I believe President Bush hit the nail on the head when he described the radical anti-globalization protestors as being "no friends to the poor". Helping to retard economic activity in the Third World and reduce the flows of incoming capital will only keep those nations mired in their bad situations longer. Only by allowing the free flow of capital into the borders of Third World nations and reducing bureaucratic roadblocks to investment and wealth will the situation of the Third Wold be made better. With that premise in mind, let's look more closely at the demands this group is making.
Debt Cancellation - President Bush and other G8 members have been working on making IMF debt easier for these developing nations to swallow, as well as reducing interest and other penalizing aspects of these loans. I think there is a compromise to be had here, and one that will allow the maxmimum amount of growth while still keeping agancies such as the IMF solvent. Decreasing trade roadblocks will help developing nations gather the capital to repay some of their debts, which would greatly help the situation. Debt forgiveness is one issue that should be implemented quickly, along with reforms to the lending procedures of groups such as the IMF and World Bank.
Open meetings of IMF and World Bank - Once again, this is something that is a fairly reasonable demand. However, I don't think that making them publically open for anyone to walk in would be productive. However, doing something like having some additional media presence or live telecasting of the meetings is a good thing. What I feel the real reasons for this demand are, however, is to allow protest groups to derail the meetings with their additional demands. This would get nowhere, and would further hurt Third World and developing nations. However, these meetings should have some level of democracy and openness to them, but reasonable limits need to be maintained.
Ending privatization and austerity - This is the single most egregious selection I've yet heard. State-run enterprises are almost universally less efficient and more prone to cronyism than are private enterprises. Look at the economic reforms made by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel. He managed to dramatically boost the Israeli economy through deregulation and privitization of many state-run enterprises. While he was not entirely sucessful, and the transition wasn't easy, it did result in economic growth across all income brackets. (It was such a good idea that his successor Ehud Barak continued many of his policies.) Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan both led their respective nations to new levels of economic growth through encouragement of private investment and economic growth from the private sector.
In order to boost the economies and more importantly, the quality of life for these developing nations, you need to encourage the free movement of capital on all levels. One has to ensure that those who have good ideas for new businesses have every chance to take those ideas to market. It's that kind of raw innovation and entrepreneurial spirit that can transform a sagging nation into an economic powerhouse. (Just as post-war Japan and West German both did to great effect.) True social justice demands that we not repeat the mistakes of the past but look towards the future. Socialism and Marxism have failed the developing world. Free markets can transform it into a better place.
Halting lending to "environmentally damaging" projects - Once again, a surefire way to keep the developing world trapped in poverty. According the United Nations, billions currently live in regions without potable water, and millions are killed by cholera, dysentary, and other pathogens spread through unclean water. This has got to be ended, and if there's a potential for slight environmental damage, then so be it. Human life comes first. If one has to build a pipeline to the rainforest to save a million lives, then it should be done. It should be done in a way that minimizes environmental impact, but it still must be done. Likewise if it takes a hydroelectric dam to bring cooling or heat to an impoverished region, then it should be done. If we're to truly be on the side of social justice, then we must not shirk from the noble task of improving human life. While a clean an environment is important, human life takes precedence. I find it ironic that a group calling for global justice would be willing to abandon that principle by placing an untouched environment over human life.
These policies are an improvement over the mindless rhetoric of the Left on the issue of globalization, but they are still based on a set of faulty premises. It is those groups who fight for individual rights, free movement of capital, political freedom, and economic growth for the developing world that are truly on the side of global justice.