These two maps illustrate the political, social, and economic structure of the international community during and after the Cold War. There are various approaches to the stratification or division of countries. One of them is the so-called three-world theory, and it can be observed in the first picture. To some extent, this theory had become out-of-date approximately seventeen years ago, but it helps us to explain the peculiarities of the globalization process and international relations among the states. There is a different approach to the organization of the world. It is usually called the North-South divide. Currently, this classification is more popular. But there is still a close connection between them because the aftermaths of this political and military tension hostility are still traceable. These two theories are distinguishable mostly in the parameters on which they rely.
Certainly, after the fall of the Soviet Union, there have been significant changes in the structure of the world, but some elements still remain noticeable. In this regard, we need to discuss the criteria on which each theory is based. According to the first model, all countries fall into three major categories 1) the supporters of the United States and American capitalism, 2) the second group comprises those nations who allied with the USSR and centralized economy. The third group includes those states that were neutral or gave full preference to neither of the superpowers. Three worlds theory attaches primary significance to the political system and the type of economy, either capitalistic or socialistic. Naturally, when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, the three worlds model became less appropriate. Nonetheless, it is still intertwined with the North-South model.
This theory focuses primarily on economic parameters such as gross revenue, income per capita, the level of economic development, and so forth. Secondly, this interpretation emphasizes the political and social structure. It seems that at this moment, the second model is more applicable mostly because, at the present socialist approach to the finance system has been abandoned by the overwhelming majority of nations. Certainly, there are some exceptions like for instance, China or Cuba, yet these examples are not numerous enough. Again, it has to be admitted that the three-world theory does not reflect all the complexity of the world structure because it measures only the political and social peculiarities of the country.
Again, we should say that there are certain similar features. It is necessary to take a look at those states, which are often viewed as developing. So many African countries are only beginning to evolve, and they are hardly able to compete with advanced superpowers. In part, it can be explained by the fact that they have long been virtually a town apart between the US and the USSR. Certainly, some countries have shown marked improvement, but they are still very few.
Therefore, we can arrive at the conclusion that neither of these models can be entirely rejected because the consequences of the Cold War have yet to be fully eliminated. These effects manifest themselves at various levels: namely, economic, political development. In particular, we should speak about those countries which once were torn between the United States and USSR, namely postcolonial countries. Secondly, we should speak about those states, which now go through the transition period.