In Seattle, Gothenburg and Genoa, tens of thousands of people took to the streets to express their views. A real breath of fresh air in this post-ideological age. If only there had not been the meaningless violence, we could almost have applauded them.
Anti-globalisation protests are a welcome cross-current at a time when political life has become rather dull, sterile and technocratic. Indeed, this cross-current is good for democracy. But what is your actual message? Do you espouse the views of the "Black Block", which violently opposes any form of private property? Or perhaps your views are better represented by the "Slow Food" campaign, a mundane club that spreads chic pamphlets stressing the importance of eating correct food in the better restaurants?
What is suddenly so wrong with globalisation? Until recently even progressive intellectuals were singing the praises of a worldwide market, which, they said, would bring prosperity and well-being to countries where before there was only poverty and decline.
Of course, globalisation, as a movement that disregards national borders, can easily deteriorate into a form of "selfishness without frontiers". For the rich West, free trade is naturally something that should be embraced wholeheartedly . . . as long as it is not in products that can harm Western economies. No sugar from Third World countries. No textiles or manufactured garments from North Africa. In this regard, your anti-globalisation protests are well founded.
But I would like to point out a number of contradictions. You oppose American hamburger chains, soya that has been genetically modified by multinational corporations and worldwide brand names that influence buying habits. Many of you feel everything must return to a small scale.
And yet, it is different when it comes to migration; then globalisation suddenly becomes an aim. Large numbers of homeless people drift along the borders of Europe and North America, staring wide-eyed into the shop window of a prosperous society. Millions of illegal immigrants live as homeless pariahs, in pitiful conditions, hoping against hope that somehow they can tap into Western opulence. But it is precisely the absence of free trade and investment that drives them to the West in the first place.
There is another contradiction in the fact that, while opposing globalisation, you strongly urge tolerance towards lifestyle diversity. Surely we owe the fact that we live in a multicultural and tolerant society to globalisation? Anti-globalisation protests veer dangerously towards extreme 'populist' right-wing views.
You are asking many of the right questions. But do you have the right answers? Nobody now denies the existence of climate change and global warming. But such issues can only be dealt with through global commitments. Everybody recognises the importance of free world trade for the poorest countries. But this requires global social and ecological standards.
Look at the immoral speculation that preyed on weak currencies such as the Mexican peso and the Malaysian ringit a few years ago. The most effective way of combating this kind of speculation is through the creation of larger monetary zones - another form of globalisation.
I do not think it makes any sense to be unreservedly for or against globalisation. The question is rather how everybody, including the poor, can benefit from its manifest advantages without suffering any of its disadvantages. When can we be sure that globalisation will benefit not only the happy few but also the massed ranks of the Third World's poor? Again, your concerns as anti-globalists are extremely valid. But to find the right solutions to these valid questions we need more globalisation, not less.
That was exactly the point of James Tobin. It is the paradox of anti-globalisation. Globalisation can, after all, serve the cause of good as much as the cause of evil. What we need is a global ethical approach to the environment, labour relations and monetary policy.
Democracy and respect for human rights are the only sustainable ways of avoiding violence and of achieving trade and prosperity. The international community has still not managed to impose a worldwide ban on small arms or to set up a permanent international criminal court.
Moreover, increased aid is needed from the rich West. It is shameful that more than 1.2 billion people still do not have access to medical care or a decent education. Trade alone will not be enough to solve the problems of the least developed nations. Even with more trade, there is still a need for increased development co-operation to build harbours and roads, schools and hospitals, and to construct a stable legal system.
Finally, world trade needs to be further liberalised. If all world markets were fully opened up to competition, the total income of developing countries would be boosted by $700 billion per year, or 14 times the total development aid they currently receive. No more dumping of Western agricultural surpluses on Third World markets. No more exceptions for bananas, rice or sugar. The only trade ban would be on weapons.
We need a global political body as powerful as the globalised market in which we already live. The G8 of the rich countries must be replaced by a G8 of existing regional partnerships. A G8 where the south is given an important and deserved place at the table to ensure that the globalisation of the economy is heading in the right direction.
But of course we do not need to wait for the first meeting of the new G8 to begin the process of ethical globalism. We could start in our own European backyard. Why shouldn't we systematically test every decision made in the EU for its impact on the weakest societies on earth? Does it widen or narrow the gulf between the rich northern countries and the poor south? What is the result of this decision - or of the lack of a decision - on worldwide ecological problems? And why shouldn't we call for an opinion from a high-level non-European body? Because in this respect you are absolutely right.
Guy Verhofstadt is Prime Minister of Belgium and current president of the EU. Email:globalisation@premier.fed.be