Example collocations logo

Institutions in sentence

6844 examples of Institutions in a sentence

So, when Western leaders ask Arabs and others in the region why they can’t govern themselves, they should be prepared for the answer: “For a full century, your interventions have undermined democratic institutions (by rejecting the results of the ballot box in Algeria, Palestine, Egypt, and elsewhere); stoked repeated and now chronic wars; armed the most violent jihadists for your cynical bidding; and created a killing field that today stretches from Bamako to Kabul.”
While the EU will not restore trust in all governing institutions overnight, strong action to restore growth, expand opportunity, protect citizens, improve efficiency, and build the economic infrastructure of the future will make it part of the solution, weakening the perception that it is part of the problem.
True, once religious institutions take over political power, they are never democratic.
Second, it was hoped that the euro would become a major international currency (particularly given how few countries are equipped with the necessary legal, market, and policy institutions).
Third, it was (somewhat naively) believed that the institutions underpinning the euro would improve the overall quality of economic policy, as though Europe-wide policies would automatically be better than national ones.
Disagreements also did not prevent the ECB from acting boldly, which illustrates that the governance of institutions does matter.
The EU has been unable so far to transform its institutions and procedures in order to cope with the new members.
History moves faster than politics, which moves faster than institutions.
The EU Commission is dead,by Ian DavidsonLONDON: Europe’s core unifying institutions -- NATO and the European Union -- both find themselves simultaneously in uncharted waters.
Competition among educational institutions is very welcome here, even though it may produce some abuses or outright fraud.
A regional presence corrupting local politicians, it soon expanded its territory and gained control of key positions in municipal and state security institutions.
But today, the European Union is stymied by having squandered the chance to build stronger institutions when times were better and tempers less strained.
There is a common monetary policy in the euro-zone countries, and an integrated capital market with financial institutions that are active across national frontiers.
The most obvious way is to use existing mechanisms and institutions, in particular the ECB or the European Commission.
Now they must work together to unbundle the energy sector, reform their power utilities’ governance to boost transparency and profitability, establish robust regulatory institutions, and implement longer-term policies to crowd in relevant investment.
And, while no one can say yet whether the BRICS’ initiatives will succeed, they represent a major challenge to the Bretton Woods institutions, which should respond.
These forces loathe the alphabet soup of supra-national governance institutions – the EU, the UN, the WTO, and the IMF, among others – that globalization requires.
Without functioning democratic institutions, Russia’s second attempt at selective modernization will fail just as certainly as its previous, Soviet incarnation did.
Tusk reiterated this position just before the recent informal European Council summit in Bratislava – the first not to include the United Kingdom – declaring that “giving new powers to European institutions is not the desired recipe.”
Put simply, for much of the public, EU institutions lack legitimacy.
The result is clear: in the struggle over how Europe will develop, the EU institutions lack the authority or support to put up much of a fight – or even fully enter the ring.
But this moment of national navel-gazing among the member states may actually present an important opportunity for EU institutions to work on closing the legitimacy gap.
It means, instead, completing key initiatives, most urgently the banking union; improving accountability; and ensuring that the public understands what the EU institutions are doing.
Only if the EU institutions deliver genuine action, in a credible and transparent manner, can they ensure that the current inter-governmentalism is just a phase and that the future of Europe is Europe.
Brain drains put enormous pressure on brain exporting countries to improve their governance, their institutions, and their economic and their social freedoms.
When the heads of the EU’s member states met in Brussels to deal with the Greek crisis, the interbank market, which is decisive for the liquidity of financial institutions, had started to freeze, just like after the collapse of Lehmann Brothers in September 2008.
Citizens must have the feeling that the institutions that govern them account for their interests and make them part of the decision-making process, which implies a union based on rules rather than power.
Europe is finally beginning to recognize the problems with its macro-economic institutions, particularly a stability pact that restricts the use of fiscal policy and a central bank that focuses only on inflation, not on jobs or growth.
They are all caught between the problems of the present and the mistakes of the past: in Europe, between institutions designed to avoid inflation when the problem is growth and employment; in America, between massive household and government debt and the demands of fiscal and monetary policy; and everywhere, between America’s failure to use the world’s scarce natural resources wisely and its failure to achieve peace and stability in the Middle East.
It makes them more aware of their rights and duties and affects how they interact within their communities and with the state and its institutions.
BackNext