Example collocations logo

Multilateral in sentence

1507 examples of Multilateral in a sentence

In contrast to international trade and monetary relations, no multilateral regime exists to promote and govern cross-border investment.
The international community has long agreed that trade wars pose a direct threat to the global trading system, and thus should be used only as a measure of last resort (and usually through multilateral institutions).
If this forces America back towards what the international-relations scholar Joseph Nye calls “soft power and multilateral diplomacy,” it may well be a good thing.
Countries not included in any of the current security systems would be able to join in the treaty and receive multilateral guarantees.
It demonstrates constructive leadership of the multilateral system.
The underlying reasoning is fairly simple: multilateral rules always protect the weakest players.
Similarly, multilateral development banks are investing just 1% of their total spending on ICT projects, and only about 4% of this limited investment is being spent on policy development, work that is critical if digital economies are to be well regulated.
For example, one of the biggest regional unknowns is how America’s retreat from multilateral engagement will affect the IMF’s ability to respond to future capital-market disruptions.
They are all part of an enormous multilateral trade deficit that stems from America’s unprecedented shortfall of saving – a depreciation-adjusted “net national saving rate” (combining businesses, households, and the government sector) that has been negative since 2008.
Lacking in savings and wanting to grow, the US runs massive current-account and multilateral trade deficits in order to import other countries’ surplus savings.
Unless and until the US faces up to its chronic aversion to saving – namely, by reducing massive federal budget deficits and encouraging the rebuilding of severely depleted household saving – multilateral trade deficits will persist.
Simple arithmetic and basic economics tell us that a multilateral problem cannot be addressed by a bilateral solution.
The US has shown interest in a multilateral path to engagement with Asia on strategic issues.
Governments and multilateral bodies like the UN have gradually been discredited, along with the value systems on which they are based.
In short, there is no bilateral fix for a multilateral problem.
The US had trade deficits with 101 countries in 2015 – a multilateral problem stemming from a saving shortfall that cannot be effectively addressed through country-specific “remedies.”
And, though Cuba could (and possibly should) seek financial support from sources other than the World Bank, there are problems with many of the multilateral alternatives.
Free Trade ForeverNEWTON, MASSACHUSETTS – On December 7, representatives from the World Trade Organization’s 159 member countries reached agreement on the first multilateral trade deal in the WTO’s 19-year history.
Consider the impressive scale and scope of other multilateral trade agreements – such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, and the Trade-in-Services Agreement – that are currently being negotiated.
It was only after World War II – when the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (succeeded in 1995 by the WTO) began the process of multilateral trade liberalization – that Smoot-Hawley’s destructive legacy was finally overcome.
We have called on the United Nations and other multilateral organizations to enact a global moratorium on the release of these biotechnologies into the environment, and particularly in agricultural settings.
It could have either avoided a monumental mistake, as Iraq has now proved to be, or it could have brought the United Nations on board from the outset, ensuring that military action, and the subsequent occupation and reconstruction of the country, would have broad multilateral support.
By contrast, Xi and Park issued a joint statement proclaiming the importance of faithfully implementing United Nations Security Council resolutions that call for sanctions against North Korea, as well as a multilateral agreement in 2005 that obliges the North to exchange its nuclear-weapons programs for economic and diplomatic benefits.
But if America’s next president is committed to a new direction, US foreign policy might again become more multilateral, more focused on international institutions and alliances, and willing to bring the relationship between military force and diplomacy back to within its historical proportions.
Another piece of bad (or good?) news is that a more multilateral American policy will increase the pressure on Europeans to take on more responsibility for international crisis management and conflict resolution – in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, Transcaucasia, and Russia, and with respect to Turkey’s future.
Or would it be better off joining existing mega-regional free-trade agreements, while working to strengthen the global multilateral system under the World Trade Organization?
The argument can be made that a multilateral approach is not just the better option; it is the only one.
And the fact is that concerns over state aid and competition policy can be addressed only in a multilateral forum like the WTO.
Another multilateral forum that could prove invaluable to the UK is the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a mega-regional trade agreement that provides for duty-free trade and includes modest commitments in areas like state aid and competition policy, without requiring EU-level integration.
That means pivoting away from bilateral deals, toward a multilateral approach that enables the country to rebalance and expand its trading arrangements around the world.
BackNext