(World Bank / WTO / IMF) are controlled by Euro-Hegemony to secure western interests

The arrival of the United States as a dominant power in the international system signaled an innovation in global rule-making. The key problem for explanatory theories in International Political Economy is that the territorial reach of political power is limited, and that in order to secure the survival of a territorial unit, access to resources, markets, and manpower abroad is needed. This can be achieved through conquest, competition, or cooperation. The United States devised a particularly ingenious solution to this dilemma. Instead of pursuing an outright imperial strategy of occupation, the United States supported the juridical sovereignty of states, but within international institutions that are mostly controlled by the United States. These developed common rules to which states more or less voluntarily adhered—since in part they participated in their making, and the rules provided some benefits. Elite socialization then cemented these global institutions at the national level (Ikenberry and Kupchan 1990). Writing from a critical political economy perspective, Robert Cox (1981) summarized this development as the internationalization of the state. This phenomenon is now acknowledged even by Realist authors (Drezner 2008). Four institutions are central in this context: The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the more recently created World Trade Organization (WTO), and the Bank for International Settlement. The US dominates these organizations either through its controlling share of votes (IMF, World Bank) or through its market power (WTO). According to Cox (1981), these organizations represent a “machinery of surveillance” that institutionalizes a mechanism for the “harmonisation of national policies” (p. 145), not only for developing countries but also for advanced industrialized countries.