"We speak here of power in all fields of human activity, including the political, economic, military, technological, social, intellectual, and so on.

Left to its internal and autonomous impulses, the process of globalisation will inevitably result in the further enhancement of the domination of the dominant and the entrenchment of the subservience of the dominated, however much the latter might resent such domination.

Among other things, this paradigm means that, naturally, the powerful will set the agenda for all residents of the global village. Again naturally, they will do this to advance their own interests.

This will include the perpetuation of their dominant positions, to ensure the sustenance of their capacity to set the agenda of the global village, in the interest of their own neighbourhoods within this global village.

Inherent within this is, necessarily, reliance on the use of the superior power of which the dominant dispose, to achieve the objective of the perpetuation of the situation of the unequal distribution of power.

In this situation, it is inevitable that the pursuit of power in itself, will assert itself as a unique legitimate objective, apparently detached from any need to define the uses of such power. This also signifies the deification of force in all its forms, as the final arbiter in the ordering of human affairs.

However, from the point of view of the disempowered, the struggle to ensure the use of such power to address their own interests becomes a strategic objective they cannot avoid. Necessarily this means that power would have to be redistributed. This would be done to empower the disempowered, and to regulate the use of power by those who are powerful.

And yet, by definition, the disempowered should not reasonably expect that their disempowerment gives them any possibility to have a decisive influence over the powerful. Logically, they should not entertain any dreams that they have the means to oblige the powerful to regulate the use of their power to achieve results that benefit all humanity, regardless of the impact of this on what the powerful might define as their national interest.

Thus we come back to what I said earlier. Because we are poor, we are partisan activists for a strong, effective and popularly accepted United Nations.

We take these positions because there is no way in which we could advance the interests of our people, the majority of whom are poor, outside the context of a strong, effective and popularly accepted United Nations.

An autonomous process of globalisation, driven by its own internal regularities, can only result in the determination of our future within the parameters set by those who enjoy the superiority of power. The powerful will do this in their interest, which might not coincide with ours."