The study of international political economy is distinguished not only by its substantive focus but also by its continuing attention to cooperative, or at least rule-guided, arrangements. These cooperative arrangements are defined variously: as an open world economy by Robert Gilpin and Stephen Krasner, and as strong international regimes by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye. But in either case, the problems of cooperation and order are not approached simply as tactical alliances or as limiting cases of international anarchy. Instead, close attention is paid to the possibilities for rule making and institution building, however fragile and circumscribed they may be. By this view, the absence of a Hobbesian “common power to keep them all in awe” does not preclude the establishment of some effective joint controls over the international environment. Elaborating on this perspective, Brian Barry argues that “international affairs are not a pure anarchy in which nobody has any reason for expecting reciprocal relations to hold up. In economic matters, particularly, there is a good deal of room for stable expectations.”

Central Asia confronts the Soviet leadership in Moscow with a number of important policy problems. The difficult issues raised by economic and demographic trends in the region and the potential rise of Muslim nationalism among the masses there have received careful and increasing attention from Western analysts in recent years, as have some of the current and potential responses of the Soviet leadership to them. Far less attention, however, has been directed toward a more directly political problem raised by developments in Central Asia; a problem the resolution of which appears to be of far more pressing urgency, and which has potentially far more profound implications for the future of the Soviet political order itself: the rise of a modern, secular Muslim, communist elite.

In this article I shall examine the origins of a major rural revolutionary movement, Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path). An extremist Maoist organization, Sendero has gained considerable peasant support in Peru's southern highlands, especially in the Ayacucho area. Although peasant unrest has been endemic in Peru, the scope and intensity of the current movement are unprecedented. Never before has a Peruvian guerrilla group ranged over such a wide part of the country, and never before has such a group threatened the order of daily life in the capital.

Communism traces deviance, disaffection, and dissent alike to alienation and presocialist forms of consciousness. Insofar as the building of communism brings about an end to exploitation and alienation, deviance, disaffection, and dissent should disappear with them. The persistence of disaffection and articulate dissent, or of crime, delinquency, and social deviance generally, represents a failure of socialization—a failure, thus, of the system. Communist regimes are anxious, therefore, to deny the existence of crime, to expel dissenters, and to curb social deviance. Dissent and deviance are troubling in yet another respect. Insofar as Marxism aspires to eliminate social conflict and traces it to differences in social or class interest, dissent and deviance may be taken to reflect the persistence of differences in perceived interest, whether “objectively” rooted in class differences or not.

In 1983 two events focused international attention on East and West Germany. One was the collapse of talks on intermediate range missiles in Geneva and the consequent deployment of the missiles by NATO. The other was the 500th anniversary of the birth of Martin Luther. The Luther anniversary cast the spotlight particularly on communist East Germany, which revised its previously negative interpretation of Luther and not only marked his birth with elaborate festivities but also extended unprecedented assistance to the Lutheran church for its celebration. Yet, just as many wondered if inter-German detente would survive the I.N.F. deployment, so, too, many wondered at the nature of the church-state cooperation in the G.D.R., and if it would survive the Luther Year. The present analysis examines the character and direction of this churchstate relationship, using the Luther Year experience as evidence.

Technology transfer is becoming an increasingly controversial issue in world politics. After many years of enthusiasm among both importers and exporters of technology, views have started to diversify, and the parties involved have found themselves in conflict. The most visible element of the current controversy is the disillusionment among the countries of the South regarding the ease with which they expected to become industrialized through the importation of Western technology. There are also some signs of disappointment in the West, especially in the United States, where the fear has arisen that the exported technology may be underpriced and that the competitive position of the United States may be eroding relative to that of the importing countries. In this article, I will deal with only one dimension of the current debate—namely, the experience of developing countries as importers of technology from the West.