Search results

The author explores the evolution, functioning, similarities & differences between the original Bretton Woods international monetary system that operated from 1945 to 1973 & the present modified institution, which is symbolically called Bretton Woods 2 System. The existing international financial architecture keeps on being based on the hegemony of the US dollar, as a dominant reserve currency. However, in spite of the fact that in most cases the present international monetary system implies the regime of flexible foreign exchanges rates, a characteristic of this system is that many countries in different degrees refuse to accept the appreciation of their national currencies to the US dollar. At the same time, the domination of the USA, the most indebted country in the world, is becoming a very serious threat to its sustainability. However, as the author concludes, the creators of the international monetary system, being aware how serious could be the consequences of its cessation, endeavor to extend its operation accepting less expensive consequences of keeping it alive. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

The author's starting assumption is that globalization institutionalizes new forms of governance, but that this does not diminish the significance of the national state. On the contrary, globalization forces the advanced industrial societies to find a new balance between calls for economic efficacy & expectations regarding social security. On the other hand, national states have avoided the impact of globalization primarily owing to the (1) institutional acclimatizing reserve of modern democracies, (2) development & application of new political governing instruments, & (3) intelligent usage of international cooperational pressures in favor of national political innovations. However, all this does not mean that the national state has gone through globalization unscathed. A new architecture of political governance has emerged, called by the author the transnational regimes of politics. They include, besides national states, international organizations such as the WTO, regional integrations (EU, NAFTA), as well as a variety of national & transnational interest groups & movements. The author concludes that the efficacy of the new forms of governance must not be overrated. Also, the basic problem today is the expansion of the areas lacking functional markets, successful national states, or global forms of governance. 45 References. Adapted from the source document.

The process of European integrations, with growing political, economic, & security interdependence of member states is designed in such a way that, among other things, it can eventually result in developing a collective approach to defense, whose features would be a far cry from any other form of traditional alliances. The signatories of the Maastricht Agreement vowed to shape a common defense policy that would in time lead to the common defense. The common defense policy, whose structure would be built on the basis of the models & trends of the defense policies of the leading West European countries, should evolve as an integral part of EU's common foreign & security policy. It should address all the aspects of the use of military power, & it will require an analysis of a broad spectrum of possible scenarios that may pose a threat to EU's security. EU countries have demonstrated certain shortcomings in their military capacities, eg, transport equipment & other capacities for deployment. Although in the economic field they have achieved consensus on numerous issues, it is obvious that defense issues such as nuclear weapons, professionalization of the military, & the policies of defense industry are still a major bone of contention for EU members. Though EU, WEU, & NATO represent only a segment of the European security architecture, they will most probably serve as the key institutional framework for the development of a common defense policy & common defense. Further expansion of this triangular institutional framework is going to be interdependent, mutually supportive, & parallel. 20 References. Adapted from the source document.