When Americans whose origins lie in the have-not countries see poverty in those countries daily on their television screens, they want to know what their government is doing about it. In this democratic republic of ours, the information age puts pressure on our government to expand its concept of national interest to include events in other countries, indeed in all countries from which Americans come, and that means simply all countries. The task of matching resources to priorities gets hard as the list of interests of our country grows, and as the debate continues over the relative priority of each of those interests. We need to take this challenge and make it an opportunity to deepen our ties with countries that could offer tremendous trade opportunities in the future or could in part, through their relationship with the United States, become new forces for stability, democracy, and the rule of law in their own regions. As a diplomat, I also noticed the effect of rapid change within other societies.
Rapid change can overwhelm human beings.
Around the world, you can see what might be called anti-globalization reactions, particularly when people feel that their culture and their way of life are being threatened. You see this not only in radical fundamentalist movements but in some of the trade disputes between the United States and Europe, and in the isolationism of some of our citizens, not to mention the protests here and in Seattle. The answer is not truly in retreat but in advancement. The more that people benefit from globalization, the easier it will be for countries to absorb the shocks of globalization. The more they see the diversity in the world, the more they can promote and celebrate their own special cultures.