# 目次

概要 .................................. 3

後援・協賛・協力団体 .................................................................................... 4

主催者挨拶
関本忠弘 (国際社会経済研究所理事長) .................................................... 6

スピーチ
ミハエル・ゴルバチョフ (元ソ連大統領) .................................................... 7
ヘンリー・キッシンジャー (元米国務長官) .................................................... 9
中曽根康弘 (衆議院議員、元内閣総理大臣) ............................................ 11
邱国洪 (在日中国大使館公使参事官) .................................................... 13

## パネル・ディスカッション

<table><thead><tr><th>＜テーマ＞</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1. テロの原因</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>2. アフガニスタンへの米軍事攻撃</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>3. 中東問題</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>4. アジアにおける改革</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>5. 日本の国際的役割</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>6. 質疑応答</td><td>20</td></tr></tbody></table>

-2-

が、21世紀の各国政府にとって極めて重要だ。

アジア地域では、単独で全てのパワーを掌握している国はない。東アジアの安全保障メカニズムの創設には熟慮して取り組むべきである。それは、各国が結んでいる2国間及び多国間枠組みを包括し、また外交を通じて紛争解決を図るためのフォーラムとして機能するものがよい。日米関係はアジア地域において、おくそらく将来のモデルとなり得る。

欧州連合(EU)とロシアは将来、外交分野でより重要な役割を果たすだろう。また、ロシアは北大西洋条約機構(NATO)との新たな関係を発展させていくと思われる。これらの動きは、冷戦終結後広く唱えられてはきたが未だ実現していない「新世界秩序」の形成につながっていくかもしれない。

グローバリゼーションは新しいアイディアを必要とする新世界をもたらす。アジア・太平洋経済協力(APEC)のような国際協力を今後進めていかなければならない。この新概念を世界全体に伝えるための「広報活動」にも、同時に力を入れていく必要がある。

-8-

(11)

[LL]

スピーチ

中曽根康弘氏

(衆議院議員、元内閣総理大臣)

グローバリゼーションには光と影がある。「光」の側面とは、国境を越えて物
だけではなく価値や精神も移動して共通思想が普及し、環境問題への対処や情報
化、金融の自由化などが科学技術の発展とともに21世紀にはますます促進され
ることである。一方、「影」というのは、貧富の格差の拡大や人口問題、情報・
金融における米国覇権主義への批判であり、この「影」の部分が世界的な課題と
なっている。皆で人類の運命を真剣に考えるべき時代のスタート地点に我々は立
っているのであり、「グローバリズム」を前進させて、国連を中心にそろそろ準
備を始めなければならない。

このような状況のもと、伝統的国家主権の及ぼす範囲は侵食され、制限されて
きている。国家という枠組は消滅しないものの、冷戦の終結によってイデオロギー
の2極体制は崩壊した。1990年代から、各国は自らのアイデンティティを模
索し続けている。一方で、非政府組織(NGO)の政治勢力が増大している。今
後、世界貿易機関(WTO)や国際連合の場でも大きな政治的影響力を及ぼして
いくだろう。

9月11日のテロ事件は宗教と権力が政治的に結びついた権力行動であり、政
治的アジテーションである。文明の潮流に対する反逆であって、明らかに刑事的
犯罪だ。アメリカの呼びかけに応えて、国境を超えて世界が一致団結したことは
私自身もこれまで経験したことがない。これは、一種の「グローバリズム」であ
り、文明的価値を守るために協力するという意味で、世界はよい経験をしている。
これを成功させ、その成果を子々孫々に伝えていかなければならない。

イランとアメリカが対話を始めたことは、双方が普通の状態に戻そうと努力し
ていることであり望ましい。穏健な回教徒の国々が、国内の狂信的な動きを抑え
ながら世界協力の方向へ指導力を発揮し、前進していくことを我々は希望してい
る。日本もこれらから学んで前進しなくてはならない。日本はよく不介入主義と
言われたが、湾岸戦争の経験を踏まえて他を助けるようになってきており、今後
も積極的に関与していかなくてはならない。電車の痴漢を見て見ぬ振りするよう
なことは、国家レベルでしてはいけない。これからの重要課題は、アフガニスタ
ンをどうするかである。解決の成否が第2、第3のビン・ラディンが出てくるか
どうかの大きな分かれ目となる。これは世界全体の関心事項でなければならない。
そして、世界共通の価値を守ってきたという実績を背景に、パレスチナとイスラ
エル間の問題については、国連や多国間で双方を妥協させる圧力を作り、事態の
打開につながるよう、何らかの成果を出さなくてはならない。究極的にはパレス
チナ国家建設を共通目標におくべきだ。

-11-

[L]

このテロ事件後の国際社会の一連の行動は、従来の世界の予測を覆している。F. フクヤマの『歴史の終わり』も、S. ハンチントンの『文明の衝突』もあてはまらない。全世界が共通の価値を支持し結束してきている中、現実はより次元の高い価値を見つめ始めてきている。歴史や政治は生きており、我々が予測し得ない方向へ現実は伸びているのだ。それは、グローバリズムであり、また、宇宙中の生物圏の下位にある「人間圏」という発想であり、我々は各国の利害追求を超えて、これらの価値に向かって進まなければならない。

「人間圏」という考えと照らし合わせると、我々人間は傲慢であったために、環境問題、食糧問題、人口問題、エネルギー問題などが今になって地球上で深刻になりつつある。宇宙的視点を持って、「人間圏」と他の生物との共生を考えていかなければならない。2050年から2080年の未来を考えてみたとき、こういう貴重な発想が自ずと出てくるだろう。この概念は、仏教思想の「山川草木悉皆成仏」という教えにも共通すると思う。

経済については、欧州連合(EU)、北米自由貿易協定(NAFTA)、南米のメルコスールなど各地で自由貿易圏が存在する。アジアでは、中国がWTOに加盟し、日本もシンガポールをはじめとする国々と自由貿易協定を締結しようとしている。日本も含めた東アジア自由貿易圏ができるのは歴史の方向として当然だ。将来は、この東アジア経済圏と他の自由貿易圏との共生を図っていかなければならない。

-12-

[c]

て反対の立場をとる。国際テロ組織の発生と原因は複雑かつ多岐にわたるので、
軍事手段だけではテロ組織の根絶は不可能である。国際社会は多方面から努力し
ていかなければならない。

中国は自身の安定と発展が、東アジア地域の平和と安定に対する最大の貢献と
考えている。中国が新たな脅威となるという議論が一部見受けられるが、それは
中国の状況と政策に対する理解が不十分なためだ。中華人民共和国の成立後、中
国は「3つのノー」を約束している。すなわち、永遠に覇権主義に走らず、軍事
集団に参加せず、勢力範囲を求めない。さらに、平和共存の5原則を提起してお
り、中国は世界の平和と安定を志向している国家である。

20年来の目覚しい経済発展のもと、中国は東アジア地域の経済協力に積極的
に参加しており、地域貿易自由化と投資の促進に尽力している。現在、世界経済
が鈍化し東アジアの経済発展が新たな困難に直面している状況のなか、中国経済
の健全かつ安定的発展は東アジア全体において重要な意義をもつ。

安全保障面においても、中国の軍事費は一貫して低いレベルを維持している。
防御性国防戦略に基づいて、海外に軍事基地はなく、今後3年以内に50万人の
削減を実行してさらなる軍隊縮小を行う予定である。一方、インドおよびベトナ
ムとの領土問題もそれぞれ決着しており、国連安全保障理事会では常任理事国と
して、東ティモールやカンボジアなど、東アジアの紛争の平和的解決を推進して
いる。多国間対話についても、ARFを重要視し地域の多国間安全保障協力体制
の発展に積極的に働きかけている。

改革開放を長期的な基本国策としつつ、経済の発展に力を集中させることが中
国の国際的な任務である。年内の世界貿易機関(WTO)加盟は、改革開放への
新たな段階であり、経済のグローバル化に積極的に参与していくことになる。こ
れにより、国内企業の競争を促し、また海外企業に対しては市場への安定した進
出機会を提供することが可能になる。つまり、東アジアの経済発展に新しい活力
を注入することにつながり、将来、中国の経済発展は東アジア経済全体の持続的
発展の動力になっていくだろう。

-14-

[L]

ランは、そのような無差別暴力を許していないし、ビン・ラディンはイスラム社会の主流からの脱落者だ。イスラエルとパレスチナ間の問題も事件の背後にある一因だ。我々は既存の考え方を超えて、イスラエルとパレスチナに和平を受け入れさせなければならない。パレスチナ国家を建設することは解決への打開につなげることができる。

## 2. アフガニスタンへの米国軍事攻撃

**田原氏** 中国やフィンランド、イランなど、アメリカのアフガニスタンでの空爆に関して憂慮を表明し、攻撃に伴うアフガニスタン市民の犠牲者について懸念を示している国もあることについてはどう思うか。

**キッシンジャー氏** 中国は、人道的懸念と同時にアメリカの行動についての理解を表明している。他の国に関しては、国内向けの批判的意見と実質的な反対とを区別すべきだ。本当に反対している国は比較的少ない。対テロ戦争が失敗すれば、テロリズムの被害は世界中に広がるだろう。

**邱氏** テロ事件の原因は複雑で、窮地に陥っている途上国が持つ感情もあるだろう。アメリカはそのような感情を刺激する力のある唯一の国だ。しかし、主たる原因は間違なく不平等性にある。アメリカの軍事行動に関しては、中国は明確な目標と市民の犠牲が最小限であることを条件に賛成した。アフガニスタンでの成功は軍事行動だけでは達成しないだろう。長期的には政治、経済、法律分野での協力がテロリズム打倒のために必要である。終極的に、アフガニスタンの問題はアフガニスタン人によってのみ解決できる。もし北部同盟の手に排他的に委ねられるならば、情勢は悪くなるだけである。

## 3. 中東問題

**田原氏** パレスチナ問題はおそらく今回のテロ事件の根底にある一因だ。イスラエルは国連の解決案に従わなかった。アメリカがイスラエルに対して占領地帯から立ち退くようもっと強く説得すべきだったのではないか。湾岸戦争でイラクがクウェートを侵攻したとき、アメリカは武力で抑えたが、イスラエルのパレスチナ地区の占領に対してはまったく違っている。

**中曽根氏** アメリカはイスラエルに最近占領した地域から撤退しパレスチナと和平を結ぶよう働きかけるべきだ。しかし、最もよいのはイスラエルが自発的に退去することだろう。

**キッシンジャー氏** イスラエルのパレスチナ地域の占領とイラクのクウェート侵攻を同等に考えるべきではない。イラクの行動は国家による国家の併合行為だった。イスラエルは閣僚の暗殺事件に対して、和平を前提に一部の土地を一時的に返還している。根本的な問題は80キロほどしかない土地の中に2つの国民を同

-16-

[u]

居させようとすることなのだ。交渉の場では常にイスラエルが土地に関して妥協
するよう求められるが、一方パレスチナ人は言葉の妥協しか求められない。彼ら
もイスラエルの存在を認めるよう明白に言及すべきだ。ユダヤ人が居住する地域
の一部も含めてパレスチナ国家を建設すべきだが、イスラエルが大きく譲歩する
には、暴力行為をやめることとイスラエルを承認することの2つがなされなければならない。

ゴルバチョフ氏 和平プロセスは勝者と敗者を作り出すようであってはならない。双方の合意と相互譲歩に基づくべきだ。ゴラン高原を訪問したとき、私は3台の自動車が爆弾によって爆破された事件に遭遇した。和平は暴力の終結を意味する。しかし、爆破テロ事件は和平プロセスを阻止するためのものだった。和平を持続させるには2つの前提条件があり、イスラエルの承認とパレスチナ国家の建設である。EUとロシアは和平プロセスにもっと関与していくべきだ。なぜなら、アメリカは時にイスラエルの利益のみに関心があるように見受けられるからだ。

中曽根氏 日本も第3者の立場からアフガニスタン和平会議をまとめているように、双方の仲介者としての役割を果たすことを期待したい。テロリズムは恒久和平に達する前に打倒されなければならない。米国政府はイスラエルに譲歩するよう説得すべきだ。

キッシンジャー氏 中東へのアメリカの過度な関与はイスラム過激派を勢いづけるリスクを伴う。このためにブッシュ政権は前政権よりも関与を抑えている。クリントン政権は中東に深く介入しすぎた。パレスチナ難民問題や宗教的側面での対立など、双方の見解が相容れられない問題もある。米国は当事者自身よりも問題解決に熱心になってはいけない。また、9月11日の事件を解決に導くものと見てはいけない。

ゴルバチョフ氏 中東問題に対しては、和平実現に向けてこれまで数多くの努力がなされてきた。その功労者のうちの1人にジョージ・シュルツ元米国務長官がいる。アメリカが他の国と協力しようとしていることはよい兆候だ。

## 4. アジアにおける改革

田原氏 ゴルバチョフ氏のペレストロイカは賞賛に値する。彼は政治改革を経済改革に先行して行った。中国は逆に反対の政策をとっている。経済は改革されてきているが政治システムはそのままだ。ロシアよりも中国で改革が成功しているよう見えるのはなぜか。

ゴルバチョフ氏 その見方は単純化しすぎている。1985年ごろからロシアでも経済改革を始め、科学技術の振興と質の向上を目指した。しかし、ソ連の官僚たちは彼らの利益を守るために改革に反対した。しかし私は耐え続け、1990年になるとほとんどの人が改革に賛成するようになった。中国とロシアにはそれぞれ

-17-

C.C.

のやり方がある。重要な教訓の1つは、国際通貨基金(IMF)がブラジルに行ったように、外部からの改革は失敗しがちであることだ。

田原氏 日本の小泉首相の改革においても、官僚の妨害が改革を損ねることになるのだろうか。

中曽根氏 ありうる。確かに危険だ。

田原氏 中国とロシアの改革の違いについてはどう思うか。中国の文化大革命は失敗だったように思うが。

邱氏 中国の政治システムは中国国民によって決定されていく。民主主義が必要ないとは言えない。中国共産党は民主主義のために戦った。誤りもあったが、しかし改革は正しい方向で実行されている。故鄧小平主席は必要な改革のための人材を用意してくれた。改革は内側から国民のために行われたときにしか成功しないだろう。中国の改革は農村からボトム・アップで行われており、トップ・ダウンではない。中国とロシアの経験は実際には比較できない。中国は現在の政治的安定が崩されると分裂してしまうだろう。中国国民は共産党を選んだ。その選択を尊重すべきだ。

ゴルバチョフ氏 中国は改革に成功するだろうと思っている。また、中国の分裂は世界規模でマイナスの影響を及ぼすだろう。どの国も、その国に合ったペースと特有の環境を考慮して改革を実行すべきだ。

キッシンジャー氏 中国とロシアはそれぞれ違った歴史を持っているために2者の改革の比較はできない。現在の中国共産党は毛沢東時代の共産党とは違う。インターネット・カフェの出現など、中国国民の表現の自由も拡大している。中国は、まず沿岸地域の開発を進めてから内部を進める政策をとってきた。ロシアと中国は全く異なる。結局重要なのは、両国が国際社会の立派な一員になったことだ。

## 5. 日本の国際的役割

田原氏 日本は湾岸戦争において、クウェートからイラクを排除するために結成された多国籍軍にカネだけしか出さなかったと批判された。小泉政権は、現在攻撃が続けられている対テロ戦争に自衛隊が参加できるよう法律を作った。日本の議論が、法律上の自衛隊の行動を規定する文言にばかり集中しているがどう think か。

中曽根氏 集団的自衛権は国際的に認められているが、日本国憲法で禁止されているという通説がある。私はこの解釈に反対だが、はっきりさせるために憲法改正が必要だ。日本は今後、国家安全保障基本法を制定して、首相や国会に対して規定を設け自衛隊がどこまで行動できるのか明らかにしないといけない。過去の首相は差し迫る問題を優先せざるを得ず、憲法改正問題を後まわしにしてきた。たとえば小泉首相も、構造改革を最優先させている。

- 18 -

[L]

キッシンジャー氏 アメリカ人で日本憲法の複雑性を理解している人は少ない。しかし、日本が現在の国際的取り組みに対し、資金拠出以上の貢献を準備していることは重要だ。自衛隊が後方支援のみに制限されるかどうかは問題ではない。敏感になっている歴史問題には注意を払いながらも、日本はこれから国際政治でより積極的役割を果たすことは必至だ。

ゴルバチョフ氏 今日の不安定な国際情勢のなかで憲法改正を行うのは時宜に適っていない。そもそも、国家が1つの事件に対処するために憲法を改正するのは、歴史を振り返ってみても賢明でない。国連安全保障理事会の常任理事国数を増やし日本にも議席を与えることで、日本は憲法を改正しなくても政治的影響力を増やすことができるだろう。日本が現在取り組んでいる構造改革は雇用の維持と需要の喚起に焦点をあてるべきで、軍備の増強ではない。日本の平和主義憲法はむしろ強みであり、モラル面での影響力を保つよりところとなっている。日本の反核の立場も軍縮交渉において不可欠な要素だ。世界にはあまりにも多くの兵器が存在している。日本とドイツは軍事的手段でなく経済で発展を遂げたモデルとなりうる。

キッシンジャー氏 日本は決して非武装国ではなく、EUや中国よりも膨大な軍事予算をもっている。

中曽根氏 日本は軍備増強を考えているのではなく、むしろ「普通の国」にしようとしているだけだ。自衛隊の行動範囲は現在憲法によって著しく制限されている。例えば、規定によると自衛隊は「非戦闘地域」での展開が許されるが、それは曖昧で行動基準の具体性が欠けており、単に彼此の活動を抑制するだけだ。戦後直ぐに米国主導で作られた憲法を改正して合理的な範囲内で自衛隊がもっと国際貢献できるようにしたいと望んでいる。現憲法と現実には落差があり、普通の憲法にしようとしているのである。

邱氏 日本の憲法改正について中国は強い関心があるが、中国は他国の政策に干渉しない。日本が世界第2位の経済大国である地位に見合った役割を持つことは自然なことだ。中国人の中には、日本の軍国主義の復活を危惧する者もいる。個人的な意見として、日本は繁栄と平和の道をこれからも歩み続け、軍備増強を追求しないと思う。

中曽根氏 日本は第2次世界大戦でアジア諸国に侵攻した経緯をもっている。日本が対テロ戦争のような国際的行動に対して、資金だけ貢献すればよいと考える人もいるだろう。しかし、日本は湾岸戦争で汗を流すことを嫌がる「ベニスの商人」だと非難された。日本は他国と肩を並べて貢献すべきだ。

キッシンジャー氏 日本は親密な同盟国として、また大国として敬意をもって扱われるべきだ。いくつかの国が協力しているアフガニスタンへの軍事行動は象徴的なものであって、それが協力の全てではない。多くの国が協力しているということが重要である。アメリカは決して日本の貢献に不満を持ってはいない。日本の憲法改正については、他のパネラーと同じく日本自身が決めることである。

— 19 —

Globalization Forum 2001

"The Peace and Stability of Asia"

Coorganized by the Institute for International Socio-Economic Studies and the Gorbachev Foundation

Time: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m.

Venue: United Nations University U Thant Hall

# Contents

Overview .................................. 25

List of Sponsors ........................ 26

## Opening Speech

Sekimoto Tadahiro (chairman of the Institute for International Socio-Economic Studies) .................................. 28

## Morning Session: Keynote Speeches

Mikhail Gorbachev (former President of the Soviet Union) ................................. 29

Henry Kissinger (former U.S. Secretary of State) .................................................. 31

Nakasone Yasuhiro (member of the House of Representatives, former Prime Minister of Japan).................................. 33

Qiu Guohong (Minister Counsellor at the Chinese Embassy in Japan) ............ 35

## Afternoon Session: Panel Discussion

### Themes

1. Terrorism .................................. 37

2. Afghanistan .................................. 38

3. The Middle East ........................ 38

4. Reform in Asia ................................ 40

5. Japan's International Role ................................................................................................ 41

6. Questions .................................... 43

— 24 —

# Overview

## 1. Theme: "The Peace and Stability of Asia"

(1) The progress of globalization and changes in inter-state relations

a. Globalization and the antiglobalization movement

b. The impact of the terrorist attacks on Asian security

(2) Prospects for economic invigoration and convergence in Asia

a. The impact of a global recession on the Asian economy

b. The expansion of the Chinese economy and the harmonious economic development of Asia

(3) Sustainable development in Asia and global environmental issues

## 2. Participants

### Speakers:

- Mikhail Gorbachev (former President of the Soviet Union)

- Henry Kissinger (former U.S. Secretary of State)

- Nakasone Yasuhiro (member of the House of Representatives, former Prime Minister of Japan)

- Qiu Guohong (Minister Counsellor at the Chinese Embassy in Japan)

### Panel discussion coordinator:

- Tahara Soichiro (journalist)

## 3. Program Tuesday, November 13, 2001

- 10:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m.: Forum (United Nations University U Thant Hall)

- 5:30 p.m.–6:30 p.m.: Press conference (3rd Floor, ANA Hotel Tokyo)

- 6:30 p.m.–8:00 p.m.: Reception
  ("Otori-no-ma" (Basement 1) of ANA Hotel Tokyo)

## 4. Languages

- Forum: Japanese, English, Russian, Chinese (simultaneous interpretation)

- Press conference: Japanese, English (consecutive interpretation)

## 5. Coorganized by

- The Institute for International Socio-Economic Studies

- The Gorbachev Foundation

— 25 —

Opening Speech

Sekimoto Tadahiro
Chairman of the Institute for International Socio-Economic Studies

Sekimoto Tadahiro, chairman of the Institute for International Socio-Economic Studies, opened the symposium, welcoming all those present and offering special thanks to Mr. Gorbachev, Dr. Kissinger, Mr. Nakasone, and Mr. Qiu for taking part. As Heraclitus said, "Nothing is permanent but change." Rapid progress in information technology and the development of high-speed transport links have driven forward the process of globalization, which has brought not only benefits but problems, too. While the 1980s were a period of turbulent change and uncertainty and the 1990s one of "great breaks" with the past—such as the collapse of the bubble economy in Japan—the twenty-first century must be an era of reform. Humankind must focus its wisdom on solving the problems confronting the world, otherwise humanity itself could be doomed. In Japan, the Koizumi administration holds the key to the success of reforms. Globally, we face such problems as terrorism, ethnic conflict, and the gap between the rich North and poor South. One of the key challenges is to overcome the conflict between exogenous pressures and the endogenous reality of countries through thorough investigation and discussion.

In conducting structural reforms, it is important to remember that not all of the systems currently in place are bad. We must also avoid doctrinaire black-and-white judgments. For example, can the single-minded pursuit of increased economic productivity that has dominated policy in recent years really bring about a sound and healthy world? The private sector, too, must not forget its role in reforms, particularly in investing in cutting-edge research, improving the global environment, and contributing to the world from the viewpoint of the coexistence of global society. Reform must be conducted through thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, and humanity must prioritize not only economic progress but also social and cultural values. The key questions facing us are: What reforms should be made? And at what speed?

Dr. Sekimoto expressed his happiness at welcoming keynote speakers who overcame the rough seas of the twentieth century and hoped that this forum would prove to be a significant event.

— 28 —

[w]

Speech

Mikhail Gorbachev

Former President of the Soviet Union

Mikhail Gorbachev posited that globalization has replaced the bipolar confrontation of the Cold War era as the major current in world affairs. The challenge now is to maintain stability by capitalizing on globalization and managing the risks associated with it, such as financial crises. In particular, the developed world must support the developing world, and the gulf in wealth between the two must be narrowed. Currently 18% of the world's population possesses 85% of the wealth, and this inequality is forecast to continue growing. Abject poverty—millions in the "fourth world" live on under $1 a day—is a breeding ground for hate and extremism, and the huge disparities in the world today must be seen as one of the underlying causes of the recent terrorist attacks in the United States.

International society must change to face the new threat of global terrorism. The United Nations has been underestimated in the past, but it will now be more important than ever. The current drama must become the foundation for future international cooperation. Key questions include: What will be the character of post-conflict Afghanistan? How will the Arab world react? How can the world be saved from extremism? The Taliban have caused instability not only in Afghanistan but in Pakistan, India, China, and Russia—all nuclear powers—which illustrates the wider importance of the fight against extremism. Everyone agrees that terrorism is bad, but there is less agreement on how it should be fought. All issues must be tackled from the perspective of political science, and the United States must take into account the wishes of all sides. The conflict must not be turned into an ideological one. The importance of the Islamic world is sure to grow.

The era of globalization is witnessing the emergence of a global civil society—as seen in the antiglobalization movement—which is destined to play a major role in shaping the future.

Despite some remnants of the Cold War, such as on the Korean Peninsula, and lingering territorial issues, such as China's claims on Taiwan, in the long term Asia—where the interests of America, China, Japan, Russia, and India converge—will be the key region in the twenty-first century. Asia is home to one-third of the world's population and produces an increasing chunk of global gross domestic product. China has made big strides in modernizing its industries and has recently seen the fruits of a 14-year effort to gain entry to the World Trade Organization. This will have a positive effect on the world economy, although fiercer competition will bring

— 29 —

with it difficult labor issues. Japan is also making serious efforts at structural reform. Reform is important, but so is maintaining employment. Juggling these two needs is a vital task for governments in the twenty-first century.

No single country has all the power in Asia. Consideration should be given to the creation of an East Asian security mechanism that would bind the countries of the region in a network of bilateral and multilateral relationships and serve as a forum for resolving disputes through diplomacy. The Japan-U.S. bilateral relationship could perhaps serve as a model for future relations in the region.

The European Union and Russia will play bigger roles in global diplomacy in the future, and Russia will likely develop a new relationship with NATO. All of these currents may lead to the creation of the "new world order" that was trumpeted but failed to materialize after the Cold War.

Globalization is bringing about a new world in which new ideas are needed. International cooperation, as seen, for example, in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, is the way forward. The task of communicating such ideas to the world at large—"public relations"—is also something that needs to be worked at.

— 30 —

Speech

Henry Kissinger

Former U.S. Secretary of State

Henry Kissinger observed that we are closer today than ever before to a true world community.

He recalled meeting Mr. Nakasone for the first time at Harvard University in 1953, just after Japan had emerged from the Occupation. Japan overcame the destruction of World War II to become a major economic power through faith and inner strength, which tells us something about how the current crisis in world affairs can be conquered. He recalled visiting China in 1971 and 1972 and stressed how far the country has developed since then, especially in the economic sphere. He also reported that many people questioned his sanity when he suggested—after a meeting with Mr. Gorbachev, who was then president of the Soviet Union—that Soviet troops would soon withdraw from Afghanistan. The very fact that an American, a Russian, a Japanese, and a Chinese could meet in such a forum bears witness to how far the world has come since the Cold War era of mutual suspicion and confrontation.

Americans' shock at the September 11 terrorist attacks stemmed not just from the huge loss of life but from the fact that their own territory had been attacked—and by a force not widely perceived as an enemy. The level of hostility toward their country shown by the terrorists was unbelievable for most Americans. There have been some positive consequences, however. The attacks signal the end of the illusion that history has stopped and all that matters is economics. Now it is clear that a new world order must be created. Also, Americans have been demonstrating unity and dedication on a scale not seen before.

Before September 11 there was much talk of the need for the European Union to forge an identity distinct from the United States and of EU-U.S. divisions. Now the EU complains that America has declined its offers of military assistance. The attacks have served to bring Brussels and Washington much closer.

Russian President Putin's visit to America shows how the world has changed. Just six months ago the talk was of disagreements over missile defense. Now the issue is how a new Russia with new borders can become a full and equal member of the international system in cooperation with the United States and others. Likewise, before September 11 some U.S. politicians thought that China was set to replace the Soviet Union as the major threat to America. Now China's contribution to the war on terror is being recognized and people have realized that China is not a threat if it

— 31 —

is integrated into the international system, in the same way that India used to stand
back from world affairs but is now a part of the international system. The tradition-
al balance of power is being transcended as nations join together to tackle common
problems, bringing us closer to a global political system. As so often, tragedy also
presents an opportunity.

There can be many explanations for terrorism, but there can be no excuses and no justification for such acts. Terrorism must be defeated. Issues like the gap between rich and poor nations may have played a distant role, but they will take longer to solve. Developed nations should help developing ones to narrow the wealth gap, but outside assistance alone cannot solve the problem; poor countries must be willing to help themselves. Japan and South Korea succeeded in developing through their own efforts. Some countries need to restructure domestically before help is given.

As during industrialization in the nineteenth century, when people migrated
from the countryside to the cities, globalization has brought spiritual dislocation as
well as progress. Care must be taken not to radicalize those who have not yet
benefited, otherwise the world will be split in two, with a globalized class living in
fortified suburbs connected by the Internet on the one hand and a poor underclass,
resentful and susceptible to nationalistic and religious extremism, on the other.

The current recession presents a paradox: In times of economic downturn peo-
ple demand government action, but this is usually national action, often in the form
of protectionism. This time, global action is needed to avert a crisis. In the 1990s
economics drove politics. Now it is time for politics to take the lead through global
cooperation, for example in combating the spread of biological weapons. The guid-
ing philosophy of the coming age should be that of a "world community." The ter-
rorists' only achievement may be to cause the formation of a world community, quite
the opposite of their aims.

Dr. Kissinger recalled a Chinese proverb stating that in times of turmoil little
problems are treated like big problems and big ones not at all, while in times of order
big problems are treated like little ones and little ones should not concern us.

— 32 —

Speech

Nakasone Yasuhiro

Member of the House of Representatives
Former Prime Minister of Japan

Nakasone Yasuhiro said that globalization had both light and dark sides. On the one hand, IT and advances in human understanding of DNA and space are acting as a uniting force, especially among the young, breaking down the barriers of nationalism, and not only goods and capital but also ideas, heritage, and culture are transcending borders. On the other, a bloated human population and the consequent environmental destruction could lead to food shortages or other disasters. The growing gap between rich and poor countries also represents a challenge of historic proportions, and there is criticism of the United States' hegemony in information and finance. Globalization is both a uniter and a divider of nations. We must look at humanity and the world we inhabit as a single unit in space in order to overcome our problems. We are now at the starting line in our quest to solve the problems we face and ensure that humankind has a bright future. The United Nations has a leading role to play in these efforts.

Globalization is eroding the traditional sovereignty of nation states. This will likely continue, but nation states will not disappear altogether. As seen in the EU's union of nation states, countries will cooperate more closely than ever before, but there will remain a core idea of "homeland." During the Cold War, countries were drawn magnetically to either the United States or the Soviet Union, and national identities were defined according to the ideologies of these two blocs. Since this bipolar ideological system ended, countries have striven to stake out their own identities. Meanwhile, nongovernmental organizations have grown as a political force. Their influence will continue to grow in such forums as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization.

The September 11 terrorist attacks were an act of political agitation, an affront to civilization, and a crime. The world community has united as never before to fight the common threat of terrorism. If this global effort to protect cultural values succeeds, it could have positive repercussions for tackling other global problems. Among the consequences of the attacks is renewed dialogue between the United States and Iran and the cautious support for U.S. action of moderate Islamic nations. It is to be hoped that these countries will show leadership in participating in global cooperation and quelling the extremist elements within their own borders. In the past Japan was often described as following the path of noninterventionism—the equivalent of

— 33 —

pretending not to see a groper on a train—but this kind of behavior is no good at a state level. The criticism it received for contributing only money to the allied effort at the time of the Gulf War has spurred it to take real action this time and introduce new laws to combat terrorism. The Afghanistan situation must be handled so as to avoid creating a second or third Osama bin Laden. The whole world must take an interest in the future of this country.

The world should appeal to Israel and the Palestinians to resolve their disputes through the values that bind humanity together. The U.N. and other multilateral channels have a vital role to play in applying pressure to both sides. The building of a Palestinian state should be a common goal for all involved.

Neither Francis Fukuyama's "End of History" nor Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" accurately describes the world in the twenty-first century, in which countries are coming together to defend common values. Both politics and history are alive and well, and reality is moving in directions that we cannot predict. The idea of "human space" is central to globalization and expresses the idea of humanity going beyond the pursuit of national interests to tackle challenges together. It is related to the idea of creating a biosphere in space.

In contrast with this idea of "human space," we humans have been arrogant and have caused the worsening crises of environmental destruction, food shortages, and population and energy problems. We must consider how humankind can live in harmony with other creatures. One of the best ways to do this is to look at the earth as seen from space. These ideas are particularly relevant when one considers the future between about 2050 and 2080. Such concepts of the togetherness of humanity and its harmony with nature are common in Buddhism.

In economic terms, free-trade blocs like the EU, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and Mercosur in South America point the way forward for Asia. East Asia should also form an economic union, which would be a historic development. China has joined the WTO, and there are signs that Japan is waking up to this need in its forthcoming bilateral free-trade agreements with Singapore and other countries. It must consider how it will live with an East Asian economic bloc and with other free-trade areas.

— 34 —

Speech

Qiu Guohong

Minister Counselor at the Chinese Embassy in Japan

Qiu Guohong focused on two themes, the situation in and issues facing East Asia and the link between China's development and peace in East Asia.

He outlined the enormous potential that Asia possesses. Its many social systems, models of development, and varied cultural traditions make it the world's most diverse region. Its huge population, its wealth of resources, and the compatibility of Asian economies mean there are great possibilities for mutual benefit with Europe and the United States. The diversity, joint development, and prosperity of East Asia is vital for global peace and stability.

In terms of security, East Asia is now very stable, with relations among China, Japan, and the United States improving and signs of a thaw between North and South Korea. This year there have been signs that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum (ARF) is progressing from trust-building measures to preventive diplomacy. Economic cooperation is also moving forward, with cooperative mechanisms like ASEAN+3 promoting mutual benefits for the countries of the region in many fields. In particular, awareness regarding the prevention of financial crises is growing, and the ability to control market fluctuations has increased. Many countries are placing regional cooperation at the core of their policies.

The region also faces threats, such as the aftereffects of the Asian financial crisis and other transnational problems. To tackle these problems, first the countries of East Asia must build relations of trust among themselves and with other major nations in a spirit of commonality. Each country should respect the diversity of East Asia. Second, there is a need for a regional security mechanism in Asia to provide a forum for resolving disputes. Maintaining bilateral relations with the United States is the prerogative of each nation, but these relations should not impact on other countries. Third, it is important for nations to resolve disputes peacefully through negotiation and dialogue.

Building trust-based relations like this, developing sound cooperation in regional trade and investment, and developing cooperation in such fields as finance, science and technology, IT, and environmental conservation should help to check the growth of the wealth gap that has been caused by economic globalization.

Following the September 11 terrorist attacks, and for the sake of sustainable peace in East Asia, countries must urgently set about the task of resisting terrorism. Terrorist organizations represent a threat to global peace and stability. China is also

- 35 -

a victim of terrorism, in Xinjiang. The terrorist forces there not only conduct terrorism in China but are also linked to foreign terrorist groups, threatening the security and social stability of the country. China opposes terrorism in any form. The causes of terrorism are complex and varied, and terrorist organizations cannot be eliminated by military means alone. China supports the current antiterrorist efforts, but there must be no double standards, and civilian casualties must be minimized. The international community must make efforts on a number of fronts.

The biggest contribution China can make to peace and stability in the East Asian region is its own stability and development. Some people say that China represents a threat, but this view is based on a lack of understanding of China's situation and policies. Since the founding of the People's Republic of China, China has been committed to the three noes: no hegemony, no participation in military groupings, and no seeking a sphere of influence. It is committed to global peace and security and has formulated and announced five principles for peaceful coexistence.

Based on 20 years of economic development, China is an active participant in economic cooperation in East Asia and is working to promote regional free trade and make investment easier. Now, as the world economy stagnates and the East Asian economy faces new difficulties, the sound, stable development of the Chinese economy is of great importance for the whole of the region.

In terms of security, too, China's military spending remains at a low level. Its national strategy is based on defense, it has no bases abroad, and it is scheduled to reduce its armed forces further by 500,000 personnel in the next three years. China has resolved its territorial disputes with India and Vietnam and, as a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, has promoted the peaceful resolution of conflicts in East Asia, such as in East Timor and Cambodia. It values the ARF highly and is actively working toward a multilateral security cooperation system for East Asia.

Reform is a long-term national policy, and economic development is the duty of China as a member of the international community. China's entry into the World Trade Organization by the end of this year represents a new phase in the country's reforms and will help China to play a more active part in economic globalization. It will promote competition among domestic businesses and offer secure opportunities for foreign enterprises to enter the Chinese market. In short, it will add new dynamism to East Asia's economic development, and in the future China's economic development will contribute to the sustainable development of the East Asian economy.

— 36 —

Panel Discussion

The afternoon panel discussion was chaired by **Tahara Soichiro**, a veteran journalist and commentator.

**Mr. Tahara** introduced the panelists, commenting that Mr. Gorbachev had truly changed the world through his *perestroika* reforms in the Soviet Union, while Dr. Kissinger was a great exponent of shuttle diplomacy. Mr. Nakasone did justice to the title of prime minister during his years in office, while the relatively young Mr. Qiu represents the future of Asia.

1. Terrorism

**Mr. Tahara** recalled that the world expected the end of the Cold War to herald an era of peace, but in fact conflicts proliferated, sometimes fueled by a growing wealth gap. He asked if the panel agreed with Mr. Gorbachev's assertion in his speech that the way vulnerable countries have been left behind in the globalization process contributed to the terrorist attacks.

**Dr. Kissinger** noted that many terrorists—notably Osama bin Laden—are far from poor, and the causes of violence are more complex. Most of the September 11 suicide bombers were the kind of educated, middle-class people who have benefited from globalization. The hatred shown by Islamic fundamentalists is more likely rooted in frustration at their own governments' failings and fear that modernization threatens their culture. Modernization without reform is an underlying cause, but this is no excuse for terrorism.

**Mr. Gorbachev** stressed the importance of looking into the minds of the terrorists. The principles of these fanatics are fundamentalism and radicalism. They lack humanity and use religion to justify their crimes. When the Soviet Union left communism behind, this did not produce terrorism. Instead, Russia became a partner of its former enemy, the United States.

Mr. Gorbachev explained that he himself is not religious but he respects others' right to religious expression. He recalled that when he was in the Soviet politburo he summoned religious leaders to discuss legislation on increasing freedom of religion. He condemned the constraints that had been imposed on religion in the Soviet Union.

**Mr. Nakasone** accepted that the gap between rich and poor countries may have been a distant cause of the terrorist attacks but stressed that it was no justification

— 37 —

(ll)

for them. Terrorism is nothing more than a criminal act. The Koran does not con-
done such indiscriminate violence, and Osama bin Laden is a dropout from main-
stream Islamic society.

The Israeli-Palestinian issue is also a distant cause of the attacks. We must go
beyond previous thinking and force Israel and the Palestinians to accept peace,
including a Palestinian state that is able to develop.

## 2. Afghanistan

Mr. Tahara pointed out that some countries, such as China, Finland, and Iran, have expressed caution regarding American bombing in Afghanistan and concern about civilian casualties.

Dr. Kissinger replied that China has expressed understanding for U.S. actions as well as humanitarian concern. As for other countries, it is important to differentiate between critical statements for domestic consumption and true opposition to U.S. actions, which is relatively small. If the war on terrorism fails, the scourge of terrorism will spread all over the world.

Mr. Qiu said that the causes of the terrorist attacks were complex and included the feeling among some developing nations that they were cornered. The United States is the only country with the power to induce such feelings. However, the main cause was undoubtedly inequality.

As for the U.S. military action, China approved providing there was a clear goal and that civilian casualties were minimized. Success in Afghanistan will not be achieved with armed force alone. Political, economic, and legal cooperation will be needed to defeat terrorism in the long term. In the end, Afghanistan's problems can only be solved by the Afghan people. Things will only get worse if the country is left exclusively in the hands of the Northern Alliance.

## 3. The Middle East

Mr. Tahara said that the Palestinian issue was probably a root cause of the terrorist attacks. Israel has failed to obey U.N. resolutions. Perhaps the United States should have been firmer in telling Israel to leave occupied lands. When Iraq invaded Kuwait it was pushed out by force, but Israel's occupation of Palestinian land has been treated very differently.

Mr. Nakasone agreed that the U.S. should tell Israel to leave the recently occupied land and make peace with the Palestinians. But the best solution would be for Israel to move voluntarily.

— 38 —

Dr. Kissinger vehemently rejected any parallel between Israel's occupation of Palestinian land and Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, which was an annexation of one state by another. Israel had temporarily returned to some areas given in peace in response to the assassination of an Israeli cabinet minister. The fundamental problem is trying to fit two peoples into a strip of land only 50 miles wide. Whenever there are negotiations there are always calls for Israel to make concessions in the form of land, yet the Palestinians only ever make verbal concessions. They must make a clear commitment to accepting the existence of Israel.

There should be a Palestinian state, including some of the land now occupied as Jewish settlements, but before Israel makes major concessions two things must happen: an end to violence and a recognition of Israel's right to exist.

Mr. Gorbachev emphasized that the peace process must not create winners and losers and should be conducted by consensus and mutual concessions on both sides. He recalled a visit he made to the Golan Heights that coincided with the explosion of three car bombs. Peace means an end to violence. The aim of the car bombs was to stop the peace process. The two principle conditions for a lasting settlement are the recognition of Israel's existence and the creation of a viable Palestinian state.

The European Union and Russia should be more deeply involved in the peace process—in part because America is sometimes seen as being interested in Israel's benefit alone.

Mr. Nakasone hoped that Japan, too, would play a role as mediator between the sides, just as it is acting as a third-party mediator by offering to hold a conference on Afghanistan. Terrorism will have to be defeated before a lasting peace settlement is reached. Washington should play a role in persuading Israel to make concessions.

Dr. Kissinger cautioned that too much U.S. involvement in the Middle East would risk further inflaming Islamic militants. This is why the Bush administration has not been as involved as the Clinton administration, which had been too deeply engaged in the region.

There are some issues, such as the return of Palestinian refugees and conflicting claims on religious sites, on which the views of the two sides may be irreconcilable. Some issues will be deferred, some tackled. The United States must not be more eager than the parties themselves to solve the problems. Also, the September 11 attacks must not be seen as the events that produced a solution.

Mr. Gorbachev recalled that the Middle East has seen many efforts to bring about peace, including by then U.S. Secretary of State George Schultz. It is a good sign that the United States appears willing to cooperate with other countries to solve the problems in the region.

— 39 —

4. Reform in Asia

Mr. Tahara praised the *perestroika* reforms that Mr. Gorbachev implemented in the Soviet Union, noting that he attempted to make political reforms before economic ones. China has taken the opposite tack, reforming its economy but not yet its political system. Why, he wondered, did reform seemingly succeed in China but not in Russia?

Mr. Gorbachev rejected this analysis as simplistic. He started economic reforms as far back as 1985, with the aim of accelerating scientific and technological progress and raising quality, but Soviet bureaucrats blocked many of his reform efforts in order to protect their own interests. He persevered, however, and by 1990 most people supported his reforms. China and Russia each have their own ways. One important lesson is that reforms imposed from outside, such as those the International Monetary Fund imposed on Brazil, tend not to succeed.

Mr. Tahara asked whether bureaucratic interference could stifle Prime Minister Koizumi's reforms in Japan in the same way as it had hindered Mr. Gorbachev, and Mr. Nakasone agreed that this was a danger.

Mr. Tahara asked about the differences between reforms in China and Russia and suggested that China's Cultural Revolution had been a failure.

Mr. Qiu stated that China's political system will be judged by the Chinese people. It cannot be said that there is no need for democracy. The Chinese Communist Party fought for democracy. There have been mistakes, but reforms have been carried out to correct them. Deng Xiaoping helped prepare the people for needed reforms. Reforms will only succeed if they come from within and are suited to the nation in question. China's reforms are being carried out from the bottom up, beginning with rural areas, not from the top down. The experiences of Russia and China cannot really be compared.

China would disintegrate if the current political stability was broken. The Chinese people chose the Communist Party, and others must respect their choice.

Mr. Gorbachev expressed confidence that China would succeed in its reforms and agreed that the disintegration of the country would negatively impact the world at large. Every country should implement reforms at a pace that is right for them and takes account of their particular circumstances.

Dr. Kissinger concluded that China and Russia have different histories and therefore their reforms cannot be compared. The Chinese Communist Party of today is not the same as Mao's Communist Party, as witnessed by the increased level of freedom of expression that Chinese people have, for example the appearance of Internet

- 40 -

cafés. China has adopted the approach of developing its coastal regions first, then inland areas. Russia and China are very different. In the end the important thing is that both nations have become responsible members of the international community.

## 5. Japan's International Role

Mr. Tahara reminded panelists that in the Gulf War Japan was criticized for contributing only money to the allied effort to eject Iraq from Kuwait. The government of Prime Minister Koizumi has formulated new laws to allow the Self-Defense Forces to participate in the current war on terrorism, but the provisions for action are highly convoluted.

Mr. Nakasone noted that although the right to exercise collective self-defense is internationally recognized, some say that it is prohibited by the Japanese Constitution. He disagreed with this interpretation, but suggested the Constitution needs to be revised to clarify such matters. Japan needs a clear national security law to set rules for the prime minister and the Diet and clarify what actions the SDF is permitted to undertake.

Prime ministers, including himself, often had more pressing issues to deal with than revising the Constitution. Prime Minister Koizumi, for example, is giving greater priority to his structural reform program.

Dr. Kissinger posited that few Americans understand the complexities of the Japanese Constitution. However, it is significant that Japan is prepared to provide more than money to the current international effort. It should not be a problem if the SDF is confined only to logistical support. Japan will inevitably take on a more active role in international affairs from now on, although it is important to respect historical sensibilities.

Mr. Gorbachev suggested that today's uncertain international situation was not a good one in which to carry out revisions. History shows that it is unwise for nations to revise their constitutions in response to a single event. There are many ways for Japan to contribute to international efforts other than military ones. Japan should be given a place on an expanded U.N. Security Council, which would increase its political clout without any need for changing the Constitution. It also has a role in the fight against terrorism. Japan's structural reforms should focus on maintaining employment and increasing demand, not on building up the military.

Japan's pacifist Constitution is a source of strength and moral authority. Its anti-nuclear stance, too, is a vital part of the disarmament struggle. There are far too many weapons in the world. Japan and Germany could become models of development by economic, not military, means.

— 41 —

**Dr. Kissinger** noted that Japan is far from unarmed and has a bigger military budget than any EU nation or China.

**Mr. Nakasone** stressed that Japan was not attempting to build up its military but rather to become a "normal" country. The SDF are currently handicapped by the Constitution and should be made more useful. The provision for them to be deployed in "non-combat zones," for example, is vague and designed simply to restrain their activities. The Constitution, which was formulated under the leadership of the United States just after the war, should be revised to allow the SDF to participate more in international efforts within the bounds of rationality.

**Mr. Qiu** stated that China has reservations about the possible revision of Japan's Constitution but that its policy is one of noninterference. It is natural for Japan to have a role in line with its status as the world's second largest economy, but it should consider the feelings of neighboring nations when deciding whether to increase the role of its military. Some Chinese worry about the reemergence of militarism in Japan. Mr. Qiu's personal view is that Japan will take the path of prosperity and peace and not pursue a military buildup.

**Mr. Nakasone** acknowledged Japan's aggression against Asian countries in World War II. Some would prefer Japan to contribute only money to such efforts as the war on terrorism, but Japan had been criticized during the Gulf War for behaving like the Merchant of Venice and giving money but no sweat. Japan should make a contribution on a par with those of other countries.

**Dr. Kissinger** said that Japan should be treated with respect as a close ally and a major power. The cooperation of several countries to the military action in Afghanistan is symbolic. Military cooperation is not the only form of cooperation. What is important is that a large number of countries are acting in concert. America is in no way dissatisfied with Japan's contribution.

**The participants** all agreed that in the end it was up to the Japanese to decide whether and how the Constitution should be revised. The question of how Japan should become a "normal" nation given the burden of history was a difficult one.

When discussions touched on the question of arms reduction and Japan's contribution to the cause of nuclear disarmament, **Mr. Tahara** asked why the United States had not ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

**Dr. Kissinger** replied that the Senate rejected the CTBT because it cannot be enforced and because a limited number of tests are necessary to maintain current nuclear weaponry.

Returning to the subject of Japan's international role, he stressed that the United States cannot lecture other countries about their policies. Each country acts in line with its own national interests. Japan is an ally, not a subsidiary, of America.

— 42 —

The issue of national missile defense will be resolved swiftly in the new atmosphere of cooperation between Russia and the United States. The visit of President Putin to President Bush's Texas ranch is a sign of the warm relationship between the two leaders.

Mr. Gorbachev added that 70% to 80% of Russians agree with President Putin's stance of supporting America's actions in Afghanistan and that the post-September 11 world offered new opportunities for cooperation between Russia and the United States.

## 6. Questions

A lively question and answer session took place, in which the values underpinning globalization were discussed.

Mr. Gorbachev argued that globalization is an objective process. The Gorbachev Foundation studied globalization for four years, consulting hundreds of scholars, and concluded that globalization cannot be turned back. The question is how we should behave in the midst of this phenomenon. Should we regulate it or let it run its own course? One idea is to impose a "Tobin Tax" of 3% to 5% on flows of capital.

Interdependence among nations is deepening. If only the West benefits from this trend, this will cause problems for all in the long term. We must help others to help themselves and act to minimize the negative effects of globalization.

Dr. Kissinger described globalization as a multifaceted process taking place on a number of different levels. It had spread both benefits, including technological innovations like the Internet, and problems, such as terrorism and environmental destruction.

There is not necessarily a need for common values. Attempts by one group to impose their values on another can be dangerous and have historically resulted in great suffering. There will, however, be common practices and goals, and values may emerge from these. The emphasis should be on practical solutions.

Mr. Nakasone argued that the idea of "human spacè" was a common value that could help humankind to cooperate to solve problems.

Mr. Qiu stressed that what is needed is common order, not common values. Values will continue to be diverse.

— 43 —