Singapore, 1998

Singapore was delighted

to see Mr. Didier Opertti unanimously elected as the fifty-

third President of the United Nations General Assembly. As

this century draws to a close, the world is experiencing

dramatic changes. We live in an era of great uncertainties.

At this crucial juncture, we are delighted that a

distinguished man of letters and man of law from a fellow

small State has assumed this distinguished office. We

would also like to place on record our gratitude to his

predecessor, Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko, for his able

stewardship of the fifty-second session of the General

Assembly.

In the last two decades, the world has changed. The

growth of international institutions, cross-border trade and

investment, the opening up of markets, the advent of

instant communication — all these have altered the face

of the world. From the Americas to Europe to the Middle

East, to Africa and to Asia, no country has been

untouched by the forces of globalization. The expansion

of global economic activity has forced globalization onto

the agendas of United Nations Members. At one point or

another, we have all asked how our peoples could benefit

from globalization and wondered how our nations could

be better plugged into the global economic grid. Keen

international interest at the United Nations about

globalization was also evident from the active

participation of many Member States in the high-level

dialogue on the impact of globalization held last week on

the fringes of the General Assembly.

At that dialogue, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said

that there was no subject more important than

globalization. I agree. The long-term benefits deriving

from the free trade of goods and services and from the

free flow of capital and information are generally

accepted.

In the last year the desirability of a freer flow of

capital has been severely questioned. When the currency

crisis erupted in South-East Asia, some expected the crisis

to blow over quickly. Unfortunately, this was not the

case. Economic problems quickly developed into full-

scale social problems, which in turn became political

problems. The crisis has since spread from South-East

Asia to North-East Asia, Russia and even Latin America.

Even as we speak, it laps at the shores of America and

Europe. What started out as a national problem has

ballooned into a regional problem, and it is fast

threatening to become a global crisis.

The United Nations cannot avoid coming to grips

with globalization. Events in East Asia over the last year

have caused enthusiasm for this phenomenon to give way

to uncertainty about its value. The questions foremost in

our minds are: is globalization good for us? How do we

prevent ourselves from being hurt by it? We are all

groping for answers. The challenge for us is whether we

are able to draw the right lessons from recent events.

On the whole, globalization has done a lot of good.

The process has enhanced the free flow of goods and

services, capital and information; it has spurred innovation

and competition and has lifted hundreds of million of

people out of poverty. East Asia has enjoyed two decades

of unprecedented economic growth. Our landscape has

been radically transformed. Financial centres have

14

replaced sleepy villages. Lifestyles which were a dream for

our parents are a reality for us. Our cities are increasingly

plugged into the world information superhighway. Less than

10 years ago, letters would have taken at least a week to

cross the globe. Today, with the advent of electronic mail,

it takes seconds. We can now chat “real-time” on the

Internet. Initially, the Internet was used mainly in developed

countries. Increasingly, it has spread its wings around the

globe.

Dialogue and cooperation between countries have

improved as the countries found issues of common interest

and more areas of interdependence. Isolated economies

have joined hands to form regional economic groupings and

to promote regional prosperity. Look how the globalization

of information has helped the work of the United Nations

itself. Today, anyone with a computer and modem can gain

electronic access to over 360,000 official documents of the

United Nations, dating back to 1947. The complete list of

United Nations peacekeeping operations, including potential

training programmes, is available on-line. More crucially,

the Organization’s “Relief Web” provides situation reports

on humanitarian relief efforts in disaster areas around the

world, along with instant information on how individuals

and Governments can contribute to specific humanitarian

operations. One major force of globalization, the Internet,

has tied all of us together, very much like a global family.

But, like any man-made phenomenon, globalization

inevitably creates some problems. Some countries have

been made more vulnerable by the opening up of their

economies to the global market. Control has now passed

largely into the hands of thousands of money traders who

can move billions of dollars across boundaries with a single

click of a computer mouse. Effectively, there is now no real

force that can stop them.

As the former Chairman of Citibank, Mr. Walter

Wriston, noted in a recent article:

“When I started in the banking business, the total

foreign exchange market in New York was only about

$50 million. If the Federal Reserve called Citibank or

Chase and instructed them to sell $10 million, an

order that size could move the markets. Today, that

market is $1 trillion and Central Bank intervention in

foreign exchange becomes an exercise in futility.”

In today’s CNN world, live images are transmitted

from one end of the globe to another as events unfold.

Perceptions can be changed, emotions stoked and

confidence irrecoverably shaken within minutes. This exerts

greater pressures on Governments, on businesses and even

on peoples to respond, rationally or otherwise.

The way ahead is not to turn our backs on

globalization. This is no longer a viable or realistic

option. To repudiate globalization will hurt our long-term

growth prospects. It is vital to remind ourselves in this

crisis that the tremendous economic growth that much of

the world has experienced since the Second World War

has been the result of the free trade in goods and services

encouraged since the formation of the General Agreement

on Tariffs and Trade in 1947. There is an overwhelming

consensus among economists that we should continue to

push ahead on this front, despite the fact that

protectionism has once again reared its ugly head. If we

try to turn the clock back and walk away from free trade,

the impact will not just be domestic nor will it be merely

economic.

Domestic political pressures can find regional and

international outlets. The prosperity resulting from open

markets has provided a foundation for national stability

and regional and global peace and security. If countries

cannot get access to the raw materials, goods and services

they need through peaceful and open competition, they

will resort to other means. Economic rivalries can have

political and military consequences. A return to global

tensions cannot be ruled out, but we must avoid it. The

core interests of the United Nations — the maintenance

of peace and security — may be endangered. The only

way forward is to find solutions to deal with the

vulnerabilities created by globalization.

At the domestic level, we must promote higher

standards of national government by strengthening our

regulatory and supervisory frameworks, improving

corporate governance, increasing transparency and

lessening government interference in market decisions.

We need to put in place sound macroeconomic policies

and build strong regulatory structures to make our

economies more resilient.

On the international front, the United Nations can

play a leading role in the international effort to help

countries reap the benefits of globalization. We should

encourage the developed world to assume the primary

responsibility for bringing the world out of this crisis.

There should be greater dialogue and partnership between

the developing and developed world to ensure that

globalization benefits every country. Globalization should

bring security and confidence, not greater vulnerability, to

our people.

15

United Nations Members have a common interest in

revitalizing and reforming the major multilateral

institutions, including the International Monetary Fund

(IMF), the World Bank and the World Trade Organization

(WTO). The United Nations, for its part, has prevented the

scourge of another world war. The IMF, World Bank and

WTO have overseen a great burst of economic expansion

of a size never seen before in the history of man. Together

with other key United Nations agencies, they have made

significant contributions to development efforts and to

poverty alleviation. However, recent developments have

shown that these institutions have their weaknesses. They

should be reformed, but not destroyed.

So, we at the United Nations can play a constructive

role in this process. As Secretary-General Mr. Kofi Annan

said at the high-level dialogue recently, the United Nations

has

”A unique and indispensable role to play. Our broad

mandate, our universal membership and our ability to

involve non-State actors all make the United Nations

uniquely well equipped to help forge a global response

to the crisis, which is global not only in the

geographical sense, but also in the range of issues that

it raises.” (A/53/PV.6)

I am glad that one clear conclusion of the high-level

dialogue on globalization was, as the Secretary-General

reiterated in his closing remarks, the need for the United

Nations and Bretton Woods institutions to now work

together as equal members of the same team. In my view,

we will also have to work together to deal with the new

challenges which were not anticipated when the Bretton

Woods institutions were set up in 1944.

We stand at a critical juncture of international

discourse. As we approach the twenty-first century,

paradigms that have brought us wealth and peace in the last

half-century are now being questioned. The temptation to

take the easiest route — to close our doors on

globalization — is very great, but the quickest route is not

necessarily the right or best route.

We can begin by holding full discussions on this issue.

A good start was made at the recent high-level dialogue.

Many good ideas have been raised. We should continue this

process in order to come up with a global understanding of

the challenges and to formulate a global response. I am

pleased to learn that preparations have already begun for

the Millennium Assembly in the year 2000. Many questions

will certainly be discussed then, but I dare say that no

question may be more pressing than the challenge of

globalization.