I agree with the great New York Times reporter Rick Bragg, who wrote that the civil-rights movement of the 1960s was the story of the century and that any reporter who wasn't there will always feel like they missed the country's most important events. But I do not think the World Trade Organization comes close to meriting the attention or the distrust that has welled up from even the most peaceful demonstrators this fall. The WTO is, it seems to me, exactly the sort of organization that activists should try to work with from the inside. It gives the United States a chance to wield its influence diplomatically, rather than through military might. The more economically entrenched we become, the more we can work with the governments of the world to bring about environmental and human rights reforms.
Engagement is the only effective strategy for the western world to influence the developing world.
Coca-Cola will succeed there where Jesse Helms failed, and its logo is a far more effective ambassador of the merits of a free democracy. Even as the protesters paraded before trade ministers from all over the world, U.S. officials were pressing for tighter international labor standards. Developing countries are suspicious that these efforts are thinly veiled protectionist strategies from the industrial giants. If more activists had stood behind Clinton and the WTO rather than against them, these human rights demands might have carried more weight. The organization could do much to open up its processes and accommodate comments from non-governmental organizations.