The following are extracts of editorials taken from newspapers around the world that may be of interest to Royal Gazette readers.The Guardian, London, on the single European currencyPeople may not be dancing in the streets today but the birth of the euro in notes and coins, after an interminable pregnancy, is a monumentally important event in the history of Europe. What is transcending is the decision of 12 nations, many with highly nationalistic histories, to bury the most potent physical symbol of their identities in a common currency. It has not been an easy journey. In its early years the euro, which has been traded in virtual form since the start of 1999, has not succeeded in becoming a strong rival to the dollar. In fact it has lost 25 percent of its value since then. Instead of leading by example, the eurozone economic block is trapped in the world recession, watching enviously as refusenik Britain shows it a clean pair of heels — at least for now. But in such adversity the adopters can also find strength. The project is of its nature a very, very long-term one and if it can survive such vicissitudes at birth it may be blessed enough to have longevity on its side. It has scored some successes including its adoption as a corporate currency in Europe and the fact that more than a third of capital transactions are in euros. The introduction of the euro will survive the inevitable problems attached to such a vast operation including fraud, supply breakdowns, bank strikes and profiteering. Tony Blair is hoping that as the euro creeps into Britain (through tourism) by the back door, and as British tourists become more familiar with it on holiday, our scepticism about the single currency will slowly evaporate. But whatever lies in store for Britain can take nothing away from the transcending nature of events today. Eurosceptics and enthusiasts alike should bury their differences, raise their glasses and wish the euro a long and prosperous life.Folha de Sao Paulo, Brazil, on the euroThe beginning of the euro is a decisive step in the construction of the European Union.

The day scheduled for the circulation of the currency has been called 'E Day' as opposed to 'D Day' when allied forces disembarked in Normandy.

It is by the distance between both dates that the size of the achievement has to be measured. From the imperialist and neocolonialist arrogance of the 19th Century, the Europeans went on to build a supra-national entity, sheltered in the economy, not war or genocide.

Among all of the post-Second World War political and institutional constructions, the European Union stands as the one which was able to re-invent itself, identify new energy and create a long-term landscape.

It is a notable achievement, specially if compared with what was left from the supra-national institutions inaugurated after the IIWW victory: IMF, World Bank and United Nations, all still far from accomplishing their roles.

On the other hand, the advent of this important supra-national currency takes place within a worrying economic and geopolitical context. First, whereas the euro appears on the side of the US dollar as a global monetary reference, its value through the past years has been below expected levels. Some times it devalued sharply. A parity between both became unsustainable.

The European Central Bank has opposed lowering interest rates despite the slowdown of the international economy. Regional interest was placed as a priority in relation to the difficulties of the world economy.

In a general way, the euro is still better for the EU than for the rest of the world. Furthermore, the global monetary system is still in a precarious condition.

The strength of the euro also depends on the will of European authorities to open their markets. It is from the investments, trade and financing that derives the strength of a currency in the world system. From this standpoint, the European economy is still far from the weight reached by the US economy.

In some areas like agriculture, Europe plays openly against globalisation. The idea with this is to defend some interests of the EU which, since it limits the development of poorer countries out of the bloc, compromises Europe's inclusion as a global financial leader.