The Third World Challenge: Another Chance for the North?
If one thing more than any other was made abundantly clear by the whole series of international negotiations in the 1970s, it is that the industrialized democracies--which, with Australia and New Zealand as appendages, and with the Soviet bloc, make up "the North"--have no strategy and no vision when it comes to their dealings with the three-quarters of the human race that lives in the developing "South." For over a decade, the North has been discussing with the South the problem of their long-term economic relations--the so-called New International Economic Order. But wherever the focus has been--the five meetings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the various special sessions of the U.N. General Assembly, the fumbling and finally negative two-year talks of the Commission for International Economic Cooperation (the ironic name given to a series of North-South consultations in Paris), the fiasco of the latest conference called by UNIDO (the U.N. Industrial Development Organization), or the virtually nonexistent outcome of the so-called Economic Summit of Western leaders in Venice--wherever the place, whatever the context, whoever the parties, the outcome has been virtually the same. In short, it has been nothing.
Barbara Ward (Baroness Jackson of Lodsworth) was President of the International Institute for Environment and Development in London from 1973 to 1980. Among her books are Rich Nations and Poor Nations, Only One Earth (with René Dubos), and, most recently, Progress for a Small Planet.
If one thing more than any other was made abundantly clear by the whole series of international negotiations in the 1970s, it is that the industrialized democracies-which, with Australia and New Zealand as appendages, and with the Soviet bloc, make up "the North"-have no strategy and no vision when it comes to their dealings with the three-quarters of the human race that lives in the developing "South." For over a decade, the North has been discussing with the South the problem of their long-term economic relations-the so-called New International Economic Order. But wherever the focus has been-the five meetings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the various special sessions of the U.N. General Assembly, the fumbling and finally negative two-year talks of the Commission for International Economic Cooperation (the ironic name given to a series of North-South consultations in Paris), the fiasco of the latest conference called by UNIDO (the U.N. Industrial Development Organization), or the virtually nonexistent outcome of the so-called Economic Summit of Western leaders in Venice-wherever the place, whatever the context, whoever the parties, the outcome has been virtually the same. In short, it has been nothing.
There are tiny exceptions: the ludicrously inadequate amounts promised to underpin more stable world commodity prices; the guarantees limited to one group of developing states under the Lomé Convention negotiated by the European Community; the £1.2 billion pledged by the wheat producers (in wheat and long-term low-interest loans) for food relief. But these minor and unrelated acts only throw into clear perspective the utter lack of strategy on a worldwide and sufficient scale...
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
Today’s troubles are real, but not ideological: they relate more to policies than to principles. The postwar order of mutually supporting liberal democracies with mixed economies solved the central challenge of modernity, reconciling democracy and capitalism. The task now is getting the system back into shape.
How does Binyamin Netanyahu do it? The continued popularity of Israel's Likud prime minister, despite his derailment of a popular peace process, is the great paradox of Israeli politics. The key is the rise of the soft right, an odd mix of ultra-Orthodox Jews and secular immigrants from the former Soviet Union whose newfound influence lets Netanyahu defy political gravity. He holds their support by pandering to their distaste for Arabs and Israel's secular left. But the soft right is not only right but also soft and thus less wedded to a hard line. If Netanyahu drags Israel into a bloody confrontation, they could desert him for a more dovish candidate.
The Polish elections may signal the dawning of a political force in Central and Eastern Europe-Christian democracy, with emphasis on both words.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.