The past fifteen years have seen two important developments in the international economic system: the rapid industrialization of many less developed countries (LDCs) and their increasing indebtedness to private financial institutions. Massive bank loans have been used to fund industrial growth in many LDCs; international financial markets have replaced multinational corporations as the Third World's most important source of private foreign capital. In four major borrowing countries—Mexico, Brazil, Algeria, and South Korea—the process of indebted industrialization has its roots in the internationalization of finance, the increasing role of the state, and the use of funds raised on the international capital markets to finance industrial development. The results include rapid expansions of LDC industrial production and LDC exports of manufactured products, as well as the formation of an implicit partnership between private financial institutions and state-capitalist elites in the Third World.

The new politics of modernization in post-Mao China raises a variety of intriguing questions to ask and hypotheses to test in international relations research. This paper examines the normative and policy changes brought about by the impetus of the modernization drive at home and how these changes have affected Chinese foreign policy in general and Chinese global policy in particular. In pursuit of this line of inquiry, the institutional setting of international organizations, especially those concerned with global political, military, developmental, and functional issues, is chosen as a testing ground of Chinese global policy. The scope of the paper is largely limited to the Chinese global policy of the post-Mao period of 1977 - 1980. The paper attempts a normative-behavioral analysis concentrating on global geopolitical, developmental, and functional domains. By way of conclusion, the paper broadly assesses the implications of post-Mao Chinese global policy for the Third World's elusive pursuit of a new world order.

During the last decade dependency theory has emerged as an important, if highly controversial, perspective on contemporary North-South relations. This paper assesses the utility of dependency approaches by examining one concrete North-South relationship over an extended period, that between Commonwealth cane sugar producers and Great Britain. After detailing the origins of the colonial sugar trade and the later impact of British free trade policies, the article follows the evolution of British-Commonwealth sugar relations from the enactment of the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement in 1951 to the signing in 1975 of the Lome Convention's Sugar Protocol governing sugar imports into the enlarged Community. Two conclusions are drawn from this historical case study regarding the usefulness of dependency theory. First, dependency theorists exaggerate the cohesiveness of the posture of developed market economy countries toward the Third World. Second, dependency theory has too often neglected the need to explore realistic alternatives to dependency available to underdeveloped countries.

The New International Economic Order (N1EO) seeks fundamental change in international relations. World shipping has experienced substantial pressure for reforms associated with NIEO goals: controversy focuses around the operation of the liner conferences, the use of flags of convenience, which retain beneficial ownership in developed nations, and the demands of developing countries for a major share in the carriage of their imports and exports. UNCTAD, and in particular its Shipping Division headed by Adib al-Jadir, has become increasingly active in world shipping. The reforms urged through UNCTAD will have a significant impact on the fleets, maritime practices, and interests of the developed world. This study examines UNCTAD's aims in world shipping–the policies being urged, the factors under consideration, and the trends emerging from the operation of UNCTAD. It further examines developed states' attempts to shape, and their reactions to, UNCTAD policies, and the interests perceived to be at stake in the current debate on world shipping.