Bretton Woods Revisited (part 4 of 4)


© Bryan Johnson

(Editors note: This is the fourth part of a four part series analyzing the three major international organizations created out of the Bretton Woods agreement in 1944. The first article dealt with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, now known as the World Trade Organization (WTO). This second article dealt with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, commonly known as the World Bank. The third article dealt with the International Monetary Fund. This fourth article reviews the criticism of these organizations from various perspectives, and the justifications given for their continued existence by proponents.)

After World War II, the global economy was rife with high barriers to trade and investment, decimated industries in Europe and Japan, and an exchange rate system where the value of currencies were askew. In 1944, some 24 nations met in Bretton Woods New Hampshire to map out a post war strategy to revitalize the global economy. In 1947, this agreement forged the creation of three international organizations: the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Monetary Fund.

The World Trade Organization

There are many criticisms and justifications given to the continued existence of the World Trade Organization. Criticisms generally focus around the issue of sovereignty. Opponents believe that organizations like the World Trade Organization often can infringe on member sovereignty by passing dictums that supersede the legal structures established by individual countries. Opponents often argue that the World Trade Organization is a forum that supports corporate interests in place of the human interests of many countries. They argue that the system allows the rich to get rich while the poor continue to get poor. Moreover, they also argue that the lowering of world trade barriers allows domestic companies to close production in their home countries, seeking cheaper labor in less developed countries - condemning workers to the perpetual subjugation of corporate elites.

Support for the WTO generally focuses around comparisons of the pre-World War II and post World War II periods. Supporters point out that prior to the creation of GATT, there were no international avenues to settle disputes in international trade. Thus, countries often dealt with disputes by raising barriers to trade to punish other countries. This, proponents argue, lowers living standards and threatens global economic prosperity. Proponents also argue that after World War II, international trade was faced with unsurpassable barriers. Thus, the GATT was instrumental in helping international trade grow. Over 75 percent of the international trading rules in effect today were written fundamentally by U.S. trade negotiators over the past 50 years. World trade has expanded from less than $100 billion in the late 1940s to over $6.3 trillion in 1996. Moreover, the volume of world trade in merchandise goods and services totaled an estimated $6.6 trillion in 1997.

Go To Page: 1 2 3


The copyright of the article Bretton Woods Revisited (part 4 of 4) in Political Economy is owned by . Permission to republish Bretton Woods Revisited (part 4 of 4) in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Post this Article to facebook Add this Article to del.icio.us! Digg this Article furl this Article Add this Article to Reddit Add this Article to Technorati Add this Article to Newsvine Add this Article to Windows Live Add this Article to Yahoo Add this Article to StumbleUpon Add this Article to BlinkLists Add this Article to Spurl Add this Article to Google Add this Article to Ask Add this Article to Squidoo