Rabu, 10 April 2013

organisasi internasional


PERAN ORGANISASI INTERNASIONAL DALAM HUBUNGAN INTERNASIONAL
Sejak pertengahan abad ke-17, perkembangan OI diwujudkan dalam berbagai konferensi internasionalyang melahirkan sejumlah persetujuan melembaga dalam berbagai variasi, yakni, mulai dari Komisi(Commission), Perserikatan Bangsa2 (United Nations), Persemakmuran (Commonwealth), Masyarakat(Community), Kerjasama (Cooperation), dll.

Oleh karena itu, fenomena berkembangnya peran dan tujuan OI juga terkait dengan perkembanganhubungan antarnegara. Melalui OI, negara2 berusaha untuk mencapai tujuan yang menjadi kepentinganbersama terkait dengan bidang2 maupun isu2 ttt dalam HI.

Di bidang perhubungan:

1. Negara2 Eropa tahun 1815 telah mengatur hubungan pelayaran melalui Sungai Rhine (CentralCommission for Navigation of the Rhine).
2. Dalam Kongres Paris 1856 juga telah disepakati suatu persetujuan pelayaran melalui SungaiDanube bagi negara2 yang dilalui oleh sungai ini (Danube Commission).
Di bidang perdagangan:

  1. Pada 1933 telah ada International Wheat Agreement yang mengatur produksi dan pemasarangandum internasional.
  2. Tahun 1934 beberapa negara telah menyetujui pengaturan produksi dan eksport karet melaluiRegulation of the Production and Export of Rubber.
  3. Havana Charter 1948 untuk membentuk International Trade Organization, terutama yangmengatur tentang komoditi.
Di bidang moneter
1.     ketika negara2 Amerika Selatan pada 1865 membuat peraturan bersama melalui Latin Monetary Union
Dalam bidang ekonomi
, OI pada umumnya berperan sbb:

  1. Meningkatkan kesejahteraan ekonomi
  2. Meningkatkan kesejahteraan sosial.


Peran ASEAN dalam meningkatkan hubungan internasional adalah:
1. Mempercepat pertumbuhan ekonomi, kemajuan social, dan pengembangan kebudayaan dikawasan Asia Tenggara,
2. Meningkatkan perdamaian dan stabilitas regional dengan jalan menghormati keadilan dantertib hukum,
3. Meningkatkan kerja sama yang aktif dalam bidang ekonomi, social, budaya, teknik, ilmupengetahuan, dan administrasi,
4. Saling memberikan bantuan dalam bentuk sarana-sarana letihan dan penelitian,
5. Meningkatkan penggunaan pertanian, industry, perdagangan, jasa,  dan meningkatkan taraf hidup, dan
6. Memelihara kerja sama yang erat dan bermanfaat dengan organisasi-organisas


Senin, 08 April 2013

Agreement and dissagrement


BAB I
PEMBAHASAN
  1. AGREEMENT AND DISSAGREMENT
The term "agree to disagree" or "agreeing to disagree" is a phrase in
English referring to the resolution of a conflict (usually a debate or quarrel) whereby all parties tolerate but do not accept the opposing position(s). It generally occurs when all sides recognise that further conflict would be unnecessary, ineffective or otherwise undesirable. They may also remain on amicable terms while continuing to disagree about the unresolved issues.

The phrase "agree to disagree" first appeared in print in 1770 when, at the death of George Whitefield, John Wesley wrote a memorial sermon which acknowledged, but downplayed, the two men's doctrinal differences:
     "There are many doctrines of a less essential nature ... In these we may think and let think; we may 'agree to disagree.' But, meantime, let us hold fast the essentials..."[1]

Wesley was the first to put the phrase "agree to disagree" in print,[2] but he enclosed it in quotation marks. In a subsequent letter to his brother Charles, Wesley attributed it to Whitefield (presumably George
Whitefield):

    "If you agree with me, well: if not, we can, as Mr. Whitefield used to say, agree to disagree."[3]

The phrase "agree to differ" predates "agree to disagree", having appeared in the early part of the century in a sermon by John Piggott:
"And now why should we not agree to differ, without either enmity or scorn?"[4] (Sermon on Union and Peace, preach'd to several  Congregations, April 17, 1704). It expresses a similar idea without the play on words.

Its advantage over "agree to disagree" is that it does not pose an apparent logical contradiction. Game theorist and mathematician Robert Aumann argues that two people with common prior probability cannot agree to disagree.[5] However, the issues of agreement and disagreement are about separate concerns. Hence, the phrase is not actually a contradiction, when the implied parts are inserted: "agree [in principle] to disagree [about other issues]". The wording can be considered as a form of elliptical phrase, where the omitted portions, as two separate concerns, will help to clarify the intended meaning of the short phrase. The agreement is a long-term strategy, as a shared viewpoint of the opposing sides, to leave the disagreement, about the other issues, as an unresolved matter.
Economist Frank J. Fabozzi argues that it is not rational for investors to agree to disagree; they must work toward consensus, even if they have different information. For financial investments, Fabozzi posits that an investor's overconfidence in his abilities (irrationality) can lead to "agreeing to disagree"—the investor thinks he is smarter than others. A related phrase, normally reserved for informal and temporary arrangements in political affa.
  1. AGREEMENT
A negotiated and usually legally enforceable understanding between two or more legally competent parties.
Although a binding contract can (and often does) result from an agreement, an agreement typically documents the give-and-take of a negotiated settlement and a contract specifies the minimum acceptable standard of performance.
The simplest way to express agreement with a statement is, for example:
Yes, it is/ does/ can, etc.
Yes, he is/ does/ can, etc.
Yes, they are/ do/ can, etc.
To agree with a negative statement we say, for example:
No, it isn’t/ doesn’t/ can’t, etc.
No, he isn’t/ doesn’t/ can’t, etc.
No, they aren’t/ don’t/ can’t, etc.
To make the agreement more friendly, a question tag may be added.
Certainly may be included for emphatic.
I (quite) agree (with) you.
I think so too.
So do I.
You are (quite) right there.
Exactly. - formal
Quite so. - formal
I couldn’t agree more. - emphatic
I should say so. - emphatic
That’s just I think. - emphatic
You can say it again – emphatic, colloquial
You are telling me. – emphatic, colloquial
Hear! Hear! At meetings
So it is/ I have/ he did, etc - surprised agreement
I suppose so. - reluctant or half - hearted agreement
I suppose it is/ he does, etc - reluctant or half - hearted agreement
Partial agreement may be expressed by the following phrases:
I agree with you | up to a point (but…)
| in a sense (but…)
| in a way (but…)
I see what you mean, but…
That may be true, but (on other hand)…
(Oh) yes, but…
  1. DISAGREEMENT
Ketidak setujuan digunakan untuk ketidak setujuan seseorang untuk mengambil suatu tindakan yang melenceng dari tingkah laku yang diinginkan. Disagreement juga dapat diartikan sebagai perbedaan pendapat antara satu pihak dengan pihak yang lain atau seseorang atau orang lain. The simplest way to express disagreement with a statement is, for
example:
No, it isn’t/ doesn’t/ can’t, etc.
No, he isn’t/ doesn’t/ can’t, etc.
No, they aren’t/ don’t/ can’t, etc.
To disagree with a negative statement we say:
Yes, it is/ does/ can, etc.
Yes, he is/ does/ can, etc.
Yes, they are/ do/ can, etc.
To express stronger disagreement we can introduce the sentences with oh,
 which is stressed.
The above forms are used mainly to disagree with statements of fact. To
disagree with an opinion, one of the following phrases is generally to
be preferred:
I don’t agree (with you) (there).
I disagree (with you) (there).
I’m afraid I can’t agree (with you) (there). – milder, more tactful.
I’m afraid you are mistaken (here).
I think you are mistaken (here).
Direct, sometimes abrupt:
Not at all.
Nothing of the kind.
On the contrary. - formal
Very abrupt, possibly rude:
Nonsense.
Rubbish.
(That’s) ridiculous.
Now here are some ways of softening disagreement:
Well,…
Personally,…
As a matter of fact,…
To disagree tactfully we may also use such expressions as:
Oh, I don’t know. – usually in response to critical remarks.
I wouldn’t say that.
I wouldn’t call it/him… (exactly)
Do you (really) think so?

  1. EXPRESSING
a.       AGREEMENT
Secara umum contoh expressing agreement adalah sebagai berikut:
  • I agree with you 100 percent.
  • I couldn't agree with you more.
  • That's so true.
  • That's for sure.
  • (slang) Tell me about it!
  • You're absolutely right.
  • Absolutely.
  • That's exactly how I feel.
  • Exactly.
  • I'm afraid I agree with James.
  • I have to side with Dad on this one.
  • No doubt about it.
  • (agree with negative statement) Me neither.
  • (weak) I suppose so./I guess so.
  • You have a point there.
  • I was just going to say that.
b.      DISSAGREMENT
Secara umum expressing  disagreement anatara lain:
  • I don't think so.
  • (strong) No way.
  • I'm afraid I disagree.
  • (strong) I totally disagree.
  • I beg to differ.
  • (strong) I'd say the exact opposite.
  • Not necessarily.
  • That's not always true.
  • That's not always the case.
  • No, I'm not so sure about that.
Interruptions
  • Can I add something here?
  • Is it okay if I jump in for a second?
  • If I might add something...
  • Can I throw my two cents in?
  • Sorry to interrupt, but...
  • (after accidentally interrupting someone) Sorry, go ahead. OR Sorry, you were saying...
  • (after being interrupted) You didn't let me finish.

BAB II
KESIMPULAN
The term "agree to disagree" or "agreeing to disagree" is a phrase in English referring to the resolution of a conflict (usually a debate or quarrel) whereby all parties tolerate but do not accept the opposing position(s). It generally occurs when all sides recognise that further conflict would be unnecessary, ineffective or otherwise undesirable. They may also remain on amicable terms while continuing to disagree about the unresolved issues.


DAFTAR PUSTAKA