Globalization must become an inclusive force

Kofi Annan, Secretary General, United Nations

It has often been said that globalization is what distinguishes our era from all its predecessors. Globalization, we are told, redefines not only the way we engage the world, but how we communicate with each other. It is commonly understood to describe the increasing flow of goods, services, capital, technology, information, ideas and labor at the global level, driven by liberalization policies and technological change.

For a time, this logic was borne out by reality. Underlying schisms were often ignored in the belief that the rising tide of material growth would eliminate the importance of political differences and social grievances. However I and others have urged greater consideration for the potential political backlash if the social and economic consequences of globalization are left unattended.

An equally important aspect of globalization is its potential to be a truly integrating and inclusive force -- and the very real dangers if it fails to live up to that potential.

We need to be equally concerned about the gulf between insiders and outsiders in a globalized world where the economic, political and social privileges of the few are painfully apparent to those multitudes yearning for liberty and opportunity. We need to direct our energies towards realizing the aspiration inherent in the awkward, but revealing Arabic translation of the word "globalization" -- literally "world inclusivity."

Of course, globalization is not wholly new. What makes our era different is the degree of inter-penetration, the speed with which change is taking place -- and the dramatic and ever-growing gaps this process is creating between insiders and outsiders.

Globalization of economies and societies must be supported and sustained by a "globalization of community" -- to create a more expansive definition of our duties to our fellow men and women in the global village, and to ensure that globalization benefits them all -- economically, politically and socially.

The question therefore, is not whether globalization is good or bad, but rather how we adapt our policies and priorities to account for the realities of a new era. We can no longer think and act as if only the local matters, as if we only owe solidarity to those within our own city or state.

We must also tear down the walls in our own minds -- those separating us from them, rich from poor, white from black, Christian from Muslim from Jew -- so that we can recognize the untold ways in which we can all benefit from cooperation and solidarity across nationality, race or economic development.

This poses a real challenge not only to political leaders, but to civil society, businesses, labor unions, thinkers, and citizens of every nation. We need to rethink what belonging, and what community means, to embrace the fate of distant peoples, and realize that globalization's glass house must be open to all if it is to remain secure.

This will require leaders in every sector to present the choices facing the public in a different light. We cannot continue to exclude the poor, or those who are denied basic rights to liberty and self-determination. Or that if we do, we cannot hope to secure lasting peace and prosperity.

Of course, we all feel a deeply rooted sense of loyalty to those closest to us. To say that we -- particularly those living in the developed world -- have an obligation to help them those in poor and distant countries achieve their rights and opportunities in a spirit of tolerance and diversity -- is to ask a lot.

And yet, does globalization leave us with any choice? Either we help the outsiders in a globalized world out of moral obligation and enlightened self-interest, or we will find ourselves compelled to do so tomorrow, when their problems become our problems, in a world without walls.

There are myriad ways in which nations can act on this imperative -- by opening markets for the products of developing countries; by increased development assistance -- and here the UN Conference at Monterey was a good start; by promoting good governance; by addressing diseases and environmental problems that may not have reached our shores; by recognizing obligations to provide asylum; by fostering a more orderly process of integrating migrants; and by valuing pluralism as an overarching priority for every state.

To think globally -- and to consider not only domestic factors, but also international ones as integral to decision- making today, in governments, businesses and organizations -- does not mean a uniformity of thought, or just one approach.

The local is infused and enriched with global impulses and influences. The United Nations itself was created in the belief that dialog can triumph over discord, that diversity is a universal virtue, and that the world's peoples are far more united by their common fate than they are divided by their separate identities. This dialog must take place every day among all nations -- within and between civilizations, cultures and groups. But it must be based on a genuinely shared values. Without these values -- rooted in the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights -- no peace can be lasting and no prosperity secure. That is the lesson of the UN's first half-century. It is a lesson that we ignore at our peril.

While it may seem somewhat vague to speak of a globalization based on shared values, the vision of the world it seeks to create is quite clear and quite specific.

It is a world defined by solidarity, tolerance of dissent, celebration of cultural diversity, an insistence on fundamental, universal human rights, and a belief in the right of people everywhere to have a say in how they are governed. It is a world characterized by the belief that the diversity of human cultures is something to be celebrated, not feared.

This vision is based on an understanding that we are the products of many cultures and impulses, that our strengths lie in combining the familiar with the foreign. That is not to say that we cannot rightly take pride in our particular faith or heritage. But the notion that what is ours is in conflict with what is theirs is both false and dangerous. It has resulted in endless enmity and conflict, leading men and women to commit the greatest of crimes in the name of a higher power.

It need not be so. People of different religions and cultures live side by side and most of us have overlapping identities which unite us with very different groups. We can love what we are, without hating what, and who, we are not. We can thrive in our own tradition, even as we learn from others, and come to respect their teachings.

If today, after the horror of Sept. 11 we see better, and we see further -- we will realize that humanity is indivisible. New threats make no distinctions between races, nations or regions. A new insecurity has entered every mind, regardless of wealth or status. A deeper awareness of the bonds that bind us all, in pain as in prosperity, has gripped young and old.

Globalization must thus be made to benefit those at the margins as well as those at the center. Repairing the damage done to the fabric of the international community -- restoring trust among peoples and cultures -- will not be easy. But just as a concerted international response can make the work of terrorists much harder to accomplish, so should the unity born of this tragedy bring all nations together in defense of the most basic right -- the right of all peoples to live in peace and security.

An inclusive globalization will be central to achieving this fundamental goal.

The above is adapted from the Secretary General's address at Yale University in New Haven, the United States, Oct. 2.