This essay explores New Zealandʼs foreign policy after the Cold War. As a small, trade-dependent, physically vulnerable, and geographically isolated parliamentary regime, it offers an exemplar case study of how small democracies cope with the shifts that have occurred in the international political, economic, and security environment in the last 20 years. Under conditions of substantial international change, peripheral democracies often act as harbingers of larger trends, because they are embedded as subordinate players in a complex hierarchy of system interdependencies. 1 This makes for a specific problem out of a general fact: failure to anticipate or respond adroitly to international shifts potentially bears serious costs for all states, especially small ones. That is particularly so given the balance between internal and external political considerations specific to democracies. Since the post-Cold War international environment has, by all accounts, been one of major and frequent change, it stands to reason that small democracies have been significantly impacted by those changes.New Zealandʼs post-Cold War foreign policy both confirms and contradicts major tenets of the small-state literature. The country has proven successful at adapting to the international system that emerged after 1990, because it undertook policy changes in the 1980s that set it up nicely for the global transitions that followed the end of the Cold War. That was followed by elite consensus on the major contours of a principled but pragmatic foreign policy that mixed

The article argues that preauthoritarian institutions have strongly influenced postauthoritarian labor politics in Chile and Uruguay. The nature of preauthoritarian labor administration—state corporatist in Chile, pluralist in Uruguay—had a strong impact on postauthoritarian collective outcomes, whether or not they were modified by the dictators or the ideological disposition of the postauthoritarian governments. Variation in preauthoritarian labor politics between Chile and Uruguay gave historical foundation to different union fortunes in the postauthoritarian era. That result points to the contemporary influence of preauthoritarian institutions, with or without authoritarian modifiers.