^{hat do we celebrate today?}

EJ Dionne Jr. / Washington Post 4jul01

hat does patriotism mean in a world where the international financial system daily makes a mockery of national borders, shifting money around the globe at the speed of light? What does patriotism mean at a moment when successful corporations do business in 25, 50 or 100 countries and might be sued by their stockholders if they let loyalty to any one nation interfere much with their quarterly profits?

What does patriotism mean when international organizations - the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, NATO, the European Union -demand that nations pool their sovereignty in the name of some higher good?

Over what, exactly, does that "Star-Spangled Banner" yet wave?

In fact, patriotism is very much alive and finds itself strengthened by the very forces challenging national authority. The debate over a common currency in Europe has called forth opposition even in nations, such as Ireland, that have greatly benefited from the European Union. The World Trade Organization finds itself under regular assault from the right and the left on the grounds that it is undemocratic, unrepresentative and, ultimately, unpatriotic.

The paradox is that national sovereignty almost certainly can't be protected unless nations act in concert and, thereby, give up some of their sovereignty. A country that stays out of cross-national organizations lacks any control over the decisions those bodies make, and yet those decisions can powerfully affect members and nonmembers alike. But international organizations do not naturally command loyalty.

Democracy and people's affections exist at the local and national levels, but the economic system operates not only within but also above national boundaries. If a true patriot is someone who wants the people of his own nation to exercise freedom, that freedom is almost always better preserved in association with other nations than alone.

Traditional diplomacy certainly took this into account. The NATO alliance did a rather good job of protecting freedom during the Cold War. Yet, as Chris Patten, the European Union's Commissioner for External Relations, writes in the current issue of the British magazine Prospect, members of NATO accepted "constraints on freedom of action" to achieve a larger end. Did NATO impinge on national sovereignty? Yes. Did it protect sovereignty? Yes. Thus, a test for every international organization, agreement and proposal. If international cooperation, on balance, enhances sovereignty and freedom, it can be seen as serving the cause of patriots. But to the extent that internationalism seeks to obliterate national traditions and democratic control, it not only should fail, but will.

What we celebrate every Independence Day is that no individual or institution has a right to be the people's proprietor. Serving that cause is both a national and international obligation.