Gordon Smith was Prime Minister Jean Chretien's Personal Representative to the G7/8 from 1995 to 1997. He now directs the Centre for Global Studies at the University of Victoria, is a Senior Fellow at the Liu Centre at UBC, and is a member of the Commission on Globalization.WHEN G7/8 LEADERS LAST MET IN CANADA in 1995, they remarked how wonderful it was to be in Halifax where they could walk the streets among friendly crowds. How times have changed. This year it is already clear large protests are being organized. Many activists have it as their goal to disrupt the meeting, even to prevent it from occurring, and are already preparing to that end. The Canadian government will use its police and security forces, even the armed forces if necessary, to make sure that does not occur. How has this happened?The short answer is that a growing number of people are opposed to globalization and to the G7/8.(1) Globalization is opposed because of its perceived homogenizing effect and the related commodification of culture, the degradation of the environment, and adverse social impact generally. There is a perception that corporate interests always trump public interests and that the G7/8 leaders represent exclusively the former. There is also a belief that the international institutions, which help manage interdependence and are supposed to help poorer countries, lack transparency, discourage participation (of civil society), and are not accountable, or at least not publicly so. In fact, the Bretton Woods institutions and the Word Trade Organization (WTO) are accused of having become pawns of (largely American) corporate interests and of Wall Street.It is dangerous to go much further in aggregating the views of those with major concerns about globalization. Some believe that globalization needs to be better shaped and its governance improved; they want dialogue. Others want to be seen and heard; they want people to listen to them and to read their banners. Finally there are those who want to shut down the meetings and institutions that to them represent the evils of globalization; they embrace violence and intend to break through police barriers.There is an important strand of anti-capitalist, anti-American thinking in many of those who oppose globalization. Neither of these phenomena is, of course, new. They are exacerbated now, however, by the reach and wealth of American corporations and, perhaps increasingly, military power. There is a disturbingly widespread feeling that the 'United States had it coming,' although the attack on the World Trade Center is, of course, not explicitly condoned. The World Trade Center was an icon of United States led capitalism in the world.There is also a general belief of those opposed to globalization in the valuable role and legitimate importance of civil society and the non-governmental organizations that provide expression to civil society. Not surprisingly, 'civil society' hardly speaks with one voice, although increasingly coalitions of like-minded non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are being formed and effectively networked through the internet. The worthy efforts on debt relief are a good example. Indeed one of the ironies is how the revolution in information technology, which has driven globalization over the last decade or so, is being brilliantly used in an attempt to derail globalization.While it is a risky business to predict what eight(2) government leaders will do in what is, in fact, a much more unstructured discussion than most people think, there are already some clear indications. Of course, a major world crisis could change everything.The leaders will certainly talk, although not likely all that much, about the state of the global economy and what should be done to increase the prospects of growth. Increasingly this subject has become essentially the purview of the finance ministers. Over the last decade the leaders have spent most of their time on other global issues. …