Example collocations logo

Commitments in sentence

1067 examples of Commitments in a sentence

Good sense and experience should tell us that selfish sloganeering, violating the rule of law, and dismissing international commitments is not a recipe for good policy.
This week, the foreign ministers of five nuclear-armed countries – the United States, Russia, Britain, France, and China – will meet in Paris to discuss progress in implementing the nuclear-disarmament commitments that they made at last year’s Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference.
In the run-up to next month’s G20 summit in Hangzhou, China has been calling loudly for new commitments to structural reforms to stimulate growth in advanced and emerging-market economies.
To maintain support from the IMF when its current program ends in summer 2015, Tunisia will need to negotiate new commitments.
It is essential that all member states – and their voters – recognize that there is no option when it comes to the binding nature of legal commitments within the EU: Either comply with European law or leave.
In South Africa, for example, a modern constitution includes explicit commitments to upholding social rights.
All communist regimes made lavish commitments -- universal pensions, disability pensions, health care, housing -- that bankrupted the economic system.
Nonetheless, as Western governments also realize, it is almost impossible to reverse these commitments even during an extreme budget crisis.
What’s more, he helped them raise record-breaking financial commitments from donors: $11.7 billion for the Global Fund, and $3 billion for Roll Back Malaria.
Promises have since been augmented with pension hikes and old-age health-care commitments for public-sector workers.
If secular stagnation persists, these countries will have to undertake painful structural reforms, figure out how to restructure their promises (debts, social-security commitments, and pledges to keep taxes low), and distribute the resulting burden.
Spurred by increased public awareness and mounting evidence that national economies can reap net benefits from policies to mitigate climate change, governments worldwide are pledging to do so – and taking to multilateral forums to display those commitments.
Perhaps most important, the United States and China – the world’s top two emitters, which together account for more than one-third of global greenhouse-gas emissions – have finally stepped up, announcing concrete climate commitments in a joint statement last year.
Its hybrid governance structure – which combines top-down elements (primarily in monitoring and verification) with bottom-up commitments (the voluntary INDCs) – is revolutionary, as it enables us to avoid the deadlock that often characterizes large-scale multilateral governance processes.
Indeed, some countries – such as the Baltic states, Poland, and Slovakia – have long-term commitments with Russia, and thus would need more time to meet the requirements of the embargo.
Most likely, Kramp-Karrenbauer was elected (by a slim margin) because her speech at the congress centered on her personal history and experiences, and her commitments to her party and home region.
If Russia fails to abide by its commitments, these sanctions should be triggered.
Because they retain sovereignty, they cannot make similarly credible commitments not to interfere with financial markets.
It expressed the hope that international action will aim at limiting global warming to two degrees Celsius in the course of the twenty-first century, but it says nothing about how to achieve this – no commitments on the quantity of emissions, and no system for global measurement or supervision.
With no government commitments, there can be no attempt to limit carbon emissions effectively, which implies that when the world does begin to take action, it will be that much more difficult to slow the pace of climate change and mitigate its effects.
Likewise, the European Union has tried to dispel doubts about the imminence of Greek and other sovereign-debt restructurings by putting together a reasonably large stability fund (and throwing in €250 billion of still non-existent IMF commitments).
But there is a deeper – and even more troubling – explanation of Trump’s behavior: it arises from his ideas, especially his implicit philosophical commitments concerning world order.
These commitments will be much more difficult to combat.
For liberals, by contrast, the nation is defined first and foremost by its legal commitments.
The new center-left governments, unlike their populist peers, did not repudiate previous commitments to fiscal discipline, low inflation, and open markets.
Rather, they built lavish social-welfare and economic-redistribution programs on top of those commitments.
In a war with endlessly shifting priorities, conflicting aims, few credible commitments, and plenty of foreign meddling, any ceasefire today is just as likely to be broken by violence tomorrow.
These countries’ commitments created the sense of responsibility, trust, and solidarity that enabled 195 nations not merely to agree on a one-off deal, but to set in motion a series of increasingly ambitious five-year cycles to phase out greenhouse-gas emissions this century.
Developed countries made no individual commitments, and the starting year for funding adaptation assistance remains unclear.
More tellingly, it was revealed at COP24 that many other countries are lagging behind their Paris commitments (which, even if met, probably won’t be enough to achieve global emissions goals).
BackNext