Ever since 1993, when U.S. President Bill Clinton turned the annual meeting of the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation forum into a gathering for heads of state, critics have had a field day. Expectations have usually outpaced results, forcing participants to justify their attendance at what has been derided as a "two-day photo op." Such cynicism comes easily, but it is misplaced. APEC matters, and the reason why is simple: Its 21 members account for half the world's population, 45 percent of world trade and $16 trillion in economic output. Any forum that allows them to hammer out common positions on important issues is to be welcomed. And even if no single stand is developed, the exchange of views lays the groundwork for eventual agreements.

This year's meeting went according to script. Participants agreed to support a "millennium round" of trade negotiations that would produce a wide-ranging agreement within three years. The declaration pledges to pursue a "broad-based and balanced agenda" that would yield deep cuts in tariffs on industrial products, agriculture and services. Members vowed to increase market access for all trade-round participants, especially emerging economies. They backed early entrance to the trade group for APEC members not yet in the World Trade Organization. They also promised to increase transparency in their own economies.

Detractors are quick to note what the APEC meeting did not accomplish. The declaration omits specific measures for trade liberalization or for increasing transparency. There was no deal on China's admission to the WTO, even though negotiators from Beijing and Washington held talks on the fringes of the meeting. Nor did the group produce a statement on the crisis in East Timor, despite the proximity of the turmoil and its relevance for almost all the attendees.