Search results

In recent decades, the United States has increasingly used the means of economic warfare in its geopolitical struggles. Among these instruments – in addition to the financial markets – it most often launches geoeconomic attacks in the oil market against its geopolitical adversaries. The United States can cause significant economic damage both for oil exporter (eg. Iran, Venezuela) and oil importer (eg. Cuba, North Korea) countries by restricting their access to oil markets.This paper analyzes the economic warfare in the oil market between the United States and Iran, Russia, and North Korea. Through these examples this paper demonstrates how the United States organizes and executes geoeconomic attacks in the oil market and how it handles country-specific problems. The United States has the means to organize broad international coalition alongside the oil market sanctions – even in the lack of UN Security Council resolutions.United Nations has decided on a number of economic sanctions against Iran because of its nuclear program. These sanctions reduced the supply in the world oil market and resulted in about 10-20% price increase, while Iran – despite of the sanctions – found the way to sell significant amount of oil, mainly to China and India.Russia is a member of the UN Security Council, so no UN sanctions can be imposed on it, nevertheless the United States and its allies launched a geoeconomics assault against Russia after the annexation of the Crimea. Russia was prepared for these economic sanctions and could effectively reduce the negative effects on its oil export, which could even increase after the western sanctions. North Korea is under UN sanctions since 2006 because of its nuclear program. The sanctions refer to oil and oil products as well, but has no significant effect on world oil market and oil price, because North Korea is a relatively small country with low oil consumption.North Korea is suffering a huge economic burden due to severe restrictions and its only way to circumvent the embargo – according to American accusations – is to smuggle some oil from China and Russia. ; In recent decades, the United States has increasingly used the means of economic warfare in its geopolitical struggles. Among these instruments – in addition to the financial markets – it most often launches geoeconomic attacks in the oil market against its geopolitical adversaries. The United States can cause significant economic damage both for oil exporter (eg. Iran, Venezuela) and oil importer (eg. Cuba, North Korea) countries by restricting their access to oil markets.This paper analyzes the economic warfare in the oil market between the United States and Iran, Russia, and North Korea. Through these examples this paper demonstrates how the United States organizes and executes geoeconomic attacks in the oil market and how it handles country-specific problems. The United States has the means to organize broad international coalition alongside the oil market sanctions – even in the lack of UN Security Council resolutions.United Nations has decided on a number of economic sanctions against Iran because of its nuclear program. These sanctions reduced the supply in the world oil market and resulted in about 10-20% price increase, while Iran – despite of the sanctions – found the way to sell significant amount of oil, mainly to China and India.Russia is a member of the UN Security Council, so no UN sanctions can be imposed on it, nevertheless the United States and its allies launched a geoeconomics assault against Russia after the annexation of the Crimea. Russia was prepared for these economic sanctions and could effectively reduce the negative effects on its oil export, which could even increase after the western sanctions. North Korea is under UN sanctions since 2006 because of its nuclear program. The sanctions refer to oil and oil products as well, but has no significant effect on world oil market and oil price, because North Korea is a relatively small country with low oil consumption.North Korea is suffering a huge economic burden due to severe restrictions and its only way to circumvent the embargo – according to American accusations – is to smuggle some oil from China and Russia.

After Germany introduced the unrestricted submarine warfare at the beginning of February 1917, the United States declared war on 6th April 1917 on Berlin and joined the First World War beside the Allied countries. In response to the declaration of war the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy broke off its diplomatic relations with Washington on the 9th April 1917. The martial law between the two states came into force on the 7th December 1917 with the US's declaration of war. The First World War ended with the victory of the Entente and the peace was dictated by the victors. US President Woodrow Wilson achieved that the victorious powers adopted the League of Nations Covenant in April 1919, which became part of the Paris peace treaties. The US domestic politics was divided over the League of Nations, and as a result of that the US Senate has not ratified neither Germany's nor Austria's and Hungary's peace treaties. The US concluded a separate peace treaty with the losing countries on the basis of the Knox-Porter-resolution. In the history of diplomacy the Knox-Porter-resolution became known as a peace resolution that abolished the state of war between the parties, but the United States has assured all the rights guaranteed by the ceasefire agreement and the peace treaty. The study deals with the preliminaries, the parliamentary debate, details of the ratification, and also describes the most important points of the peace treaty between the United States and Hungary signed on 29th August 1921.

The study presents in brief the life of Imre Mikó, lawyer, author of several significant works of legal literature in the field of minority rights in inter-war Transylvania, who was also, briefly, a member of the Hungarian Parliament. The life and activity of Imre Mikó may be divided into two major periods. Before the Second World War, as a student of law and theology, and later as a minority rights advocate he distinguished himself with a wide array of interests, both in the field of law and politics. He was appointed to the minority protection service of the Hungarian Community in this period. His activity was interrupted by the advent of World War Two. During the war, he fell into captivity, and, after his release from the Soviet Union, he attempted to resume his political and advocacy carrier only to be side-lined, spending almost two decades in the menial occupation of bookshop clerk. His belated and partial rehabilitation following his appointment as chief curator of the Unitarian Church is described in the study. The study also makes mention of the newly discovered information regarding the fact that Imre Mikó, under significant duress, collaborated with the Securitate, while at the same time he was himself under surveillance.

"The essence of the blockchain technology lies in that via connected IT devices such a base of information is formed which simultaneously, with making a thousand copies, is able to register data of transactions, automated transactions, without any external supervision and the possibility of retrospective one-sided modification. Many believe that the system of blockchain (and the digital general ledger system forming its base) will bring about such a change into our lives which the Internet brought when it started to spread in the 1990s.
The most successful examples of blockchains so far are financial tools. The Court of the European Union has already ruled in judgement no. C264/14 that bitcoin virtual currency is considered to be a contractual money, it is a direct money between economic actors who accept it.
It is a perpetual dilemma of the law and legal regulations that lawmakers react to the events of everyday life slower than the speed at which economic actors find new solutions to various problems. Do new possibilities provided by blockchains surpass risks, or is it just like an Internet article warns: are hackers becoming the new lawyers? What can a corporate lawyer say to the previous question − can salary be asked for in bitcoin?
This presentation tries to answer the question of how much the blockchain system facilitates the conclusion of employment contracts or the fulfillment, the control, and the administration of employment relationships and whether the human element is indispensable in the operation of these systems."

University of Debrecen, Centre for Agricultural Sciences and Engineering, Faculty of Applied Economics and Rural Development H-4032 Debrecen, Böszörményi str. 138. Today ICT (Information and Telecommunication Technologies) has an essential role in some sectors of the economy. Its development has sped up so much that if somebody is not able to follow this development there is no chance in the economy. It is effectual on both micro and national economic level. A nation's elementary interest is to make the opportunity to recourse of the more developed ICT, on micro level the enterprises' interest is to take advantage of it. Furthermore the knowledge-based society comes to the front more and more, because it is a national economic aim, so without reference to conditions ICT is must at everybody's disposal. So, it has to be available in a little village, as much as a city. If a country can build a suitable infrastructure for the population, it has a huge benefit on international markets and in competitiveness. But in order for the construction of an infrastructure, the first is to ensure the financial sources. EU offers many opportunities on calls for proposals with this object and the most important thing, that we can make the best of it. ICT infrastructure development has been realised on many settlements in Hungary, but not always on the most suitable places. In my opinion, an indicator system would be worthy to develop, by which it would be possible to specify where the development of ICT infrastructure is reasonable – where the use of development funds will be most efficient. Currently applied indicators are deform, they do not reflect the real regional situation, because these had not been worked out to our environmental conditions, but are suitable for only at macro-level, for uniform international comparison, and do not consider many things. Naturally, these are suitable for making international rankings, although such an indicator system would be useful, which shows the development of our own country, at regional level too. ; Az Információs és Kommunikációs Technológiák (IKT) ma már a gazdaság valamennyi szektorában nélkülözhetetlen szerepet töltenek be. A fejlődésük annyira felgyorsult, hogy ha valaki nem képes ezt a fejlődést követni, nincs esélye a gazdaságban. Ez mind mikro, mind pedig nemzetgazdasági szintre érvényes. Egy nemzetnek alapvető érdeke, hogy megteremtse a lehetőséget a minél fejlettebb IKT igénybevételére, mikro szinten pedig a vállalkozásoknak érdeke, hogy ezzel a lehetőséggel éljenek. Továbbá egyre jobban előtérbe kerül a tudásalapú társadalom, mint nemzetgazdasági célkitűzés, azaz mindenki számára rendelkezésre kell hogy álljanak e technológiák körülményektől függetlenül. Azaz egy kis faluban ugyanúgy jelen kell lennie, mint egy nagyvárosban. Ha egy ország megfelelő IKT infrastruktúrát képes megteremteni a lakosság számára, akkor óriási előnye van a nemzetközi piacokon, és versenyképességben. Azonban infrastruktúra létesítéséhez az első a pénzügyi források biztosítása. Az EU nagyon sok pályázati lehetőséget kínál ilyen beruházások céljára, és a legfontosabb, hogy tudjunk a lehetőséggel élni. Magyarországon is rengeteg településen történt IKT infrastruktúra kiépítés, azonban nem mindig a legmegfelelőbb helyen. A fejlesztési források minél hatékonyabb felhasználása érdekében véleményem szerint olyan mutatószámrendszert lenne érdemes kidolgozni, amely alapján pontosabban lehetne meghatározni, hogy hol érdemes fejleszteni, hol hasznosulnak legjobban a fejlesztési források. A jelenleg alkalmazott különböző külföldön kidolgozott indexek torzítanak, nem tükrözik a valós regionális helyzetet, hiszen nem a saját környezeti feltételeinkhez alakították ki őket, hanem makroszintű, egységes nemzetközi összehasonlításra fejlesztették, és ezért sok mindent nem vesz figyelembe. Ezek természetesen nemzetközi rangsor készítésére nagyon is alkalmasak, de mindenképpen hasznos lenne egy olyan mutatószámrendszer, amely a saját országunk tényleges fejlettségét mutatja, régiós szinten is.