Why did the Bretton Woods system came to an end?

To discuss its historic background I will concentrate on the Bretton Woods System. Bretton Woods System is an international currency system started form 1944 July at the end of the Second World War. This system require each country to obey the rule that they tied its currency to gold in order to keep the exchange rate stable and prevent the currencies from devaluation. The establishment of this system ensure the resume and development of capitalist world economy especially America. Although this system ultimately disintegrated in 1973, it still make significant contributions to America’s irreplaceable role today.

In being so, liberalism possesses both economic and political components. Economic liberalism argues that, increasing economic interdependence would lead to a more peaceful international realm. Political liberalism bases itself on the belief that ‘A just world order assumes the establishment of republics ’. Thus, political liberalism as practiced by the United States during Cold War becomes a critical proponent of democracy promotion by noting that overlapping national interests will allow for a tamer international environment, engendering the notion that democracies do not engage in wars. Although democracy as interpreted by liberal theory on its own does not lead to free market, it may create the necessary infrastructure for such an event to occur. The promotion of democracy, to a great extent, increases economic interdependence through the alignment of core national values and therefore decreasing the probability of hegemony between the states. However, The notion of liberalism was undermined in the literature of the United States foreign policy after the Cold War. Even though the states were economically interdependent during the Cold War yet they engaged in rivalry for resources to the extent that if, assumingly, the “World Trade Organization” came to be perceived as a corrupt institution,

Robert O. Keohane, “From After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy,” in

At this point in time, the main actors in the international system are nation-states seeking an agenda of their own based on personal gain and national interest. Significantly, the most important actor is the United States, a liberal international economy, appointed its power after the interwar period becoming the dominant economy and in turn attained the position of hegemonic stability in the international system. The reason why the United States is dominating is imbedded in their intrinsic desire to continuously strive for their own national interest both political and economic. Further, there are other nature of actors that are not just nation-states, including non-states or transnational,

With the onset of the war, the stability of the relationship between Britain, France, and Germany – which the Gold Standard was dependent on – crippled (lecture, 10/13). During the interwar period, 1914-1945, the lack of coordination between economies led to a liquidity shortage while the nations held a floating exchange rate. The interwar period saw a breakdown in international monetary coordination – proving that a floating economy was doomed for failure (FLB 264). Outside of the lack of international coordination, the Gold Standard had other downfalls leading to its demise. For example, national governments had no authority to stimulate their country’s economies in times of need. Moreover, the fixed economy limits foreign trade, hurting the country’s industries (lecture,

After World War II, the Bretton Woods Agreement established the gold standard and two support institutions called the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. This would lead to a shift, away from the gold standard, to more relaxed systems. The idea of currency purely backed by gold was slowly being shifted to a trust based currency. These institutions purpose was to regulate the economies by injecting or taking money in a process called sterilization. Sterilization is to protect certain countries from a going bankrupt. If a country goes bankrupt, it chain a chain reaction of bankruptcies. So, in order to maintain balance, currencies need to be stable enough, so that it can be in debt without having to declare bankruptcy. The idea is

The Federal Reserve System was created by Congress in 1913 and passed the Federal Reserve Act in order to provide for a safer and more flexible banking and monetary system. According to the changing needs of the system, its objectives have been changing throughout the history of the Fed. At first, “its original purposes were to give the country an elastic currency, provide facilities for discounting commercial credits, and improve the supervision of the banking system under a decentralized bank.” (The Federal Reserve System, 1984, 1). Prior to its establishment (the Fed), the supply of bank credit and money was inelastic, thus resulting in an irregular flow of credit and money, and contributed to unstable economic development. These objectives were aspects economic policies and national monetary. However, through time, stability and growth of the economy, high employment levels, stability in the purchasing power of the dollar, and reasonable balance in transactions with foreign currencies have become to be recognized as primary objectives of the governmental economic policy.

Nixon raised the price of gold during his presidency. This angered nations all who had signed the Bretton Woods Agreement (see Definition page) after World War II. As the world’s reserve currency, the US dollar had an additional problem. As global trade grew, so too did the demand for U.S. dollar reserves. For a time, the demand for US dollars was satisfied by an increasing

This made the policy fine until WW 1 when the gold standard was torn up in 1914 because countries needed to print money to fight World War I. When World War I was over and the world entered the early 1920s, countries wanted to go back to the gold standard but they didn’t quite know how to do it. Before World War I started with parity, meaning there was a certain amount of gold and a certain amount of paper money backed by gold. Then, the paper money supply was doubled. That left only two choices if countries wanted to go back to a gold standard. They could’ve doubled the price of gold — basically cut the value of their currency in half or they could’ve cut the money supply in half. They could’ve done either one but they had to get to the parity

At the end of World War Two, the Bretton Woods system was established for world currencies. This system involved countries fixing their currencies to the US Dollar, which in turn was tied to the value of gold at a fixed exchange rate of $35 per ounce. As this was a fixed exchange rate system it effectively forced countries to pursue a certain monetary policy, in order to keep their currency pegged to the Dollar and in turn the value of gold.

With exchange rates now set in stone (fixed), the gold standard made sure that price levels around the globe move together. This dual movement occurred automatically with a balance-of-payments/ adjustment process also known or called the price-specie-flow mechanism. This is how the flow mechanism worked. Suppose that a grand technological innovation produced faster economic growth in the United States. Now because the supply of money (gold) was fixed/set in the short run, U.S. prices dropped. This lead to the Prices of U.S. exports falling in relation to the prices of our imports. This caused other countries to demand more U.S. exports and Americas demand for imports fell. This resulted in the United States creating a balance of-payments surplus,

Hegemonic internationalism by definition is a paradox within itself. Internationalism suggests cooperation among nations for common good, while hegemony is an instance when one nation has power over another nation. This leads to the belief that hegemonic internationalism is, in reality, one nation pursuing its own national interests at the expense of other nation. Nazi Germany, Iran and the United States are all examples of a nation pursuing hegemonic internationalism.

Hegemonic states are ultimately set to fail. These states only seek to change rules at will and use force to achieve certain goals. States that strive to become a hegemony only end up pushing themselves into a corner because trying to attain full dominance over other states would only put a large target on that state. “Inferior” states would fight to try to get rid of the hegemonic state and become the new hegemony and this would only repeat again in many cycles unless an alternative was implemented. Chomsky believes in an “institutional framework of domestic power.”1 Chomsky criticizes the United States of asserting its dominance over other states in an attempt to have full control of what other states do, say, and act upon. Chomsky

The Bretton Woods Conference in 1944 spawned two IFIs, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, in order to rebuild a

Here the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, later divided into the World Bank and Bank for International Settlement, were established. To regulate the international policy economy these institutions become known as the Bretton Woods institutions and became operational in 1946. The IMF, founded to stabilize countries' currencies in relation to each other, holds money in trust, which member countries can borrow according to terms set by the institution. The World Bank instead gives more long-term loans and sells bonds to corporations and governments, which bind the issuer to pay the bondholder the amount of the loan plus interest. However, the countries taking advantage of the opportunity to borrow money to improve their affected economy are obliged to launch a set of policies, known as the Washington Consensus, which was first presented in 1989. The reforms introduced by the Institute for International Economics include "deregulation, privatization, currency devaluation, social spending cuts, lower corporate taxes, export driven strategies, and removal of foreign investment restrictions" . More, "these loans are only granted when the countries agree to the adoption to a comprehensive programme of macro-economic stabilization and structural economic reform."