Diversity and Homogeneity in World Politics



A growing diversity in political alignments was probably the most obvious outcome of the dramatic events which tumbled over each other in the early 1970s, and which seemed to transform the face of international politics. It was as if a series of political time bombs had suddenly been triggered by overlapping events to destroy the bipolarity of the previous era. The Cold War itself did not end during the 1970s, but the world of the Cold War did. The international system was no longer dominated by the dangerous certainties of the ‘Superpower era’. Instead, in all the major regions around the world in which the Cold War had previously been fought, unprecedented changes encouraged indigenous and more diverse political forces.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    See, Henry Kissinger, ‘East Asia, the Pacific and the West: Strategic Trends and Implications’, in East Asia, the West and International Security: Prospects for Peace, Adelphi Paper 216(1), (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1987), pp. 3–4.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Compare for example, Robert Gilpin, The Political Economy of International Relations, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987), pp. 364–78;Google Scholar
  3. 3a.
    Susan Strange, ‘The Persistent Myth of Lost Hegemony’, International Organization, 41(4), (1987), pp. 551–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, (London: Fontana Press, 1989), pp. 601, 681.Google Scholar
  5. 7.
    Seyom Brown, New Forces, Old Forces, and the Future of World Politics, (Boston: Little, Brown, 1988), pp. 161–3.Google Scholar
  6. 8.
    Susan Strange, States and Markets, (London: Frances Pinter, 1988), p. 82; Gilpin, op. cit., pp. 252–3.Google Scholar
  7. 9.
    Stephen Wilks, ‘Industry in Western Europe’, Europe 1989, (London: Europa Publications, 1988), p.34.Google Scholar
  8. 10.
    Sunday Times, 12 April 1987, pp. 1, 4. See also Juliet Lodge, ‘British Local Authorities and the European Community’, Talking Politics 9(2), (1989), p.38.Google Scholar
  9. 11.
    Kenneth Clark, Civilization: A Personal View, (London: BBC and John Murray, 1971), p. 347.Google Scholar
  10. 12.
    One of the best reviews of the debate about the fate of the West, in particular that of America, in the postwar era is, Paul Kennedy, ‘Fin-de-Siècle America’, The New York Review of Books, 37(11), 28 June 1990, pp. 31–40.Google Scholar
  11. 13.
    See, Ali Mazrui, ‘Changing the Guards from Hindus to Muslims: Collective Third World Security in a Cultural Perspective’, International Affairs, 57(1) (1980), pp. 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 14.
    See, James P. Piscatori, Islam in a World of Nation-States, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press for the Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1986).Google Scholar
  13. 15.
    A.D. Smith, Nationalism in the Twentieth Century, (London: Martin Robertson, 1979).Google Scholar
  14. 17.
    On invisible trade see British Invisible Exports Council, Invisible Trade in the World Economy 1972–86 (London: BIEC, 1988);Google Scholar
  15. 17a.
    Phedon Nicolaides, Liberalising Trade in Services: An Overview of Issues and Difficulties, Discussion Paper 3 (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1988), p.2.Google Scholar
  16. 19.
    Harold Lever and Christopher Huhne, Debt and Danger: The World Financial Crisis (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1985), p.11.Google Scholar
  17. 19a.
    The 1989 figures are quoted from the World Bank in Peter de Groot, ‘The Ties That Bind the Third World’, New Scientist, vol 125 24 February 1990, p.62.Google Scholar
  18. 21.
    William Rees-Mogg, ‘Wasps, Wimps and a Tradition which Lost Confidence in Itself’, The Independent, 2 August 1988, p.12.Google Scholar
  19. 23.
    Nigel Swain, ‘The Global Information Technological Revolution and Political Legitimacy in Hungary’, in The Open University, Global Politics, Block III, Part 2 (Milton Keynes: Open University, 1989), pp. 59–95; ‘All the World’s a Dish’, The Economist, 21 August 1988, p.9.Google Scholar
  20. 24.
    Steven L. Canby, ‘Military Reform and the Art of War’, in Asa A. Clark, et al. (eds), The Defense Reform Debate: Issues and Analysis, (Baltimore, Mass.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984), pp. 127–9.Google Scholar
  21. 25.
    On summit meetings, see Robert D. Putnam and Nicholas Bayne, Hanging Together: Co-operation and Conflict in the Seven-Power Summits, (London: Sage, 1987).Google Scholar
  22. 31.
    See, ‘Multinational Companies and European Integration’, Journal of Common Market Studies Special Edition, 26 (2), (December 1987).Google Scholar
  23. 32.
    Michael Artis and S. Ostry, International Economic Policy Coordination (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs/Routledge, 1986), p.4.Google Scholar
  24. 33.
    James P. Hawley, ‘Protecting Capital from Itself: US Attempts to Regulate the Eurocurrency System’, International Organization 38(1) (1984), p.155. See also Strange, States and Markets, op. cit., p. 105; Gilpin, op. cit., p. 315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 35.
    David Churchill, ‘Europe’s Growing Hotel Appeal’, Financial Times, 10 July 1990, p. 18.Google Scholar
  26. 36.
    Roderick Rhodes, European Policy-making, Implementation and Subcentral Governments: A Survey (Maastricht: European Institute of Public Administration, 1986).Google Scholar
  27. 37.
    Christopher Tugendhat and William Wallace, Options for British Foreign Policy in the 1990s (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs/Routledge, 1988), p. 30.Google Scholar
  28. 38.
    Per Kleppe, ‘EFTA and EC Moving Closer’, The European, 1 (3), (1987), p. 36.Google Scholar
  29. 40.
    David Marquand, ‘The Fading Role of National Sovereignty in Europe After 1992’, The Independent, 10 August 1988, p. 12.Google Scholar
  30. 41.
    See, Helen Wallace, ‘Negotiations and Coalition Formation in the European Community’, Government and Opposition, 20(4) (1985), pp. 453–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 42.
    John Palmer, Europe Without America?, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), pp. 133–6. The Eureka programme was devised by France partly as a European civil response to the challenge posed by the American Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) programme, to undertake initiatives and promote development of the high-technologies that the SDI would nurture within the United States. The Eureka programme involves EC members along with Norway, Austria, Finland, Switzerland and Sweden.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Institute of International Affairs 1992

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations