Example collocations logo

Bilateral in sentence

1533 examples of Bilateral in a sentence

Europe’s relationship with Russia is too important for it to be developed in an ad hoc fashion through bilateral arrangements.
There is an obvious sphere-of-influence issue in Kazakhstan, and the Chinese have been squeezing the Russians for all they can get in bilateral deals.
But, so far, the US has relied on threats, such as halting $650 billion in bilateral trade, to persuade China to cooperate.
Both sides claim to want improved bilateral relations, but there is room for doubt about whether Russians and Europeans actually think about their relations in the same terms.
The key is effective multi-stakeholder partnerships that bring together all major players in the development process, including governments, bilateral and multilateral development agencies, national and international development finance institutions, the private sector, civil society, and even academia.
The Korean government will strive to ensure that both Koreans and the people of ASEAN are able to lead happy and safe lives, which means cooperating with all ASEAN member states, at both the bilateral and multilateral level, to overcome the security challenges that we jointly face.
George W. Bush’s administration should be credited for giving overdue recognition to India, but this was done primarily on a bilateral basis.
Its copycat, SAFTA (the South Asian Free Trade Agreement), moved slowly to reduce tariffs and the list of excluded items, so India signed separate bilateral FTAs with Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
The Ukrainian naval vessels were in full compliance with a 2003 bilateral treaty governing access to the Kerch Strait and the Sea of Azov.
Here, as elsewhere, problems arise from time to time in the bilateral relationship.
But even with this, a long and rocky ride for the bilateral relationship is inevitable.
Though their bitter border dispute remains unresolved, and China has been a vital ally and military supplier to India’s enemies in Pakistan, bilateral relations have grown warmer in recent years.
In Washington – as in Beijing, for that matter – the temptation to approach Europe in a bilateral manner is strong and growing.
According to the TFT approach, a bilateral game should begin with cooperation: if the other player behaves cooperatively, so should you.
While Trump’s focus on bilateral trade balances betrays a lack of understanding of how trade works – multilateralism functions better than bilateralism, as it is less likely to leave one economy beholden to another – it also makes the bilateral TFT strategy more straightforward to implement.
America’s strategy of bilateral trade agreements was aimed at precisely that, but it enlisted only a few countries, representing a fraction of global trade.
To that end, it must revive productivity growth, expand exports, open its economy to international competition, and forge new bilateral and regional trade deals with major economic players.
Although China publicly favors bilateral initiatives over multilateral institutions in addressing water issues, it has not shown any real enthusiasm for meaningful bilateral action.
That is why, for example, soldiers have been learning to fight in formation with robots in Hawaii, and we have engaged in bilateral training with unmanned aerial systems in Malaysia.
Since Turkey forged a customs union with the EU in 1996, bilateral trade in goods has increased more than fourfold.
Making matters worse, Germany, the reluctant leader of the EU, has traditionally acted in support of its own economic and energy interests, maintaining a strong bilateral relationship with Russia.
Though the US and China do not lack issues to discuss, the bilateral dialogue in the security field lacks depth and follow-up.
Despite rhetorical bromides about requiring “ministers to unlearn ingrained habits and focus on substance, not rhetoric,” and about “business associations engaging with the granular detail of what companies want,” this proposed Plan B would strengthen the bilateral and regional trade initiatives that have diverted energy and attention from Doha and the WTO.
The bilateral nature of the talks makes them less unwieldy than the ever-expanding TPP.
He has focused on China and Germany, because they maintain large bilateral trade surpluses with the US – totaling $366 billion and $74 billion, respectively, in 2015.
But, in both cases, immediately eliminating America’s bilateral deficits would simply make Americans poorer.
This is the classic form of adjustment in the international economic system, and past US administrations pursued this method by applying bilateral pressure, and by working through international institutions such as the G7 and the International Monetary Fund.
The first, more plausible option is to strike bilateral deals.
Since the election, Trump has mostly avoided talking about his trade-protectionist campaign pledges, such as imposing punishing tariffs on China and Mexico, dismantling the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and rescinding America’s bilateral trade agreement with South Korea.
So what is likely to be on Obama’s mind when he meets his Indian counterpart again, and what does he think can be done to cement bilateral ties?
BackNext