A few months back I used to this column to cogitate about the nature of a sphere. I subsequently compared that type of thinking to the wrongheaded "the world is flat" new paradigm that is going around the world (so to speak) because of a new book with that offensive phrase as its title.

Then, this month's issue of WebSphere Journal takes a deliberately eclectic approach that confirms neither that the world is spherical or flat, but shows that it is definitely complex and often confusing.

Confusion lies, in my opinion, at the root of the current debates about the nature of the world and the nature of how all of us should view it and treat it. Encapsulated in worldwide debates over "globalization," the debates are often not debates at all, but rather, strident arguments that often start with street battles (and now, apparently, terrorism), and end with uncompleted agendas.

IBM has certainly become part of the globalization debate with the successful sale of its PC business to Lenovo, and effectively to the government of China. Lauded as a smart business move for both companies-it let IBM immediately realize cash gains that would have taken more than a decade to realize through profits and it established relatively obscure Lenovo as a world player-the deal nonetheless gave a queasy feeling to U.S. citizens (both on the left and the right) about an impending global takeover by the emerging Chinese nation.

The queasiness make simply be a kneejerk reaction that portends nothing serious. Many will remember when Japanese companies were buying up things such as New York's Rockefeller Center and California's Pebble Beach Golf Course in the 80s, prompting outcries from all corners of the U.S.

In those cases, it turned out that the Japanese were hardly able to physically move either of these properties to Japan, that they were simply investors the same as any other, and that they got taken badly in both deals. A decade of stagnation in Japan has alleviated any American fears that Nihongo would be the language of choice in the 21st century.

Now comes fear of China, certainly not tied directly to the IBM-Lenovo deal, but tied to the potential Unocal takeover that comes in the wake of it. But it comes with a simultaneous fear of the U.S. in many parts of the world, of a highly militaristic nation that seeks to promulgate iconic business brands such as Starbucks and Nike in every corner of the earth. This fear, of course, follows at least 30 years of international mocking of earlier icons such as McDonald's and our fabricated Hollywood heroes and mindset.

Whose sphere/globe is it anyway? Do "American" oil companies actually produce any significant portion of their oil in the U.S. anymore? They do not. Don't most large American companies (such as IBM) generate at least half of their revenue and profits outside of the U.S.? They do.

Don't companies who are outsourcing offshore provide employment of human beings, often at wages far above the prevailing wage? Doesn't a rising tide lift all boats, as most U.S. technologists and globalization promoters insist?

I think IBM was visionary, and more important, correct in integrating Lenovo into the global PC infrastructure as a full playing partner. Surely everybody knows that there are hugely significant design and manufacturing industries throughout the world who have contributed mightily to the IT revolution over the past 20 years. IBM's move was simply a logical move within this reality. Expect more of this sort of thing, whether coming from China, India, or maybe Russia...or maybe even the United States.

And more to the point, WebSphere application developers are an eclectic bunch, coming from all corners of the world, developing applications to be deployed to all corners of the world. We live in a global business village, and attempting to leave that village will just put you out somewhere in the vicinity of the middle of nowhere.