In October I873, as every Conference Report recalls, the Associ ation for the Reform and Codification of the Law of Nations was founded in Brussels (Belgium). At the Brussels Conference of I895 the Association's name was changed and ever since it has been "The International Law Association". On August 30 and 3I and September I, I973, a Centenary Cele bration will be held in the Association's place of birth. In the course of preparations made for this triduum, plans were also laid by the Executive Council for a Centenary Volume to mark the event. The formula adopted for the book was mostly based on contributions by Chairmen and/or Rapporteurs of International Committees of the Association who were asked to shed light on "the present state" of their subject. Hence the title of the Volume. For good measure, vari ous other topics not coming under the terms of reference of Inter national Committees were added. Almost all of the authors invited responded favourably, and their studies are to be found in Part II, arranged in sections which have no other justification than the Editor's whim. It should be pointed out that Chairmen and/or Rapporteurs of International Committees wrote their articles a titre personnel and, therefore, cannot be deemed to express opinions held by their Com mittees as such. Part I contains the "other essays", dealing with the Association itself rather than with the present state of international law.

International Communism today is split on a number of ideological and political issues and is incapable of the kind of unified action implied by the term “movement.†So argues Heinz Timmermann in this assessment of the current state of world Communism. Dr. Timmermann discusses the historical concept of a world Communist movement in connection with the USSR and China. Focusing on Communism in the West, he examines such diverse groups as the Communist parties in Italy, France, Portugal, Cyprus, Chile, and Japan. Communist parties in the West are increasingly adjusting their policies to better fit their own cultures, and the author links this independence to the emphasis the Soviet Union’s Communist Party has been placing on the specifically Russian character of the October Revolution and Soviet state interests. Apparently, Moscow is now showing some flexibility in its response to tendencies toward differentiation and pluralism within the system of Communist parties. Gorbachev is less concerned with ideological orthodoxy than with Communists effectively supporting Soviet foreign policy. The author argues that by acceding to the concept of “unity in diversity,†Gorbachev is signaling that the Soviet leadership is willing to look beyond the myth of a world Communist movement.