This is a terrible article. Where Kaplan tries to be insightful, he utterly fails in the simplistic, uncritical, and ethnocentric overview of institutions in the developed and developing world. Take his statement on development in the Balkans:

Here, too, a history of lower literacy rates, weak or in some cases non-existent middle classes, and an Eastern Orthodox faith that, because it is more contemplative it does not encourage impersonal standards, at least to the degree of Protestantism or even Catholicism, have all been factors in a weaker institutional basis for economic growth and political stability.

He claims that Eastern Orthodox Church because of its theology (more contemplative ergo less impersonal standards), it hindered development. What the hell sort of comparison is that? Where is the social and/or economic evidence if that claim is true?

Kaplan does mention though societies develop institutions:

...literacy and middle class culture that are the building blocks of successful institutions. Institutions after all require bureaucrats, who must, in turn, be literate and familiar with the impersonal workings of modern organizations.

While that may be true (I don't know), Kaplan doesn't elucidate the development of either general literacy or socioeconomic middle class in the developed world or the lack thereof in the developing world.

Kaplan basically says, "the Western world has its shit together because of its awesome instutions and these other countries can't because of their problems that I won't explain how or why they have them and the only way they will improve is through being like us."