Cause of"Inclusive"Globalization
演讲人：Kofi Annan 科菲·安南
It is a great pleasure for me to visit Yale，and to pay tribute to the very important work done by the Centre for the Study of Globalization.By devoting the intellectual resources of this institution to this central phenomenon of our time，you can help guide us in understanding and grappling with the sweeping changes affecting the world.Let me also say how valuable your World Fellows programme promises to be-in bringing bright and promising young leaders to Yale and equipping them to help their own nations make the most of globalization.
It has often been said that globalization is what distinguishes our era from all its predecessors.Globalization，we are told，is redefining not only the way we engage the world，but how we communicate with each other.Globalization is commonly understood to describe the increasing flow of goods，services，capital，technology，information，ideas and labour at the global level.driven byliberalization policies and technological change.
For a time，this logic was borne out by reality.Indeed，it worked so well that in many cases underlying schisms were ignored in the belief that the rising tide of material growth would eliminate the importance of political differences and social grievances.However，over the past few years，I and others have urged greater consideration for the potential political backlash if the social-as well as the economic-consequences of globalization are left unattended.
Today，I would like to share some thoughts on an equally important aspect of globalization-namely，its potential to be a truly integrating and inclusive force-and the very real dangers if it fails to live up to that potential.
In other words，just as we worry about the gap between haves and have-nots，we need to be equally concerned about the gulf between insiders and outsiders in a globalized world where no border is impermeable and where the privileges-economic，as well as political and social-of the few are painfully apparent to those multitudes who still yearn for liberty and opportunity.We need，in short，to direct our energies towards realizing the aspiration inherent in the awkward，but revealing，Arabic translation of the word "globalization"-which means literally "world inclusivity."Of course，globalization is not wholly new.As far back as we can trace human history，people have traded，been on the move，colonized and migrated，and in the process have transformed both the places they came fromand the places to which they journeyed.
What makes our era different is the degree of interpenetration，the speed with which change is taking place-and the dramatic and ever-growing gaps this process is creating between insiders and outsiders.
Today，I wish to suggest that one way to address this new division-between those who are benefiting from globalization，and those who simply see it as one more manifestation of the inequity of the world-is to pursue an inclusive globalization whose purpose lies not only in opening markets，but in expanding opportunity and promoting cooperation.By this I mean the need to ensure that the globalization of economies and societies is supported and sustained by a "globalization of community"-to create a wider，more expansive definition of our duties to our fellow men and women in the global village，and to ensure that globalization benefits them all-economically，politically and socially.
The question before US，therefore，is not whether globalization is good or bad，but rather how we adapt our policies，priorities and personal choices to account for the realities of a new era.In a world without walls，we can no longer think and act as if only the local matters，as if we only owe solidarity and allegiance to those within our own city or state.
Such a world demands that we tear down the walls in our own minds.as well-those separating US from them，rich frompoor，white from black，Christian from Muslim from Jew-so that we are able to recognize the untold ways in which we can all benefit from cooperation and solidarity across lines of nationality，race or economic development.Whether it is the area of crime，health，the environment，or the fight againstterrorism，interdependence has ceased to be an abstract concept，and become a reality in our own lives.
This poses a real challenge not only to political leaders，but to civil society，none-governmental organizations，businesses，labour unions，thinkers，and citizens of every nation.We need to rethink what belonging means，and what community means，in order to be able to embrace the fate of distant peoples，and realize that globalization"s glass house must be open to all if it is to remain secure.
This will require leaders in every sector to present the choices facing the public in a different light.They need to make the difficult，but necessary case that we cannot continue to exclude the poor，the disenfranchised or those who are denied basic rights to liberty and self-determination.Or that if we do，we cannot，at the same time，hope to secure lasting peace and prosperity.
Of course，including all those people in our circle of concern will not be easy.We all feel a deeply rooted sense of loyalty to those closest to us-families.friends.Fellow citizens of city and country.To say that we-and here I think in particular of those of US privileged to live in the developed world-should include citizens of poor and distant countries in our circle of concern-to suggest that we have an obligation to help them achieve their rights and opportunities in a spirit of toleranceand diversity-is to ask a lot.
And yet，does globalization leave US with any choice？Either we help the outsidersin a globalized world out of a sense of moral obligation and enlightened self-interest，or we will find ourselves compelled to do so tomorrow，when their problems become our problems，in a world without walls.
