Eyes on the Prize

In a speech in Seoul in January 1989, Australia's then Labor Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, proposed that an Asia-Pacific economic forum be set up to facilitate regional cooperation. Later that year in Canberra, APEC was born. An ardent free trader, Hawke hoped high-level political dialog would counter international protectionist forces and promote free trade among neighbors. Now in private business, Hawke spoke to TIME's Fiona Carruthers in Sydney last week.
TIME: After 10 years, what do you consider to be APEC's greatest achievements?
Hawke: APEC has been a force--both within the organization and within the broader forum of the World Trade Organization and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade--for withstanding considerable pressure for a relapse into greater protectionism. It has kept the torch of free trade alight at a time when it's been threatened.TIME: And where has it failed?
Hawke: People will say the targets set for free trade haven't been achieved. That's a genuine enough criticism, and is a reflection of the way the [financial] meltdown of the second half of 1997 has thrown a lot of people off track. An invalid criticism of APEC is that it didn't prevent or solve the Asian crisis. That's a misreading. APEC is not about running the economies of the region. It's specifically about trade facilitation and liberalization.

TIME: Has APEC justified its existence and the money spent on it?
Hawke: If you didn't have APEC, you'd have to create something else. Look at the side benefit of having the leaders of the region meeting every year. They're not just going to dinners. The forum has provided a framework for leaders to come together and discuss a range of issues beyond the specific charter of APEC. Don't let's believe that Bill Clinton and [Chinese President] Jiang Zemin are just going to be talking about trade liberalization.

TIME: APEC has come to be judged on its ability to achieve trade reform. Was the 1994 Bogor Declaration, which set targets for free trade in the region, a mistake?
Hawke: It was ambitious. You shouldn't call good ambition a mistake. I just hope they get their commitment refueled in New Zealand.

TIME: Are expectations of APEC's ability to achieve trade reform too high?
Hawke: When you set dramatic targets and you're not seen to be moving irreversibly towards achieving them, you create a potential albatross. I hope there will be an intellectual understanding of the virtue of the move toward more liberalized trade. That's why we need a reaffirmation of the principle.

TIME: Compliance with APEC's goals is voluntary. Will the Bogor targets be reached?
Hawke: Intelligent self-interest, and analysis and the experience of the past 25 years can only lead member countries to [embrace] trade liberalization. There will be some blips, but there's an impetus that wouldn't have been there without APEC.

TIME: What must this meeting achieve to shore up confidence in APEC?
Hawke: A clear, unequivocal recognition of the value of liberalized trade, a strong reaffirmation by the political leaders of their commitment to the principles and processes of APEC, a clear statement of what APEC can and can't do. Any sense of a diminished commitment in some areas [of trade] would be fatal for APEC. I'd also hope that the U.S. would realize that they stuffed up during [Chinese Premier] Zhu Rongji's visit in not accepting his proposal that China join the WTO.