By THOMAS P.M. BARNETT, Scripps Howard News Service

Two new reports about our world reiterate the overwhelmingly positive impact of globalization upon our planet, making it more peaceful and more just.

The Wall Street Journal's European edition opines that the transatlantic bond remains "robust" despite President George W. Bush's supposed unilateralism. Harsh anti-Americanism, like that of France's Jacques Chirac and Germany's Gerhard Schroeder, is out and pragmatic pro-Americanism is in -- see replacements Nicholas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel.

The Economist magazine recently published a special report on Vietnam. It's a fascinating story of how a closed political system rapidly opened itself up to globalization's transformative embrace by mixing role models from all over the globe, including accepting outside religious influences.

In the global oil industry, there is Saudi Arabia and everybody else. But with the planet experiencing the worst food crisis since the tumultuous 1970s, the question begs, Who is the "Saudi Arabia" of agriculture? Well, it turns out that North America is the OPEC of global grain.

The late 1980s was a turning point in global security: worldwide defense spending peaked, along with the number of men under arms and arms sales. During these last great years of the Cold War, the Pentagon spent an average of $4 billion annually on missile defense.

While America remains the world's sole superpower, numerous rising great powers re-grade the global landscape, making it flatter than it's been at any time since the early 20th century.

Hillary Clinton promises she'd "obliterate" Iran if it used nuclear weapons against Israel, suggesting that, as president, she'd return the "favor" -- in spades.

In a previous column I registered my joy in finally participating in a presidential primary that would matter, but as Indiana's vote draws near, I find myself more uncertain than ever. I must admit that -- as usual -- it strikes me as a choice between lesser evils.

Americans spend little time remembering our history, preferring to focus on current and future accomplishments. That attitude gives us a bit of attention-deficit disorder when it comes to judging other countries' political evolutions. We simply cannot understand why they shouldn't be able to quickly put together a democracy like our own.

Western powers today fear that China's stunning rise signals a real challenge to the notion that economic growth triggers democracy. While I understand such fears, let me tell you why they're unfounded: China's economy increasingly mirrors our own.