These changes have increased the complexity of the international investment regime, and should broaden interest in developing a more effective investment protection framework. But just the opposite is happening a progressive weakening of protection, with states increasingly flouting their treaty obligations and skirting or ignoring the outcomes of international dispute resolution proceedings.

This last component is largely rhetoric it is hard to imagine any Mexican already in the US voluntarily returning to, say, Zacatecas to wait patiently in line for a new visa. President George W. Bush has been skirting the question ever since he committed himself to an immigration agreement with Mexico when he visited President Vicente Fox in Guanajuato almost exactly five years ago.

But I also believe that the fundamentalist approach that can be sensed in certain circles is skirting the limits of the acceptable. How can fundamentalists advocate limiting economic growth as a solution to the problem of global warming when there are men, women, and children in their hundreds of millions, all over the world, who still lead lives of abject poverty and are in desperate need of help?