The United States and the EU started to work on creating a new free trade zone in July 2013, and to date already six rounds of talks have been held. While both sides seek to conclude negotiations within two years, some experts have questioned these dates due to a large number of complexities in the process, disputes between the parties, and domestic opposition in the participating countries.

The idea itself of creating a single transatlantic market is not new. Back in 1995, the EU commissioner for trade voiced this idea and called for the creation of a transatlantic free trade zone. But then, with the creation and expansion of the WTO, this idea was shelved.

The global economy is experiencing the most serious test of its strength since the end of World War II. It is obvious that the old system is now gone. The bets have been placed: Russia is trying to lead the bloc of developing economies, and the goal of the U.S. is to subjugate Europe economically and politically. It is over this issue that the main struggle has now unfolded.

Russia’s and China’s gas agreement has already been called “the top three-decade deal.” Its scale is quite impressive – in the next six years, the Chinese will be investing $55 billion in Russia’s mining and gas transportation system. But much more important than the numbers is the fact that the agreement formalizes that the two superpowers have common interests, at least for the foreseeable future. We are witnessing the emergence of new global political-economic blocs.

Politics in the APR occupies an increasingly important place in U.S. foreign policy, with particular emphasis currently on the new bloc which plans to create free-trade zones across the entire region. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is without a doubt one of the Obama administration’s main priorities and offers an alternative to the Chinese project, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which is also in the negotiations stage.

In 1959, Fidel Castro imposed a ban on the sale of residential property in Cuba. For more than fifty years after this decision was made, the only way that Cubans could move was to exchange properties on the basis of similarity. A new property should not be different from the old one in terms of square footage or style. And even if a family had the need to expand their living space and, more importantly, the means to do so, it would not have been legally possible. At the same time, other families could have housing that was too large for their needs. For example, childless families or older couples might prefer to live in a modestly sized apartment, but the paradox was that this exchange was impossible. In addition, according to one unofficial estimate, by 2011 there were about 200,000 units of vacant housing on the island, despite the fact that about a third of Cubans had to squeeze into a few square meters of living space each. According to the 2012 census, the Cuban population (11.2 million) lives in 3.9 million housing units, meaning that there is an average of 2.8 inhabitants per unit.

The combination of the terms “rapidly developing” and “economy” were used exclusively to describe the Asian Tigers and the BRICS countries just five years ago. But today, to the surprise of many, there are several new growth leaders on the African continent. The IMF paints a good picture of this trend, according to which six of the top ten fastest growing economies (by GDP growth compared to the previous year) for 2001-2010 were African (Angola, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Chad, Mozambique, and Rwanda) and seven of the top ten projected fastest growing countries for 2011-2015 (Ethiopia, Mozambique, Tanzania, Congo, Ghana, Zambia, and Nigeria). Thanks to these countries, the entire continent’s economy is expected to grow by 6% in 2014. It’s clear that most of the success of the “African lions” is due directly to profits from energy exports.