In this commentary on the 2003 globalisation index, Foreign Policy magazine highlights its major findings
The smoke over the World Trade Centre had yet to clear before the attacks by al-Qaeda had become a powerful symbol in the debate over globalisation.
For the anti-globalisation movement, September 1th was a gruesome vindication of its argument that global integration had widened the gap between the haves and have-nots and in doing so, created resentment that exploded with the destruction of one of the most famous icons of Western capitalism.
For others, the message was entirely opposite and the solution was not less globalisation, but more. Even as both sides of the political spectrum reached opposite conclusions, though, they agreed on one point.
The collapse of the twin towers was a body blow to what some people thought was an almost unstoppable force.
This year's A.T. Kearney/ Foreign Policy globalisation index, which measures levels of global integration among 62 countries (representing 85 per cent of the world's population), offers a dissenting view.
To be sure, 2001 saw a dramatic downturn in some of globalisation's most visible drivers, from foreign direct investment to international travel and tourism.
In many cases, however, not only was a slowdown already in train before the attacks, but a prompt response by policy-makers to September 11th helped to dissipate the negative economic effects.
Even as globalisation's leading economic indicators lagged, levels of political integration shot up, spurred in part by co-operation in the war on terrorism and the continuing integration of Russia and China into the international system.
By making use of several indicators - including information technology, finance, trade, personal communication, political engagement and travel - the A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy globalisation index reveals how a country's level of global integration spans multiple dimensions.
For instance, Ireland ranks number one in our index for the second year in a row because of its strong links to the global economy and because it is also the world's most talkative nation, owing to the heavy traffic into its call centres and the strong growth in outgoing international calls.
Switzerland is the second most global nation, thanks in part to being one of the world's most popular centres for travel and tourism.
In economic integration, the United States is near the bottom at 50th place; yet it is the 11th most globalised nation because it has the highest level of technological integration in the world, with nearly 143 million Internet users, more than 106 million Internet hosts and more than 93,000 secure servers.
The index also reveals that the much-lamented global economic slowdown had an uneven effect.
Western Europe saw its level of economic integration decline dramatically (with nine of the 15 countries in the region posting lower overall scores), but eastern Europe bucked the continental trend with expanded volumes of trade.
Singapore slipped from third to fourth in this year's ranking, but south-east Asia remains the most economically integrated region among the emerging markets.
These trends belie the post-September 11th assumption that the flow of people, goods and services would slow when nations tightened control of their borders to guard against international terrorist networks.
Open borders however are not the cause of globalisation as much as they are the result. The most destructive act of terrorism in history could not destroy the underlying drivers of global integration.
Even as deepening global integration makes nations more vulnerable to exogenous shocks, it only strengthens countries' resolve to cope with crises. Witness how the Bush administration, which had long cast a sceptical eye on financial rescues, threw its support behind a $30 billion International Monetary Fund loan package for Brazil to prevent that country's economic crisis from spreading throughout Latin America and ultimately affecting US trade.
In the aftermath of the terrorist bombing in Indonesia which killed nearly 200 people, leaders at the November 2002 summit of the Association of South-East Asian Nations pledged to strengthen efforts to combat terrorism.
Although globalisation might be resilient to external shocks, it tends to create its own internal stresses.
There are signs that some parts of the world believe the costs of global integration now outweigh the benefits.
The anti-globalisation movement has gained political traction as populists have made electoral gains in Europe and Latin America. The global war against terrorism has provoked fears of a human rights race to the bottom, as nations, eager to calm jittery foreign investors by clamping down on terrorist activity, might also excessively restrict political freedoms.
As the war against terrorism continues, those most interested in promoting global integration must do more to heed the concerns of those who feel marginalised by it, lest the backlash against globalisation become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Or, put another way, al-Qaeda is not the real threat to global integration. Globalisation has nothing to fear but globalisation itself.
Copyright 2003, A.T. Kearney, Inc. and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved. A.T. Kearney is a registered service mark of A.T. Kearney, Inc. Foreign Policy is a registered trademark owned by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
The data sources used to construct the third annual A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Magazine Globalisation Index are available at www.foreignpolicy.com and on the website of A.T. Kearney's Global Business Policy Council at www.atkearney.com