After the disastrous month of September, when terrorist attacks and retaliation contributed to storm clouds over the global economy, November demonstrated the resilience of globalization. The global economic downturn has led most of the world to rally together, not only in the hunt for the terrorists, but in reinforcing global cooperation. Several events in November give hope for a stronger international community, with consequent economic benefits.
First, more than 100 countries assembled in Marrakech, Morocco, to complete a unique UN agreement to limit global climate change. These countries agreed to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases in order to slow the process of global warming.
Yes, the US is not yet a party to the agreement -- even though America is the world's biggest single contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Yet the fact that the world could agree despite the absence of the US may prove promising. No single country, even the largest economy in the world, can stop the cooperation of others. Sometime soon, the US is likely to rejoin these international discussions.
ILLUSTRATION: YUSHA
Second, the world community welcomed China as a member of the WTO. For hundreds of years, China held itself aloof from the world economy. Then, in the middle of the 19th century, China suffered at the hands of European imperial powers, which gained technological and industrial superiority over China, using this to force trading concessions from the Ching Dynasty.
For more than a century after that, China was in turmoil. Only 20 years ago did China decide to rejoin the world trading system. This month's entry of China into the WTO is a major step in that process. China has now rejoined the world community as a cooperative, stable, and powerful sovereign nation, which will be one of the leading trading countries in the years ahead.
Third, more than 140 nations agreed in Doha, Qatar to launch a new round of trade negotiations. After years of global protests about free trade, the world's nations chose trade over protectionism. Importantly, developing countries achieved several breakthroughs in the new trade agenda. Poor countries won concessions on access to essential medicines; and they pressed for, and received, promises that rich countries would address protectionist policies in several areas.
Fourth, the war in Afghanistan has not only proceeded rapidly on the ground, but has led to a diplomatic breakthrough as well. The UN will play a central role in the reconstruction of a working government in that country, and in coordinating humanitarian assistance for the Afghan people. The growing role of the UN in this process puts the seal of international law and diplomacy over the global struggle against terrorism, and helps to reassure many countries that this is a true international effort, not just the US acting alone.
While these seem to be a grab-bag of achievements, they point to a single message: the world community is finding new ways to cooperate, even against a backdrop of terrorism and global recession. The growing role of international institutions under the UN umbrella provides greater confidence that disputes can be addressed peacefully and even sensibly, with significant inputs of scientific expertise as in the Climate Change treaty. No country wants to be outside of this global process. China's membership in the WTO is sure to be followed by Russia's membership in the coming years.
Academic scholars and political observers debate whether globalization is a real phenomenon or a slogan; whether globalization is beneficial or harmful; and whether globalization is a fragile process that could be reversed or a robust process likely to gather force in the coming years. My view is that globalization is a powerful and generally positive force. It offers countries the gains from increased international trade, faster diffusion of technologies to mutual benefit, and hopes for less cross-country violence and conflict. The agreements in November suggest that most of the world shares such hopes, and is ready to commit political resources into the success of the process.
Of course globalization requires international governance and rules. It cannot be a game of rich against poor. It cannot function without international law and international institutions. Therefore the preeminence of UN institutions in so many events in November is notable. The UN has shown its value in global environmental management, international trade, state building and reconstruction, and humanitarian assistance. UN agencies will have a critical role to play in future years in helping Africa's impoverished countries (and those elsewhere) to derive larger benefits from globalization.
This month, in short, has been a fitting prelude to the happy occasion on Dec. 13th when UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and the UN organization itself share this year's Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, Norway. The prize is a fitting measure of the role that the UN now plays and must continue to play in promoting a successful and peaceful globalization.
Jeffrey D. Sachs is the Galen L. Stone Professor of Economics and director of the Center for International Development at Harvard University. copyright: project syndicate
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS