Preface to a Critique of the New World Order

Despite ambivalence about the term Third World, scholars still tend to retain the term as as a convenient form of shorthand and argue that all countries belonging to this category including the newly-industrializing countries (NICS), have much in common See. Manor James (ed.). Rethinking Third World Politics.London: Longman, 1991. pp. 1–13.

Fukuyama Francis , The End of History?. The National Interest, No. 16, Summer, 1989, pp. 3–l8.

President George Bush’s speech to the American public on January 16, 1991. Reproduced in the Span, February 1991, pp. 8–9. In his address to the UN. General Assembly on October 1, 1990, President Bush stated: “We have a vision of a new partnership of nations that transcends the cold war: a partnership based on consultation, cooperation and collective action, especially through international and regional organizations: a partnership united by principle and the rule of law and supported by a equitable sharing of both cost and commitment; or partnership whose goals are to increase democracy, increase prosperity, increase the peace and reduce arms.” Quoted in Gardner Richard N. . ‘Practical Internationalism’, in Allison Graham Taverton Gregory (ed.). Rethinking America’s Security: Beyond Cold War to New World Order. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1992, p. 272.

Lellouche Pierre , ‘New World Disorder?’. The Statesman, 29.3.92. See also. Responses to Fukuyama in The National Interest, No. 16, Summer, 1989, pp. 19–35

Mearsheimer John J. , ‘Disorder Restored’, in Allison Graham Gardner Richard N. (eds.), op. cit.. p. 223.

Kissinger Henry A. . ‘Balance & Power Sustained’, in ibid., p. 239.

Krauthammer Charles , “The Unipolar Moment”, in ibid.., p. 296.

Amin Samir , Maldevelopment: Anatomy of a Global Failure. London: Zed Books, 1990, p. 53.

Ibid. , p. 54.

Quoted in Raghavan Chakravarti , Recolonisation: GATT, the Uruguay Round and the Third World. Penang, Malayasia: Third World Network, 1991, p. 55.

Higgott Richard et. at.. ‘Theories of development and underdevelopment, implications for the study of Southeast Asia’. in Higott R. Robinson R. (eds.). Southeast Asia: ‘Essays in the Political Economy of Structural Change’. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985, p. 39.

O’Donnel Guillermo , ‘Corporatism and the Question of the State’, in Malloy James (ed.), Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1977, p. 54.

Adriano Fermin , ‘A Critique of the Bureaucratic-Authoritarian State Thesis, The Case of Philippines’. Journal of Contemporary Asia Vol. 14, No. 4, 1984, p. 461.

Collier David , ‘Overview’ of the Bureaucratic-Authoritarism Model’, in Collier David (ed.). The New Authoritarianism in Latin America. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1979, p. 26.

O’Donnel Guillermo . Modernization and Bureacratic-Authoritarianism in South American Politics, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979, p. 60.

Leaver Richard . ‘Reformist Capitalist Development and the New International Division of Labour’, in Higgot R. Robinson R. (eds.) op. cit., p. 160.

Quoted in Higgot R. et. al. op. cit.., p. 45.

Gibbs Graham , ‘The State in an International Context’, in King Roger , The State in Modem Society: New Directions in Political sociology. Chatham: Chatham House Publishers, 1986, p. 223.

See, Palloix Christian . ‘The internationalisation of capital and the circuit of social capital’, in Radice Hugo (ed.). International Finns and Modem Capitalism, Harmondoworth: Penguin, 1975, pp. 63–68.

Quoted in Chilcote Ronald . Theories of Development and Underdevelopment, Boulder: Westview Press, 1984, p. 122.

Barkin David , ‘Internationalization of Capital: An Alternative Approach. Latin America Perspectives, Vol. 8. Summer and Fall, 1981, pp. 156–161.

Higgot R. et. al.. op. cit., pp. 45–46.

Ibid. , p. 46.

Ibid. , pp. 41–42.

Rosenuu James N. , Turbulence in World Politics: A Theory of Change and Continuity, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990.

These three features were stated by Moravesik Andrew in ‘Liberalism anti International Relations Theory’, a working paper published by Centre for International Affairs. Harvard University. 1992’. Citations are from Burley Anne-Marie Salughter . ‘International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda’. American Journal of International Law. Vol. 87, No. 2, April, 1993, pp. 227–228.

Schroeder Paul W. , ‘The New World Order: A Historical Perspective’. The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 2, Sprin, 1994, p. 32.

Ibid. , p. 33.