Prague protests won't solve struggling nations' economic woes

I wasn't surprised to read that rock-icon Bono, an Irish nationalist and lead singer of U2, was in Prague during this week's World Bank meetings in that city.

After all, the musicians of the last 100 years have created a tradition of social advocacy: Shostakovich hawked revolution, Lennon suggested we give peace a chance, Paul McCartney still lends his name to animal-rights causes, Thom York of Radiohead pushes debt relief for the Third World, John Mellancamp sings on behalf of American farmers and even Bob Dylan eventually got involved in the fight to free boxer Rubin Carter.

In light of this legacy, it seems natural enough that Bono might lend support to the few thousand protestors who thought that pillaging a magnificent European capital would earn a moment of notoriety and stop Monsanto from producing genetically engineered 37-pound tomatoes.

But Bono wasn't in Prague to spur on the rioting masses. Instead, he flew in to deliver a speech commending World Bank President James Wolfensohn, who Bono assures us is not only "one of the grooviest of the world's economic intelligentsia," but someone who works hard to promote the rights of the world's poor. I'm sure that the Democratic Left will argue that Bono, a man who has sold more CDs than there are child slave laborers in southeast Asia, is simply speaking the pro-globalization party line of the extremely rich.

I would like to suggest that Bono's pro-World Bank stance instead demonstrates a deeper understanding of modern human rights than the stance of anti-World Bank protestors. The World Bank's strategy of quietly lobbying business and government to guarantee people's basic needs does much more good for hundreds of millions of the world's poor than rioting ever will.

One of the most common criticisms directed toward the World Bank is that the interest Third-World governments pay on World Bank debt prevents them from financing programs to help their people. But the World Bank is already engaged in debt-relief — it has pledged to void $11 billion of its own loans and to work to cancel $39 billion of debt loaned by other Western institutions. While the bank usually does demand governmental restructuring in exchange for debt forgiveness, the reforms are aimed at ensuring that the people of a country see the benefits of debt forgiveness, not merely the oft-corrupt government. No good comes from canceling a $1-billion debt if a country's president then goes and spends $1 billion on fancy cars, planes and personal resorts in France.

But enough praise of the World Bank's activities. The point is that the World Bank is at the cutting edge of a new type of human rights movement — one that uses meetings and constructive programs, not protests and leaflets. The modern age has rendered protest largely ineffective; by and large you aren't allowed to protest in the world's poorest countries — you'll be sent to jail), and protests in Europe or the States just don't trouble dictators thousands of miles away. The modern economy, however, does give us a lever to demand change in non-Western countries.

If non-Western countries hope to modernize, they need Western capital, capital we can choose to withhold from them unless they guarantee basic rights and work to improve the economic conditions of all their citizens. Despite what the anti-globalism protestors chant, most capitalists aren't inherently evil — that's why corporations and businessmen establish foundations and the World Bank works for debt relief. I suspect that bankers and businessmen would be willing to implement policies designed to promote human rights if activists made sound, rational proposals rather than discrediting themselves through violence. Human rights activists of today should be working with companies, not against them. Doing so is the only way to give the world's poor jobs — a sweatshop is better than nothing, after all — and guarantee basic economic and human rights.

Sure, flying to Prague to trash a store or going to a concert and denouncing globalism has more appeal than attending a meeting on international banking. In photos, Wolfensohn doesn't look like someone you'd want to take clubbing after a protest. But protecting human rights and promoting economic development in the modern world is not about engaging in destructive fun with a group of friends. Pushing for reform within the existing government and corporate structure will do more good for more people than protests thousands of miles from those whom the protestors purport to help. Peter Harrell is a politics major from Atlanta, Ga. He can be reached at pharrell@princeton.edu.