Most observers looking at Russia and China when Mao died in 1976 would have bet that Russia was better positioned for industrial growth and international economic integration. The Soviet Union was a superpower with many of the requisites for development; China was an overwhelmingly peasant society emerging from the chaos and isolation of the Cultural Revolution. Conventional wisdom suggested that Russia was more likely to become a major commercial and knowledge economy industrial power; instead, Russia has experienced significant de-industrialization, lost much of its knowledge economy capability, and is increasingly marginalized in the G-20. China, in contrast, has become a significant global player in a growing range of industrial linkages, and is investing in human capital to move up the value-added chain. Professor Balzer examines China and Russia s starting point of reform, which he argues influenced the nature of each country s integration with the international economy. China s thick integration has generated a self-reinforcing dynamic, with economic and political interests promoting further integration. Russia s thin integration promotes no serious economic or political interests demanding modernization or deeper internationalization; rather, Russian epistemic communities benefit from perpetuating Soviet practices.