MOORE: Globalization’s a trite phrase. A slogan. It’s not a policy declared by the WTO or the gnomes of Zurich, or rich people in Davos. It’s a process. In fact, many historians argue that trade is a lower percentage of world GNP now than 100 years ago. [The WTO is] 142 members driven by consensus. Everybody has to agree, and then, once governments have agreed, we have this unique mechanism [for arbitration and appeal]… This is where the little guy has some chance. And a lot of people out there think, ‘Well, wait a minute, why don’t we [include] indigenous rights, human rights, animal rights, other things?’ But we can’t handle that. We’d become a very dangerous beast if we had all those powers.

A lot of the scrutiny is good. It makes us better. And some of the critics are right.

The majority have anxieties we should share. Of course people should be saying we should do more about AIDS. Of course we should do more about [Third World] debt. Of course we should focus on issues of the environment, of families… I draw a line between them and those who say, “We’re here to stop the ministers’ meeting.” That’s fascist. That’s Marxist. Sure, march on the Parliament. But don’t burn down the Parliament. That’s been done before.

But it’s not. There’s time for the capitals to reflect, to revisit their positions. But if we go to Doha with the same agenda we had in Seattle, we’ll get the same results.

Agriculture.

Europe, Korea, Japan, Norway–versus those countries that are agricultural exporters. And there are differences among the developing countries. A food importer like Egypt might have a different view than a food exporter like South Africa. These are legitimate national interests. The environment and some of the social areas are also very difficult. When it was only about tariffs, it was a bit easier.

Not at all. The U.S. team is working very hard. The stories you’ve read about Bob Zoellick and [European negotiator] Pascal Lamy… are true: two very focused, very intelligent guys trying to understand each other’s needs. The transatlantic relationship is central to any success.

I worry when regionalism becomes a substitute for multilateralism. But I have no evidence of that yet.

Yes, we will have China; we should be able to get there by Doha. But when you’re looking at tens of thousands of pieces of paper and hundreds of lawyers, you’ve got to worry that some sentence might not be constructed right.

You have to be haunted by history. We were formed out of the collapse of the global trading system, which led into the Great Depression and the two tyrannies of the last century… We were created by men and women of vision who saw preventing the rise of hostile trading blocs as part of our function. I don’t see that on the horizon… In my heart, I think we’ve learned a lot.

I see the rules we establish here as the final nail in the coffin of colonialism. A global system run by rules and consensus is essentially democratic.