The Single Supervisory Mechanism and the Assessment of Hungary’s Possible Approach

Due to the European financial and sovereign debt crisis occurred in 2008, the decision-makers of the European Union decided to take steps to avoid a further possible turmoil and created a mechanism to ensure the efficiency of financial supervision across the union. This financial integration of Europe is called the banking union. The milestones of the union are: the single rulebook for the capital requirements of credit institutions (i.), the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) lifting prudential supervision of credit institutions to a European level (ii.), a Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM) (iii.) and the common deposit insurance system (iv.). The Single Supervisory Mechanism is one of the crucial parts of the banking union, since it has the task to extend the European integration to the field of financial supervision. The executer of this task shall be the European Central Bank, so in the future the ECB will be responsible for both, the monetary policy of the union and the financial supervision of the significant European credit institutions. The ECB – with the contribution of the national competent authorities – shall supervise the most significant banks of the European Union. The SSM will be mandatory for the Euro-zone Member States and voluntary for the rest. However, it is unclear whether how many non-euro zone Member State will decide to participate. According to the Hungarian situation, it is unlikely that Hungary likely participates, because of the uncertainty regarding the untested practice of the SSM

Russia and the World: The View from Moscow

In 1939, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill observed that Russia was “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.” Equally significant, but often forgotten, is what Churchill said next: “Perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest. Much has changed in Russia and the world since 1939, but Churchill’s observation remains valid today. What is Russia’s national interest? How do Russia’s leaders, especially Vladimir Putin, view their country’s national interest? And how can their viewpoints be determined? Many factors determine Russia’s worldview and drive Russian assessments of Russian national interests. Some are derived from Russia’s history. Others result from the threats, dangers, and risks that Putin and others in the Kremlin perceive today. Still others, in turn, are a function of the Kremlin’s current regional and global foreign and defense policy priorities. Together, these inputs allow the overarching strategies that Russian leaders pursue to be deciphered. Using these tools, this essay assesses: 1) the impact of history on Russia’s worldview and the Putin government’s views of Russia’s national interest; 2) international threats, dangers, and risks as seen from Moscow today; 3) Russia’s current geopolitical and regional priorities and actions; and 4) Russia’s global grand strategy ... assuming it has one

Toward an Estimate of the Soviet Worldview

While assessments of Soviet perceptions are always difficult, a rough estimate of their point of view can be developed. This paper, originally prepared as a Military Issues Research Memorandum at the Strategic Studies Institute of the Army War College, finds the Soviet worldview to be consistent, comprehensive, flexible, and perhaps insidious

From the Crest All Directions are Down: The Soviet Union Views the 1980s

Wielding more military might across a greater territorial expanse than at any time in its history, enjoying greater political influence around the globe than it ever had before, and possessing the world\u27s second largest national economic base, the Soviet Union basks in its power, prestige, and influence