The West accuses Russia of violating the main unspoken principle of the postwar world order – the ban on the redistribution of territory between “civilized” countries. However, this rule has been repeatedly violated in recent decades (for example, witness the emergence of the state of Kosovo on the world political map), when Western countries, acting in the name of the world community, decided that such redistribution is in their interests. The Kosovo precedent, of course, would not justify the actions of Russia in the Crimea, if it were not for one fundamental difference: The peninsula was transferred from one legal jurisdiction to another with practically no bloodshed and no conflict. After all, Crimeans have really always considered themselves to be Russians. The West refuses to officially recognize that the residents of Crimea have a right to self-determination, even though such a right has been declared by all international institutions. It refuses not only because of its reluctance to approve of Russia’s policy, but also  it is obvious that Europe, which is experiencing serious economic problems, is itself experiencing this principle in action: After all, it will have to accept the results of the already announced referenda in Scotland and Catalonia. Even the Venetians, judging by the latest news, are not against restoring their republic.

The lengthy U.S. economic recovery is accompanied by growth in economic indicators across the board, including in sales of motor vehicles, which have reached record levels. In order to keep pace with the increased demand, all assembly line facilities in the United States have maxed out their manufacturing capacity and are today producing more cars than ever before. In the first half of 2013 alone, 5.7 million cars were manufactured in the U.S., exceeding the same period last year by 5.9%. In addition, the American auto manufacturing capacity is beginning to return home from China.

Professor Robert Mundell, Nobel Prize winner in economics and the person known as the “father” of the euro, visits the Chief Editor of World Economic Journal.
– In the foreseeable future, is there a possibility of a third global currency (along with the dollar and the euro) emerging in Asia?
– That strong currency would most likely be the renminbi (yuan). If China’s GDP keeps growing at the same rate over the next 10 years, it could catch up to the U.S. So I don’t rule out that by somewhere around 2025 the world could have three main currencies: the dollar, the euro, and the yuan. Moreover, the Japanese yen has a chance at becoming the fourth world currency unit. It’s also possible that the British pound could advance and become a fifth currency. But there is a lot of competition between the Chinese and Japanese currencies and if the dollar and the euro calmly interact with one another, the yuan and yen don’t. Overall, some countries could be part of a single currency zone which doesn’t require them to use a single currency, but would simply requires them to regulate the currency exchange rates in that region, that is, to set the ratio of the euro and dollar, for example. Changing the currency of your country to another one is a serious political move and no one will go for being in a country that swings between two currencies. That’s why creating a single currency for the entire Asian region doesn’t seem possible to me. Maybe they’ll ‘make friends’ later, but for now the Asian countries can perfectly well keep their own currencies and simply regulate the exchange rates.

The association of the emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa continues to strengthen its position in the world. Membership in the BRICS is becoming a priority for other countries with stable economic growth. The analytic service of the World Organization of Creditors speculates that the union could take on a new name – BRICSIK – to include Indonesia and Kazakhstan. In the early 2000s, the BRICS countries were considered exclusively as suppliers for the G-7 countries. Developing countries supplied the G-7 with cheap food, raw minerals, labor and intellectual resources, and mass-consumption goods. But over the past decade, the economies of these countries have been able to change their role from “supplier” to that of “locomotive” of global economic growth.
Stable economic growth and high figures within the association have recently been hot topics of discussion among experts. The VI Astana Economic Forum was no exception, during which WOC President Robert Gubernatorov gave an analysis of the BRICS countries and suggested that the union could soon expand.

Nestor Osorio, the head of the UN Economic and Social Council, shared his ideas with a correspondent of World Economic Journal about combating unemployment, and proposed creating a new bloc of countries, rather than expanding the BRICS. 

The most acute and frequently discussed question today remains how to get out of the crisis. Many hope that the creation of G Global might change the situation. How do you, as the President of ECOSOC, view this idea? To what extent could such a grouping solve the crisis?
All of us today could be called witnesses to a special moment of history. The economic crisis has affected all developed countries and has accordingly had an impact on developing countries as well, especially in the areas of financing for development and technology transfer. We could get out of this situation if world leaders would meet, not just in small groups among themselves, but rather create a more representative, multilateral, and transparent system. The G Global strategy is precisely to create such an all-inclusive organization, comprising large as well as medium-sized and small countries. When discussing the crisis, I generally insist that there has to be a connection to the private sector, since that in particular can become the driver for revival and development. And governments, the international community, and international organizations should help one another and provide the necessary stimulus for solving the crisis and all the problems it entails.

The Chief Editor of the World Economic Journal Robert N. Gubernatorov visits Professor Robert John Aumann. Aumann is a Nobel Prize Laureate in Economics for his game-theory analysis of conflict and cooperation. 
How do you rate today’s established world order and how do you see the world in the near future? Twenty years ago it was two-pronged, with the USA on one side and the USSR on the other. What vectors do you see in the new world?
Journalists have a tendency to constantly be looking into the future and making predictions about it. But few get it in their head to compare the present reality with the past forecasts of experts. I think that in 10 years, still no one will be looking at whether Professor Aumann’s predictions came true or not.
Back in 2008, I had thought that the world would come out of the crisis relatively quickly. As we now see, my forecasts didn’t come true, so now I prefer to refrain from speculating.