Callahan glanced at Harold Wilson, who shrugged indifferently, these words? It is indeed not suitable for an elected minister to speak out. Although the underlying logic of the international community is like this, speaking at an international conference that attracts the attention of the world will still have a great impact.

Now that the global economy is becoming more and more integrated, and Japan is not an insignificant small country, the two countries must still have a chance to sit down. Callahan really can't say such things.

"In fact, the unity and stability of Europe and the United States are the basis for the prosperity of the free world. Of course, we do not deny that Japan is a country of strategic significance. However, its role in the international economic system needs to be more widely recognized. There is no industrial scale. No, you need diplomatic influence, military capabilities, etc.”

Alan Wilson almost talked about white supremacy. Although he didn't say it, he meant it inside and out. First Japan is not a normal country. Does Japan have an army? No! But the Federal Republic of Germany has an army. Although the two countries are both defeated countries, their status is not the same. Germany is far more important than Japan.

"The British are not easy to take responsibility, so they push out the secretary-general of the cabinet." Kissinger whispered to Rockefeller, "Actually, we should pay attention to this secretary-general."

"It is worth noting his wife, not him." Rockefeller replied with a smile on his face. "From the underlying logic of the system, Sir Allen's words don't count. This is the meaning of the British cabinet."

Is that so? Kissinger always felt that things were not that simple, but he really had no evidence to prove his judgment. Rockefeller said that the cabinet secretary was pushed out to say that politicians were not easy to say, and there was some truth and logic.

Except for Japan, the representatives of all countries actually agreed in their hearts to talk nonsense, and they looked down on the Secretary-General of the British Cabinet in countries other than Europe and the United States.

But for the Japanese side, it really looks like a humiliation, or if the image is removed, this is an arrogant old white man, immersed in his own world.

In the 21st century, even if Alan Wilson couldn't be a king, why wouldn't he be the governor of a deep red state? It's a pity, now everyone talks about unity and diversity. The consequences of diversification are of course not seen by any country except one authority figure in the UK who did not want to be named.

"I think European countries are very much looking forward to a more constructive international monetary system. There is no doubt about it. Not only the UK, but all European countries think so."

Just like the master who peddled success studies on the main podium, he just said, "Understood, applause."

The sovereign currency system is definitely better for the United States than the Bretton Woods system. Although in theory everyone has equal opportunities and can take back the initiative of the currency and control it in their hands, it is obvious that the national power of the United States far exceeds that of any other country present. There is no maintenance cost, of course the United States is happy.

If the United States is happy, other countries may not be happy. Otherwise, why did the United States oppose the British plan in 1944?

The positions of the delegations of various countries are different, but they are basically divided into two camps, namely the United States and Japan, the follower of the United States, and European countries. It's really not Britain. Chirac said with a strong attitude that if the system this time does not satisfy France, the European Community may establish its own gold standard system.

"The veto power of the United States should not exist. It is very unreasonable." Chirac's words made the American attendees look very bad.

The United States has a veto in both the IMF and the World Bank, and the two organizations theoretically cannot pass resolutions that are not favorable to the United States.

After the war, the economic hegemony of the United States awakened so many years earlier than its military hegemony. With 6% of the world's population, the United States occupies 50% of the wealth. It must formulate a rule that can be seen in the past to protect this wealth.

The reason why Americans set financial rules is to maintain their wealth status and keep their country from war. The only way is to formulate rules that are beneficial to the United States and let other countries follow the rules.

As long as it is within the framework of this rule, the United States can achieve its own goals.

Both the World Bank and im are headquartered in Washington. Although the two organizations have many overseas representative offices around the world, the center of power is undoubtedly in the headquarters in Washington. The overseas offices are only auxiliary information collection and project supervision.

At the beginning of the establishment of the World Bank and IM, the United States and European countries reached a tacit agreement on the election of the leaders of the two organizations. The president of IM was nominated by the European countries, and the president of the World Bank was nominated by the United States.

"Are the French going to plan the President of the Americans?" Alan Wilson heard Chirac's proposition, and felt that it was relatively soft to attack Japan, at least not as fearless as the French.

Alan Wilson's words were not pleasant, and he charged against the veto of the United States without coming up, although he wanted to do so very much.

However, considering the gap in strength and status, the United Kingdom still sets its goals very realistically. The United States will not give up the veto power. It is much more realistic to strive for the total share and the proportion of voting rights for European countries.

Especially the voting rights, the World Bank and IM's voting rights must be given up by the United States, otherwise, what's the point? The oil crisis and the economic crisis are caused by all countries. Because of the problem of excessive dollar issuance, it can be said that all countries in the world have already paid for the excessive issuance of dollars.

"It would be great if the United States could face up to the opinions of the French." In fact, Callahan also hoped that Chirac's suggestion, or criticism, would become a reality, so that Europe's autonomy would be greatly expanded.

At this time, the UK remembered that it was a member of Europe. Normally, the British would never remember that they were a part of Europe.

"It's still unlikely. But I believe that the United States is still not easy to attack. France still has considerable strength." Alan Wilson said, of course, the whole of Algeria and the mainland of France combined, how could it be possible to have no strength, old imperialism.

If it weren't for the support of those French-speaking countries in Africa, would France be able to establish an independent defense system with its own strength? How is that possible. However, this is not enough to shake the United States.

Unless the sky is wide, the free world is only half of the whole world. Although it may be a relatively larger one, there is another half of the world that is not affected by the United States.

If one day the other half of the world can be brought under his command, maybe it can change. It is better to define the goal more realistically.

Compared with Chirac's remarks, the British sterling zone, voting rights, and the Japanese yen are not eligible to increase their share, all seem reasonable.

Both im and the world bank use a weighted voting system. What is a weighted voting system?

Just like the system of different rights for the same share in a joint-stock company, two people also hold 10% of the shares, and one of them has only one vote, that is, has 10% of the voting rights; the other has three votes, that is, Has thirty percent of the voting rights. This is not unheard of in the United Nations. Isn't the Soviet Union a typical example of one country with three votes?

In im and the World Bank, it is clearly stipulated that different countries have different "quotas", and the amount of quotas determines the number of voting rights. Countries with more quotas have more decision-making power, and they have more voting rights than others. The nation's voting power.

In im, the voting rights of each member state are divided into two parts: basic voting rights and share voting rights. What the UK wants to fight for is the share voting rights in im.

In European countries at this time, it is very likely that we will not be able to elect a president who satisfies us today, otherwise no one will want to leave.

Although the United Kingdom's proposition hurts the heart of the United States, it is better than the French~lightnovelpub.net~The French want to abolish the veto of the United States. If it weren't for the fact that the Soviet Union is staring at it now, the United States wants to let the French feel the treatment of the Soviet Union in the world.

"For Britain to agree to the demonetization of gold, only the United States can make concessions to a certain extent." When communicating with Kissinger, Callahan explained the basic position of European countries.

Amend the relevant provisions of special drawing rights so that special drawing rights will gradually replace gold and dollar as the main reserve capital of the international monetary system.

Transactions between im and member states use sdrs instead of gold, and all assets held in im's general accounts are expressed in sdrs. Expand the scope of use of sdrs in the general business transactions of im, and expand the scope of other business applications of sdrs as much as possible.

In addition, im should supervise the sdrs system at any time, and modify or add or delete relevant regulations in due course.

"Of course, the voting rights of Europe, including Britain, France and Germany, should exceed half of the total voting rights, so that the relationship between Europe and the United States will be more fair. This is also a clause specially advocated by European countries." Callahan said to Kissinger, "The U.S. over-issued its currency before, which left a deep impression on Europe, especially France, which spread attacks on the U.S. dollar in Europe."

Kissinger said with an expression that you are thinking about farts, "European countries account for 55% of the voting rights? You can figure it out."

"Actually, compared to the French's idea of ​​abolishing the veto power of the United States, I think the idea of ​​dialogue is not so exaggerated." Callahan asked back unmoved, "Maybe this meeting will not be able to come up with any consensus. There is no way to continue to use the old international monetary system for the time being.”