Office of Research | Issue Focus | Foreign Media Reaction |
|
|
|
KEY FINDINGS Overseas editorial reaction to the World
Economic Forum was dominated by criticism of the U.S. and doubts about the
merits of globalization. In a shift
from the positive coverage of free trade following Doha, the focus was on the
failures and negative consequences of globalization. Secretary Powell's remarks on "waging war" on world
poverty received a few nods of approval, but overall, editorials portrayed the
U.S. as insincere about correcting "global inequalities." MAJOR THEMES --Anti-Americanism has become acceptable again, particularly in
Europe, supplanting the erstwhile "solidarity" with the U.S. after
the terrorist attacks. --The prevailing view was that globalization
contributes to rather than prevents the poverty-terrorism connection and sympathy
toward the developing world--seen as not reaping the benefits of a free
trade--is on the rise. --A minority view held that while globalization
is flawed, it is the best alternative for creating economic opportunities for those who choose to
participate. COMMENTARY HIGHLIGHTS Criticism of U.S. overtakes economic agenda: A number of European dailies concluded that
the post 9-11 goodwill toward the U.S. has evaporated. Many critics, warmed up after their
diatribes against the president's State of the Union "axis of evil" remarks,
focused less on economics than on the U.S.' perceived "unilateralism"
in the war on terrorism. Even London's
conservative Times warned, the greatest danger to the U.S. was its
leaders' "arrogance of power."
Skeptics question globalization and "capitalist
values." Many lamented that the
rules of global trade, written by the U.S., were "stacked against"
the developing world. They saw the gap
between rich and poor countries "widening"--a problem that would fuel
terrorist-breeding "hostility" toward the West. A majority concluded that the free market
model needed redressing. Defending globalization: A few, mainly in Canada, Europe, India and
the Philippines, bucked the anti-globalization trend. They dismissed the poverty-terrorism link as "facile,"
some deriding the WEF attendees as "buffoons" or
"dreamers." EDITOR: Irene Marr ************************************************************************************************************ EDITOR'S NOTE:
This report is based on 59 reports from 19 countries, January
31-February 7. Editorial excerpts from
each country are listed from the most recent date. EUROPE BRITAIN:
"Arrogance And Fear: The American Paradox" A commentary by associate editor Anatole
Kaletsky in the conservative Times observed (2/7): "Is America about to snatch defeat from
the jaws of victory? To judge by the
incoherent paranoid mood of the World Economic Forum in New York, American politicians,
businessmen and media commentators appear to be on the brink of a collective
nervous breakdown.... Americans should now feel more secure than ever.... Yet
the Bush Administration's response to all these victories has been to terrify
the American public with bloodcurdling rhetoric about the infinitely greater
horrors of nuclear and biological terrorism that lie in wait.... There are many possible reasons why Mr. Bush
may prefer to whip up irrational war hysteria rather than rest on his laurels....
"All this is obvious enough--and all of
these themes were widely discussed in the background of the New York forum, if
only sotto voce. It is also obvious
that America's paranoia and arrogance will pose at least a temporary danger to
the global--anti-terrorist coalition.
What is less obvious...is the effect of the new paranoia on the global
victory of American capitalist values....
Even U.S. businessmen seem to be losing confidence in the legitimacy of
the system that made them rich.... All
this may be no bad thing. Perhaps global
inequalities have become intolerable.
Perhaps the imbalance between materialism and spirituality does need
redressing. Perhaps Europe...could
benefit by distancing themselves further from brash American values. But as Mr.
Bush pushes America ever further towards the extremes of military
unilateralism, there is a growing danger of a repeat of the global ideological
backlash of the 1960s--and a near certainty that U.S. influence in the world
will diminish. The greatest danger to America's dominant position today is not
Islamic fundamentalism. It is the
arrogance of American power." "Is It At Risk?" A special report in the independent Economist
reflected (2/2): "Leadership in fragile times' is the theme of this year's
World Economic Forum.... [For] Once
that theme is apt. America has declared
war on terrorism, Argentina's financial system has collapsed, and the world
economy is enduring the worst slowdown in a generation. Does all this, as some argue, pose a threat
to the liberal international order--that is to globalization?... Pessimists were quick to suggest that
globalization cannot survive these shocks....
The war on terrorism could conceivable clog the arteries of the global
economy.... So far, however, the
evidence...is patchy.... In short, most
aspects of globalization have survived the shocks of 2001 remarkably well. But at the same time these events have
worsened a long-standing problem.
Global integration is a selective phenomenon. Many countries benefit, many do not.... Globalization is not, and never was, global. Much of the world,...including large tracts
of Africa and many Muslim countries, has simply failed to participate. The shocks of 2001 now risk worsening this
long-standing marginalization." "U.S. Treasury Secretary Sheds No Tears For
Poor" Jeremy Warner penned this editorial in the
centrist Independent (2/4):
"For Mr. O'Neill, debt relief and most overseas aid is a waste of
money. Sure there is a desire to do
something about the state of the world, the more so since the terrorist
attacks, but there is also a bigger priority, which is not to waste the
taxpayer's money. There's some truth in
what he says, especially when it comes to the effectiveness of overseas aid. The trouble with Mr. O'Neill is that he
thinks like the businessman he was....
Meetings of the World Economic Forum have long been characterized by
American triumphalism, and despite all that has occurred--the bursting of the
technology bubble, the business downturn, 11 September and the Enron
embarrassment--this one is no exception." FRANCE:
"Recovery: American
Voluntarism" Philippe Reclus opined in right-of-center Le
Figaro (2/7): "The
all-powerful American view at the Davos/New York Summit proves that the U.S.
firmly intends to keep the upper hand and not give anyone else the leadership
role in bringing about global economic recovery. No one can deny that Europe
would be the first to benefit from (this recovery). But it is regrettable that
once again the Old Continent is lagging...and incapable of proposing an
alternative to the American system of market economy while the Enron scandal
highlights its excesses." "Porto Alegre 1, Davos 0" Hedwige Chevrillon judged in centrist La
Tribune (2/4): "For once the
World Economic Forum did not turn out to be a conference on self-congratulation
by the 'masters of the universe.' The
Porto Alegre Forum was there to remind them of the concerns raised by an
apparently inhuman globalization....
Still, it would be nanve to bury globalization once and for all.... The figures are here to prove its
effectiveness.... Herein lies the
paradox: Globalization is not
global.... There is a need to explore
new forms of development. What remains
to be ascertained is the attitude of the United States, which is still
traumatized. And the strong language
used by the U.S. president in his State of the Union Address is not of the sort
to reassure the rest of world." GERMANY:
"Shot That Backfired" Center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine noted
(2/4): "The dreamers who gathered
in Porto Alegre and in New York think of everything else, but not of the
economic success of threshold and developing nations which would be impossible
without globalization. And the IMF obviously
does not seem to dare to present the situation as it is. This can be right only for those who want to
create confusion instead of informing the people." "Has There Ever Been September 11?" Maren Peters noted on the front-page of centrist
Der Tagesspiegel of Berlin (2/2): "The attacks on the World Trade
Center shocked not only New York. The whole world was shaken to the core. The new slogan was: rethink, redirect, and
redistribute. But it did not last
long. The need to move closer together
in the common fight against evil faded with the fear of the Taliban. And the desire to close the wide gap between
a prospering and a poor world, between supporters and opponents of
globalization was pushed into the background even during the first donor conference
on Afghanistan. After the hopeful beginning of the WTO in Doha, this World
Economic Forum has again turned into a bitter haggling between the developed
and the underdeveloped world....
Supporters and opponents of globalization would now be well-advised to
engage in a field where successes are necessary and possible: in the new World
Trade Round. At the WTO talks there
will not be friendly meetings but tough negotiations. Politicians and managers of the industrialized world have to
prove that they are serious about an opening of their markets and about a fair
distribution of wealth. And opponents
of globalization would have to show that they accept global trade as a possible
path to a better policy. But thus far,
signals are not very encouraging." "Protest In A New Framework" Rolf Paasch had this to say in left-of-center Frankfurter
Rundschau (2/4): "It seems that globalization critics made a new
beginning after this more or less peaceful conference and protest weekend. They have reconquered part of their
credibility. But now it will be much
more difficult to find forms of protest that can no longer be misused by
militant minorities. And there is the
challenge to develop programs that survive not only in the idyllic Porto
Allegre but also in the confrontation with the supporters of
globalization. The interventions by
Chancellor Schroeder and IMF leader Koehler in New York demonstrated the size
of this task. Their pledges for a fair
global order, their criticism of the industrialized nations, may again have no
political consequences, but they made this criticism in public and this
requires a response. A practical new
definition of their work and their goals has never been as important for
globalization critics as today at a time when, in the shadow of the
'anti-terror war,' economic liberalism is getting a new security policy
framework." ITALY:
"Europe And The U.S. Find Themselves Far From Each Other" New York correspondent Mario Platero opined in
leading business Il Sole 24 Ore (2/5): "The curtain fell on the
stage of the World Economic Forum with a basic message: the gap in the
relations between the U.S. and Europe is widening again, on both the political
and economic levels.... There is no doubt that in his State of the Union address,
President George W. Bush was referring to some European governments when he
stated that there are countries that are more concerned about living quietly
rather than continuing the fight against terrorism." "Global, No Global And America's
Puzzle" Cesare de Carlo concluded in conservative,
top-circulation La Nazione/Il Resto del Carlino/Il Giorno (2/5): "For sure, we can say one thing. Notwithstanding its contradictions,
Washington is well aware of its responsibilities at the world level. Sometimes, it would like to give them away,
but it cannot. It is the center of the empire.
Everyone, in every corner of the world, is looking at it, as they were
looking at Rome two thousand years ago.
They wait for its decisions. And
then they criticize." “U.N. ‘Unilateral Approach’ Criticized In New
York” New York correspondent Stefano Trincia held in
Rome's centrist Il Messaggero (2/4):
“On the penultimate day of the World Economic Summit, participants did
not talk about poverty or social imbalances.
They dealt, instead, with the growing American ‘unilateralism’ in
foreign policy and in the economy. Such
a policy, typical of the only world superpower, emerged clearly during the
summit from the words of Secretary of State Colin Powell and U.S. Treasury
Secretary O’Neill. A strategy that
creates concern among European diplomacies, and even high-level NATO circles,
regarding the immediate future of the war on international terrorism. The United States' veiled threat to settle the accounts with Iraq or to attack Iran
for its alleged support for al-Qaida goes hand in hand with the awareness of
the secondary role still played by Europe--unable to formulate a united and
effective foreign policy, or to counter the dollar’s exaggerated power with the
frail euro.” RUSSIA:
"Nothing Globalizes The World Better Than Anti-Globalists" Reformist Noviye Izvestiya published an
article by Aleksandr Ivanitskiy (1/31):
"Most observers agree that the 'Davos Era,' with its utter belief
in a single method of treating the world's social and economic ills, developed
by a few eggheads at their brainstorming sessions, is over. September 11 showed that not all peoples
want the same thing, and the Argentine default shows that not all are capable
of moving steadfastly to where they want to be. Besides, anti-globalism, being partly the neurosis of the Western
world itself, is clearly a reaction to the world's financial crisis of the late
1990s, which did in several seemingly promising economies in the Far East,
Latin America and, incidentally, Russia.
The unification of Europe has caused fears in the Third World as it has
stopped being the West's favorite toy. Under
the circumstances, nothing contributes better to economic globalism than the
syndrome of a besieged fortress. The
question is who will be let in." BELGIUM:
"Talk Is Not Enough" Economic affairs writer Johan Corthouts observed
in independent De Morgen (2/4):
"It is high time now to change the situation and to come forward
with new and fresh ideas to stop underdevelopment. Porte Alegre, for instance, (could do that). Now that even the super wealthy begin to
have doubts about their own recipes, the time (of the anti-globalists) may have
come to present solutions.... [But] Porte Alegre looks more like a 21st century
Woodstock--a place where it is nice to be to develop relations.... If the anti-globalists want to become a
counterweight they will have to organize themselves differently. Talking alone is not enough." "Why The Anti-Globalization Militants Don't
Want To Talk With Verhofstadt" Chief commentator Yves Desmet opined in
independent De Morgen (2/1):
"Today, Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt will attend the World
Economic Forum in New York. He had the
intention to travel from there to the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre,
Brazil, where the anti-globalization militants are gathering. But, that plan will not take place. The organizers of the alternative forum
don't want to see Verhofstadt.... One
must admit that Verhofstadt, during his EU presidency, was virtually the only
government leader who was willing to start a debate with the anti-globalization
movement.... As a matter of fact, he agrees
with many arguments of their analysis, but he does not agree with all their
solutions.... A certain segment of the
anti-globalization movement has accomplished its goal. It is not the NGOs, the trade unions and the
new social movements--the majority of the anti-globalization militants--but a
small segment of the militant leftist movement that has won the battle: The
segment that continues to view communism as the only soul-saving remedy against
all the injustice in the world. In the
tradition of that movement, a dialogue with the enemy is unacceptable. Such a dialogue with the enemy cannot yield
anything--except doubt about their own unique conviction.... Nobody demands that the anti-globalists
declare that Verhofstadt is right,...but it is stupid and arrogant to refuse to
talk to this opponent--a man who has shown that he is willing to listen." IRELAND:
"Economic Forum Hits At Smug U.S. Superpower" According to the centrist Irish Examiner
(2/5): "They came in solidarity
with the terror-wounded city of New York.
But since they arrived, speaker after speaker at the World Economic
Forum has lambasted America as a smug superpower, too beholden to Israel at the
expense of the Muslim world, and inattentive to the needs of poor countries or
the advice of allies. As the forum
wrapped up its five-day session yesterday, some of the criticism has been
simply scolding by non-Western leaders.
But a large measure has come in public soul-searching by U.S.
politicians and business leaders." "The Gap Between Rich And Poor" The liberal Irish Times held (2/5):
"The sense of unease tended to pitch European critics against American
policy-makers, in a significant barometer of a growing trend in world
politics. There was a clear difference
of emphasis between U.S. and European views about the likelihood of a rapid
economic recovery.... A more
disquieting disagreement about policy arose from discussion about President
Bush's reference last week to an 'axis of evil' between Iran, Iraq and North
Korea in harbouring and promoting terrorist organisations. This was described
as a 'bridge too far' for the Europeans by Mr. Joseph Nye, the international
relations scholar." "Post-September 11 Reluctance To Criticize
U.S. Comes To An End" International business editor Conor O'Clergy filed from New York
in the liberal Irish Times (2/4):
"The World Economic Forum this weekend nonetheless became a
catalyst for the end of international post-September 11th reticence--the
reluctance to criticise the United States in its war on terrorism.... It became almost open season on the U.S.,
ranging from criticism of protectionist policies that hurt developing countries
and the low level of US foreign aid to concerns about unilateral military
actions the U.S. might take following President Bush's naming of Iran, Iraq and
North Korea as an 'axis of evil'.... There was a perception that globalisation
created private wealth in a process biased against the poor, and resentment
against the U.S. came from the fact that as the only superpower, it so
influenced the world, while its own population had no interest in the world,
said Mr Zaki Laidi, senior research fellow at the CERI research institute in
Paris." "Powell Says U.S. And Allies Must Address
World Poverty" The liberal Irish Times ran a piece by
international business editor Conor O'Clery (2/2): "U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell acknowledged yesterday
that the United States and its allies must do more than seek to defeat
terrorism by military means.... His
portrayal of the benign aspirations of US foreign policy comes as it finds
itself the subject of some lively criticism at the forum, which this year
includes many politicians of the developing world, religious leaders and and
critics of U.S.-led globalization....
Some prominent European voices were also heard cautioning the United
States about 'going it alone' in its new war." POLAND: "God Bless
America" Maciej Rybinski wrote in centrist Rzeczpospolita
(2/6): "The World Economic Forum
in New York changed into a global tribunal to try the United States of
America. Not only the small groups of
anti-globalists, but also the Forum participants...strongly criticized the
biggest economic power for its egotism and ignoring the needs of the
poor.... One could be under the impression
that were it not for the United States, the standard of living in the
post-colonial African countries being torn by tribal wars would be much higher;
that it is the United States that curbs the development of entrepreneurship in
the post-Communist countries of Eastern Europe, maintains the Middle Age social
structures in India and Bangladesh, or forces principles that restrict output
capacity and innovation on EU countries." "Waiting For The Repetition Of Enron" Marcin Szymaniak wrote in center-left Zycie
Warszawy (2/5): "The World
Economic Forum which just ended was slightly different from previous rallies of
this kind. Its participants were more zealous in trying to convince the public
that they cared for the poor, the wronged, the Third World, etc. Alas,
everything indicates that, as usual, it will all end in prattle. Our pessimism
stems from our assessment of the behavior of the mighty of the world. The
people of the Third World should rather not count on their mercy since they
[the mighty of the world] have little respect for their fellow-citizens and
employees as the recent example of Enron shows.... The Enron affair and other
scandals of this kind only validate the anti-globalists' charges against the
politicians and big business." ROMANIA:
"Globalization Continues In Spite Of Protests" In independent Ziua, Constantin Balaceanu
Stolnici opined (2/1): "The
process of political, and especially economic, construction of globalization
continues in spite of the protests, which sometimes reach an unacceptable level
of aggression, of those who want to put an end to the course of
history.... While in New York,
globalization is based on the market economy, and, in general, on realistic,
liberal or neo-liberal models, the people in Porto Alegre have fallen into the
demagogical trap of an unrealistic egalitarianism, inspired by ancient
socialist utopias from the beginning of the 19th century, and by the disastrous
experiences of 20th century Leninism and Stalinism, which were carefully made
up." "Opportunity To Solve Mideast
Conflict" Political analyst Vladimir Alexandrescu wrote in
pro-government Dimineata (2/1):
"The New York Forum will also represent an opportunity for
diplomacy to play a role in different conflicts, such as, first of all, the one
between the Palestinians and the Israelis." SPAIN:
“Porto Alegre In Davos” Left-of-center El Pais contended
(2/4): “Anti-globalization has
triumphed, in a certain way.... Porto
Alegre and Davos have much more in common today than they did last year. Such an opportunity is not to be
missed.... The organizers of Porto
Alegre have excluded autocrats (like Fidel Castro) and the violent...but they
are making a mistake by not opening up more.... Davos has become a little like Porto Alegre, and in the end,
there is a little bit more realism. The
most positive thing is the increasing general perception that a safer world has
to be a fairer world.” "Between New York And Porto Alegre" Independent El Mundo concluded
(2/1): "Bin Laden, the war and the
economic crisis are making it compulsory for the Davos Club to restart its
search for prosperity on the grounds of globalization and democracy, while keeping in mind that this won't be achieved
unless citizens feel the benefit from it....
The anti-globalization movement is more than ever risking its
credibility and strength as well.... Their summit will be a failure if they do
not go beyond attempting to condemn the Afghanistan war.... Out of their reflections, there must be
concrete proposals, and above all,
their commitment to defend them in a peaceful way." TURKEY:
"Rising Stars: Nationalism
And Flag" Hasan Cemal saw increased nationalism and
support for the federal government as he reported from the WEF for mass-appeal Milliyet
(2/1): "There is an obvious change in the freedom/security balance
following the September 11 attacks. The
freedom aspect is losing ground, while the security aspect is gaining with the
help of public support. ... The world is changing again, and this time 9/11 is
the major driving force. International
platforms, like the WEF makes this fact even more obvious. Speaking domestically, it seems Turkey will
enjoy a much better place in the global community if Turkey manages to finish
its internal homework." "Davos Made In USA" Izzet Sedes commented on the New York and Porto
Allegre meetings in mass-appeal Aksam (2/1): "Each meeting represents a different view of the global
scene. The fact of the matter is, global issues existed before the Sept. 11,
and they continue to exist now. Nothing
has changed in that regard. The fight
against terrorism is definitely a requirement, but at the same time there
should be a fight against poverty and hunger, and work for a more peaceful world."
MIDDLE EAST SAUDI ARABIA:
"The International Message To Washington" London based, pan-Arab Asharq Al-Awsat
editorialized (2/5): "President
Bush was unable to attend the World Economic Forum because of his busy
schedule. Albeit, he might do well to ponder over the message sent by the
political and economic decision-makers there. A simple message which stated
that unfortunately despite America's extraordinary sole superpower status it
has failed to fulfill its leadership role in many spots in dire need.... Thus, giving way to prevailing hostile
feelings toward the U.S. by Leftist groups, religious extremists and nanve
idealists. Strikingly enough, America made light of the forum's fierce
criticism of U.S. politics in the Middle East and the global free-trade
environment.... One extremely dangerous
example is the Bush government's unconditional support for Sharon, which gives
him the impression that Israel has full-rein to impose its terror on Palestine
and its people. It also breeds hostile, anti-American sentiments among the Arab
and Muslims public and angers Palestinian sympathizers.... The message sent by the 120 decision-makers
is: We are friends of America, please listen and consult with us; and work to
reduce tensions around the world while it's still possible." "Needed Voice" Jeddah-based, moderate Arab News
editorialized (2/5): "Moving the
World Economic Forum to New York's Waldorf-Astoria hotel has succeeded in
keeping at bay the thousands of often-violent protesters, whose behavior has
disfigured so many recent international economic gatherings.... All the hugely varied issues that they
represent, ranging from saving the spotted owl to banning nuclear weapons, meet
together at a single point, which is deep distrust of the capitalist system.... (Corporations) have formed massive
organizations whose budgets rival, if they do not actually dwarf, those of many
poor countries. The protesters argue that these hugely powerful businesses are,
in effect, answerable to no one. They
are only interested in profits....
Would big companies have bothered to work so hard on their images, if it
had not been for the groundswell of doubt and unease about their behavior? Probably not.... Third World debt
forgiveness would probably have come about without protesters focusing
worldwide concerns on the strict and inflexible policies of the International
Monetary Fund and the World Bank. But
forgiveness has almost certainly come about more quickly.... Tanzania is a classic case where
privatization has been imposed on the government by the World Bank. But...is it really privatization or
'foreignization'? Are countries like
Tanzania now being exposed to economic, rather than political,
colonization?... Bankers smoking their
big cigars in the corridors of the Waldorf-Astoria would argue that a well-run
economy with flourishing businesses, even if they are foreign-owned, will bring
prosperity and economic stability to everyone.... This is all right as far as it goes, but multinationals still
need to have checks upon them, control which First World governments often seem
reluctant to exercise. And if a mammoth
company, like Enron is prepared to bribe and cheat within the establishment,
maybe we need the yelling anti-capitalist outsiders, to keep on crying foul,
even if they are wrong some of the time." "Misperceptions" An editorial in Jeddah-based, moderate Saudi
Gazette declared (2/4): "The
issue drawing attention in this year's World Economic Forum, which is being
held in New York instead of Davos, Switzerland, is the relationship between the
West and Islam. Although the political
West has been focusing on Islam since the fall of Ronald Reagan's Evil
Empire...and although pseudo-intellectuals like Bernard Lewis and Samuel
Huntington have been regularly warning the keepers of Western civilization of
the impending conflict with Islam, the relationship between Islam and the West
has gained significance since America's 911 events. In official circles and the
media, Islam is being portrayed more negatively than ever.... The chronic
problem of the human and political rights of the Palestinian people is being
ignored this time since the government of Ariel Sharon has almost resolved the
issue to its own satisfaction; and because the America of President George W.
Bush has decided not to be an honest peace-broker, and is now pleased to act as
the mouthpiece of the Zionist regime....
The U.S. wonders why Arabs or Muslims hate America, but rejects the view
that this is due to the fact that the U.S. has not used its power to resolve
the Palestinian problem. Palestinians,
including infants in their mothers arms, are being massacred. Yet, American conscience has not
stirred.... One problem at this year's
WEF meeting is concern that Arab countries constitute the only part of the
world trying to stay out of modern times, and that they cannot join the WTO
because some of them do not allow the import of alcohol!... Such discussions
betray the level of Western understanding of current issues outside the West.
The question before Muslims is whether Western misperceptions can ever be
corrected." EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC AUSTRALIA:
"What The World Needs Now" An op-ed from international editor Paul Kelly in
the national conservative Australian had this observation (2/6): "Though prompted by security problems
at Davos, it was an astute move [to hold WEF in New York] since America's
hopes, fears and aspirations are the drivers of world economic and security
outcomes, now more than ever. The
American condition was on display. This
is a nation that feels under threat and takes the threat seriously.... Immense military power and the chill of fear
is carrying the United States on to an unpredictable path. Bush has widened U.S. military aims, warning
that 'I will not await on events' since 'time is not on our side.' New York's meeting was dominated by
vulnerability, fragility and uncertainty....
The core of the New York conference was the need to find new
bridges--between rich and poor, globalists and anti-globalists, Israel and the
Palestinians. The WEF can't produce the answers but it can influence the
agendas." "Fair Trade And More Aid For A Safer
World" An editorial in the liberal Age held
(2/5): "This year's meeting was
moved to New York from its customary home in Davos, Switzerland, to show
solidarity with the United States after the attacks of September 11. If the rich world learned anything from
those attacks, it is that we can no longer maintain the illusion that poverty
and resentment in other parts of the world will never touch our sheltered
lives.... Countries cannot break into
the global trading system while their populations are sick and hungry, and
while the trade rules are stacked against them. Fairer trade is one part of the
answer. But in the short term there is no alternative to well-directed aid if
the world is to become a safer place." "WEF Tricks Of The Trade" An editorial in the national, business-oriented Australian
Financial Review concluded (2/4):
"The strengths and weaknesses of Western capitalism were displayed
in New York at the weekend.... Mr.
Colin Powell urged world leaders to wage war on poverty, despair and
hopelessness in order to help persuade aspiring terrorists 'that there is a
better way.' But there was no mention
of taking the simple step that the World Bank reckons would do most to
eradicate poverty--opening up the markets of the United States and other rich
countries of the world to the agricultural products and textiles that poor
countries can produce most easily." NEW ZEALAND:
"Interview With MP Clayton Cosgrove" National Radio's highly rated 'Morning Report'
program interviewed MP Clayton Cosgrove about his impressions of the World
Economic Forum (2/4): "There are
some amazing people here--Kofi Annan, Colin Powell was here the day before
yesterday. You know, they're the best and the brightest and it's a huge
opportunity for a junior MP like me to actually be exposed to them and learn
something and take the best of their ideas and bring them back... You spend two
or three days in a room with a whole series of operators, both political, NGO,
commercial. You rub shoulders with all sorts of people and you never, you know,
you never get an opportunity like this and there's huge business opportunities
here. There's huge synergies and you know, we have a bible which is an email
address book they've given us and we freely can communicate with these
people... There's a lot of pride in this city, a lot of sorrow obviously. I
visited Ground Zero a couple of days ago and it looks funnily enough, like a
reconstruction site. There's nothing there, it's a big hole in the ground now,
but people, you know, people are determined to bounce back from this and it's a
pretty emotional place I've got to say. One thing I do admire, you know, the
Americans have a great love of country and there is a real sense of pride and
resilience in this country and there is a great deal of thanks and gratitude
for the New Zealand government's role and what we've said, what we've done and
what we continue to do to assist the American cause. Our Prime Minister is held
in very high regard in this country." PHILIPPINES:
"Who's Fighting Poverty?" The independent Philippine Daily Inquirer
commented (2/7): "In the...World Economic Forum...two themes were
resonant: advancing security in a fragile world and reducing poverty and
restoring sustained economic growth.
The focus on the poor as the root of conflict and even attacks by
terrorists came as a response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United
States. But while U.S. Secretary of
State Colin Powell and Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill acknowledged the need to
combat poverty, they focused on the need to combat 'evil regimes.' Their remarks at the forum...drew attention
to President...Bush's budget proposal for next year which provides the biggest
military build-up in two decades while plunging the U.S. government again in
deficit. ...While military spending
receives a big boost, the budget seeks cuts on health and education
spending. With this shift in spending
by the world's largest economy, the voices at the forum calling for a serious
examination of poverty asa cause of conflict and terrorist attacks virtually
got a short shrift.... As the most
important source of capital and investment, the United States sets the pace for
the direction of capital flows. The
flow right now is moving away from poverty alleviation or aiding poor
economies." "Mission Impossible" Julius Fortuna, in his column in the independent
Manila Times, wrote (2/7):
"There's a new slogan arising out of New York World Economic Forum.
It's called 'ethical globalization.'
This is a phrase that means we can set up a kind and caring community in
the midst of selfishness and profit. Is
that society possible in our time?
...We doubt whether ethical globalization can ever be achieved....
George Carey, the Archbishop of Canterbury, doubted whether ethics and
capitalism could mix. Carey said the
fall of Enron...raises question about honesty and accountability within
capitalism.... China is showing the way
in terms of mixed social economy. ...It has adopted certain positive features
of capitalism.... But abuse inherent in
capitalism is checked because of the reserve power of the state hanging over
the heads of the abusive. "Poverty And Terrorism" The independent Manila Times held
(2/6): "Last week at the World
Economic Forum in New York City, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo suggested an
international coalition against poverty to complement the coalition against
terrorism. There is value in all this,
although we think it is too facile to overstate the connection between mass
poverty and the growing prevalence of terror.... Looking back, two events that
are germane to an understanding of the post-Sept. 11 world stand out. The first is the oil shock that the OPEC
inflicted on the world economy some 30 years ago. The result was a massive transfer of wealth to a few countries
that controlled most of the world's supply of petroleum.... The other event was
globalization. The so-called Washington
Consensus of trade liberalization, tight macro-economic management, and the
international linking of markets failed to take into account the time and
resources needed by poor countries to adjust.
The result was instability and, in some cases, civil strife. The confluence of the effects of these two
events coincided with the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and militancy that
began in Iran. Islam became a political
ideology for the liberation of Muslim countries from Western tutelage. The coalition against poverty, should it
become accepted, could deliberately promote policies that would stimulate
market-led economic growth. This is the
best way to bring down poverty levels.
As for terrorism, the approach should be to defuse Islamic militancy by
settling the dispute between Israel and Palestine and forcing the Gulf States
to begin introducing democratic reforms." "Root Causes Of Global Conflict" Editorial consultant Amando Doronila noted in
his column in the independent Philippine Daily Inquirer (2/6): "The World Economic Forum, at which
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo called for an international coalition in a
war on poverty, ended its summit of the world's economic, political and
academic elite in New York on Monday with diminished influence in setting the
development agenda for the 21st century....
The summit was held under the shadow of the global economic downturn
deepened by the terrorist attacks, the rising anti-American sentiment over its
global campaign against terror and the collapse of Enron which highlights
corruption in one of the leading symbols of capitalism's corporate sector. In New York, the agenda of the forum thrust
to the forefront the security concerns arising from the attacks on the United
States and these concerns highlighted such issues as 'clash of civilizations,'
the root cause of conflict - such as poverty (which President Macapagal
accented), inequity and intolerance - and the global economic outlook. The theme 'fragile times' echoed in the
meetings." "Terrorism, Poverty Are Twins" The government-controlled People's Journal
said in its editorial (2/3): "President...Arroyo delivered a
strong...message in the opening of the annual World Economic Forum in New York
last Thursday.... The President challenged the...five-day meeting to harness
the United States-led coalition to fight the global war against terrorism in
order to launch and sustain the fight against poverty and in the process
contain the spread of terrorism.... The
intimate linkage between terrorism and poverty is also a...problem being
addressed by the Macapagal-Arroyo administration. The Abu Sayyaf band...for instance, must be exorcised if we have
to bring development to Mindanao.... No
foreign investor would be comfortable at the mere mention of
terrorists,...explaining to a large extent why an overwhelming majority (of
Filipinos) backs the ongoing RP-U.S. annual military exercise." THAILAND:
"America Warned Not To Go It Alone" “Cafe Dam” commented in elite, business-oriented
Krungthep Turakij (2/6): “Most
leaders who took the podium praised President George Bush’s handling of war in
Afghanistan. However, many were also
concerned about his very utterance about the ‘axis of evil’, comprising Iraq,
Iran and North Korea, regarding it as an open invitation for more sabotages
around the world.... Chats overheard at a cocktail party had it that Bush
attempted to appoint himself a ringleader looking for war without first
consulting friends and allies, in the process forcing the latter’s hand to go
along.... In a tense atmosphere over to
one corner of the meeting room.... EU Council secretary-general Javier Solana
told Secretary of State Colin Powell that the United States must bear in mind
that Europe wanted to have a say in the decision-making process.... Such is a
warning that the United States must not go it alone without seeking consent
from Europe or it will risk jeopardizing their friendship.” "EF: No Longer Business As Usual” Mukdawan Sakboon commented in the independent,
English-language Nation (2/4):
“If America and other affluent countries really care about the urgent
problems of the world which they discussed in a panel in New York, they could
first follow in the footsteps of Finland with regard to international
aid.... Only five of the world’s
developed countries have met the target [outlined by the Finnish prime
minister.] America is not one of
them.... President George W. Bush
could...[have shown] leadership in addressing the meeting instead of sending
his secretary of state and his treasury secretary." SOUTH ASIA BANGLADESH:
"Powell Also Says The Same Thing" Independent Bangla-language Matribhumi
editorialized (2/5): "In the World
Economic Forum, Colin Powell has repeated President Bush's threat. We would like to say that the U.S. must
restrain itself. The U.S. wants to ruin
the global system, which may one day become suicidal for the U.S. itself. It is being said that the U.S. conducts
state terrorism in the name of the campaign against terrorism. It even considers the Palestinians' struggle
for freedom terrorism. We urge the U.S.
to refrain from such a dangerous policy." The World Economic Forum: Tasks To Build A Safe
World" Pro-opposition Bangla-language Ajker Kagoj
commented (2/3): "One side in the conference says that the U.S. does not
have the ability to overcome the worldwide recession. It seems impossible for Japan to recover from the state recession
it is now in. On the other hand it is
also being said that the U.S. is the focal point of the world economy. Its economic foundation is so strong that it
will soon rise up and its recession will soon go away. The distress of the world economy will also
be over. Whatever is the truth, we urge that both sides be allowed to
speak. Let the World Economic Forum
hold its conference without any hindrance and give the world community a chance
to respond. Let us preserve everybody's
right to speak." INDIA: "Pop
Economics" An editorial in the centrist India Times asserted
(2/5): "The World Economic Forum
summit might seem an unlikely place to find a rock star. Not this year. (U2 Rock Star) Bono spoke in all seriousness about a new Marshall
Plan for Africa.... It was left to Paul
O'Neill to play Scrooge. O'Neill
pointed out that funds that are given away end up either being misused or
gobbled up by avaricious middlemen....
Mr. O'Neill was being a tad defensive - understandably so, since the
United States spends about 0.1 percent of its gross domestic product on foreign
aid, less than any other industrialized country. But there is a measure of
truth in his words. No country has ever
gone from being underdeveloped to developed on the basis of aid alone.... So even as developing nations rail at the
'unfair' world order, they might want to introspect about whether they are
doing enough to develop their latent resources." PAKISTAN: "World
Economic Forum" An editorial in the center-right national Nation
argued (2/5): "With the ghost of
terrorism continuing to stalk the developed world, the issue could not be
ignored at the WEF. Mr. Colin Powell
linked terrorism with battling poverty and consequent hopelessness that helps
breed anger. While mentioning military, intelligence and legal means to combat
terrorism, on which Washington is currently putting the entire stress, Mr.
Powell underlined the importance of battling the root cause. How far the U.S. administration is sincere
in its professions can, however, be gauged from its decision last week to
reject time-bound commitments for doubling official development assistance
(ODA) to the world's poorer nations from the current $50 billion to $100
billion." WESTERN HEMISPHERE CANADA:
"Poverty-Terrorism Link Is Mere Groupthink" Alexander Rose contributed this piece to the
conservative National Post (2/5):
"I wish the Bilderberg Group, the Freemasons, the Council on
Foreign Relations, ZOG, the Templars and the Illuminati really did secretly
control the world instead of the buffoons who attended the World Economic
Conference...in New York. Then I would
be confident that at least someone compos mentis was minding the store. Like the Great Unwashed outside with their
'revolutionary street-theatre' and Chomsky paperbacks, the world's Great and
the Good think only what is popular at present, at the expense of what is
empirically, logically and realistically true.
Only a couple of years ago, Davos participants were earnestly discussing
the coming of a borderless, techno-capitalist, rights-based world. Now that this trendy cross between
fetishistic Wellsian technophilia, Randian anarcho-capitalism and Marxist
determinism has perished in the Great Dot.Com Meltdown, the WEF again focused
on the issue of the moment: the presumed links between poverty, the United
States and terrorism.... The Masters of
the Universe congregated at the WEF ought to stick to what they're best
at--making money, not peace." ARGENTINA:
"Message From New York" An editorial in business-financial El
Cronista read (2/6): "Last
year, the World Economic Forum focused on the impact of a slow-down in U.S.
economy and the capacity of the EU to play the international 'engine' role.
Twelve months later, the situation has changed completely. The debate focused
on the vigor of the U.S.'s unexpected recovery and on the new political and defense
realities after the September 11 terrorist attacks. After four days of debate...over 2,000 world political and
business leaders urged called for the benefits of globalization to be shared by
all--rich and poor. However, no definition was made on how to do this." "Brazil Outraged At U.S. Criticism" Eleonora Gosman, leading Clarin's
Brazil-based correspondent, commented (2/3):
"For the first time and in public, U.S. Treasury Secretary O'Neill
questions Brazilian authorities, triggering waves of criticism. During a
luncheon organized by the World Economic Forum, he said that in Brazil there's
a lot of corruption and nobody respects rules.... O'Neill's words suggest a veiled U.S. warning with 'a defined
purpose', according to the governor of Ceara.... But others infer that the U.S. government really wants to limit
Brazil's participation in favor of Argentina." "Anti-Davos: Argentina, Key Focus At Brazil
Forum" Nestor Restivo, on special assignment in Porto
Alegre for leading Clarin, opined (2/2): "Last year's World Social
Forum had predicted possible outbursts as a consequence of Latin America's
foreign debt. And it was right on one thing: the non payment of Argentina's
debt resurfaced the blood drainage of 'money in exchange for indebtedness'. In
fact, everything taking place in Argentina now is the key topic in every debate
at this Forum, where all anti-globalization and anti neo-liberalism groups
gather." "Does The Argentine Crisis Jeopardize
Emerging Markets"? Pablo Maas, on special assignment in New York
for leading Clarin, wrote (2/1):
"And after Argentina what? This is the question commonly made at
Waldorf Astoria Hotel where the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting takes
place. What most concerns well-known
bankers, businessmen and economists gathered here is the future of emerging
markets after the massive crisis in confidence unleashed by the collapse of
Argentine convertibility system and the freezing of Argentine banking
deposits. Critics of globalization
consider that the Argentine case shows the failure of the financial
liberalization model....
Representatives of the financial sector consider that the collapse of
the policies they supported in Argentina is exclusively related to domestic
affairs and has no relation with alleged shortfalls of the (economic)
model.... The expectation about
Argentina is that it manages to stabilize its financial situation by
reestablishing the system of payment." "World Economic Forum: New Debate Focused
On Argentina" Pablo Maas, on special assignment in New York
for leading Clarin, commented (1/31):
"The Argentine crisis will be one of the key topics debated at the
World Economic Forum.... Unlike past
years, in which the participants at Davos celebrated the apparently booming
progress of globalization and prosperity of the developed world, this year the
atmosphere is marked by the impact of a synchronized recession affecting the
United States, Europe and Japan for the first time since 1970. Although some eminent U.S. economists
declared recently that recession is over, other specialists are still in
doubt.... The scandal surrounding
Enron's bankruptcy... also promises to trigger a whirlwind of criticism in view
of what is considered 'excessive financial liberalization' which allowed big
companies and their auditors to hide key information and make indiscriminate
use of fiscal havens in order to produce profit and conceal losses." BRAZIL: "Davos Forum
In The Fight Against Poverty" The lead editorial in center-right O Estado
de S. Paulo noted (2/6):
"Agricultural trade, fundamental for Brazil's economy as well as
that of many poor nations, was one of the central topics discussed at the World
Economic Forum.... The document
produced by the Agricultural Trade Task Force in NYC may be considered an
important point in favor of the elimination of distorting policies adopted by
First World nations.... Support of
these changes seems to have increased also in the United States in recent
weeks. U.S. newspapers have published
stories on how the benefits of the agricultural policy are distributed in the
United States. Most of the subsidies go
to a few states and to a very restricted number of families, generally owners
of large farms.... For the discussion
to advance and be productive, however, it will be necessary to overcome firm
political resistance in the U.S. Congress....
The world would have profited if the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre
had also produced debates and documents as positive as those produced at the
meeting in NYC in favor of those 'excluded' by globalization." "Social
Efforts?" An editorial in independent Jornal da Tarde
remarked (2/5): "Comparing what was discussed at the World Economic Forum
and at the World Social Forum will show that in New York there was more
pluralism and a greater defense of poor nations' interests than in Porto
Alegre. The anti-globalization militants in Porto Alegre had the opportunity to
applaud each other without hearing anything to contradict the 'sacred dogmas'
of their ideological beliefs... A comparison between what happened at the two
meetings will show that the poor nations' interests were taken much more
seriously in the pluralist debates of the World Economic Forum than in the
monolithic rhetoric of the World Social Forum." "Global Democracy" An editorial in liberal Folha de Sao Paulo
noted (2/2): "By moving from Davos
to the U.S., apparently due to security reasons, the World Economic Forum has
put aside a certain shyness and at the same time continued to consolidate
'social' demands. NGOs and labor unions
have gained space in the 'world elite' meeting. On the other hand, the World Social
Forum in Porto Alegre seems to be making efforts to get rid of the image of
inconsequent opposition.... The myriad of NGOs, political parties and labor
unions that get together in meetings such as that of Porto Alegre is apparently
reaching a consensus that a minimum of organization and proposals is necessary
to occupy with more firmness the new transnational public space." "No More Diagnoses" According to liberal Folha de Sao Paulo's
political and economic columnist Clovis Rossi, (2/3): "Frequent criticism
against the World Social Forum, in Porto Alegre, according to which there are
no feasible proposals for the problem it diagnoses, is partially unfair. To be fair, the criticism should admit that
the World Economic Forum couldn't provide answers to the crucial matter of
poverty and the gap between poor and rich either. The Porto Alegre diagnosis
seems to be more accurate." "The Socialist Being" Independent Jornal do Brasil said in an
editorial (2/2): "There is no
doubt on what moves the World Economic Forum.... That forum deals with issues in a practical and objective manner,
always from the viewpoint of those who have access to power.... Its counterpart, the World Social Forum, is
more majestic, imposing. It intends to
correct world's injustices.... What is going on with socialist
intellectuals?... In order to
prevent the debate between those two
lines of economic thinking becoming lost in rhetoric, it's important that the
socialists lose the fear to be
socialists. Then the establishment
will then know whom they are talking
to." "A Comprehensive Alliance" Conservative O Globo opined (1/31): "The II Social Forum taking place in
Porto Alegre [Brazil] coincides with the Economic Forum being held in New
York.... One hopes that the second
Forum in Brazil will be less show business-like than the first one and begins
to elaborate concrete proposals to correct distortions existing in the
globalization process. And that it goes
beyond mere protest to inexorable movements of inter-dependence among societies
and economies. Nevertheless, the Porto
Alegre Forum's difficulties to achieve such goals are well known. Such a comprehensive chain of alliances
going from a leader of reactionary, protectionist activism of the French
traditional agriculture (Jose Bove) to well-known symbols of the American 'new
left', forged in the fights against the Vietnam War like Noam Chomsky, will
indeed have to face difficulties in finding common ground. If the Seattle and Genoa spirit--where
violent riots disturbed the WTC and G-8 meetings--is put aside, both the Porto
Alegre and the New York forums may help to mature ideas to make the world less
unequal." "The Free Market Has Resulted In Wars" Conservative O Globo carried this byliner
by writer Father Betto (1/31):
"The Porto Alegre World Social Forum...brings together the
attention of those who recognize the failure of globalization.... The free market has resulted in wars; IMF's
rules impoverishes Latin America, takes Argentina to bankruptcy, and forces Brazil
to undergo a monthly U.S.$2 billion bleeding.
Unemployment has become chronic; socialism has failed in Eastern
Europe. Such factors force us to
reflect on the current state of the world and find a way out, so that common
welfare may be above private interests; human rights, over profit ambitions;
social welfare, over orthodox monetarism.... The great advantage of this
forum's comprehensive ecumenism is that no ideological straight-jacket is
imposed.... It is a rich laboratory in
which the most varied artistic expressions join issues such as ethics,
spirituality and relations of power and family agriculture, land reform and
development alternatives. In Porto
Alegre dictatorial thinking sinks and what emerges is the assurance that the dream of many may become
reality." MEXICO:
"Davos In New York" Sergio Sarmiento wrote in independent Reforma
(2/4): "The Forum serves an
important function at a time when companies have surpassed governments as the
institutions that define the course of the world. Presidents and high
government officials from every country attend because they believe that their
announcements and positions (on a variety of issues) will have a greater impact
on entrepreneurs attending the Forum than on traditional political venues. Why
is it, then, that 'progressive' groups are hostile to the World Economic Forum? Why is there so much criticism against a
meeting that shares many of their ideals?
Maybe for the same reasons that the presidents and ministers attend the
Forum because they can find some of the most powerful and influential businessmen
there, as well as the world media." "Globalization With Justice" An editorial in nationalist Universal
stated (2/2): "Although the
majority of presidents of multinational firms continue to believe that
globalization is a 'positive force for social and economic change,' a U.S.
polling firm found that globalization is 'also responsible for the growing gap
between developed and developing nations.'
The dramatic situation experienced by Argentina is proof that
globalization has produced greater inequality and upheaval. The 32nd meeting of the World Economic Forum
should be used to evaluate the need to create conditions that eliminate the
increasingly violent protests of people without hope, who are trapped in
destructive poverty." ## |
This site is produced and maintained by the U.S. Department of State. Links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein. ![]() |
![]() IIP Home | Issue Focus Home |