When it comes to executing foreign policy, tone matters. And tone is this new government's best asset, as the Liberals seek to restore, as they see it, Canada's role in the world.
But results matter even more. And Justin Trudeau is just starting to grasp the difficulties of putting his own stamp on Canada's global profile after 10 years of Conservative dominance.
Under Stephen Harper, Canada focused on trade over aid and national interest over multilateral co-operation. Much got done, from major trade accords to the widely praised maternal health initiative. But even our closest allies wondered at the government's sour, sullen tone.
Now, Mr. Trudeau is exploiting his cosmopolitan charisma to rebuild burnt bridges. If you think this is the triumph of smile over substance, think again.
The Conservatives broke off diplomatic relations with Iran and criticized American-led negotiations to end the Iranian nuclear weapons program.
But they reached a deal, and now the world is welcoming the Tehran regime back into the concert of nations. A fourth Harper government would eventually have re-established relations, if only to give Canadian businesses access to the Iranian market. But it would have taken time, and much ill will would have remained. Under the Liberals, Canada can now move swiftly to end sanctions and normalize relations.
A fourth Harper government would eventually have opened trade talks with China, because Canada can't afford to be left out as other trading nations do the same. But those talks would have been difficult, because of all the baggage that accumulated between Beijing and Ottawa while Mr. Harper was prime minister.
Mr. Trudeau has signalled his willingness to sweep all that away and establish a new and more productive relationship. He can do easily what Mr. Harper would have done grudgingly. (Though no agreement is likely before the next election.)
Removing visa requirements for Mexicans visiting Canada; lessening tensions with Russia in order to advance Arctic co-operation; permitting funding for abortions within the maternal health initiative – all these are areas where the Liberals can make progress because they aren't hobbled by the legacy of the Harper decade.
But Mr. Trudeau is also discovering that campaign promises are easy to make but hard to deliver. For example, the Liberals promised to cancel the contract for the F-35 fighter, buy something cheaper, and spend the savings on ships. But military procurement is the devil's playground. The F-35 remains in the mix as a potential replacement for the aging CF-18s.
The Americans are unhappy with Mr. Trudeau's flippant promise to withdraw CF-18s from the mission against the Islamic State. It's one thing to talk about improving relations with the U.S. government. It's another thing to expect you can disappoint that government without paying a price.
International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland is consulting far and wide on whether Canada should ratify the ambitious new Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, which also includes the United States, Mexico and nine other countries. But if Congress ratifies the agreement, so will Canada. If it doesn't, we won't. Period.
The Liberals are hoping to join the United States and Mexico in a continental effort to combat global warming. But the government is struggling to figure out how to meet the existing Conservative targets, let alone more ambitious ones.
Most important, the Liberals hope to restore Canada's Pearsonian tradition of conflict resolution through multilateral engagement. But as foreign-policy experts observed Friday at a conference hosted by the think tank Canada 2020, the global institutions created after the Second World War are tottering in the face of rising new powers, non-state actors, social media and cyberthreats.
Canada's footprint in the Next World Order is likely to become smaller, as new players push us aside.
This is not to diminish what the Trudeau government has already accomplished. But if the question is: What, concretely, will the Liberals achieve in foreign policy fundamentally different from what the Conservatives would have achieved? The answer is not easily divined.
John Ibbitson