The new and ever practical American President doesn't see the value in Eastern Europe that Bush saw.
President Obama sure has changed the focus of American interests in Eastern Europe. It was only a few short years ago when then president Bush was building up Georgia’s modern military and loudly promoting NATO entry to any Eastern European country interested in snubbing Moscow. Now Obama is backing out of Georgia, Poland, Czechoslovakia and anywhere else in Europe as fast as politically possible. Why the sudden dramatic shift and where does it leave Eastern Europe?…
Article comments
26 - Noel
Baritone,
Of course the USSR would have been better off with more gradual change, but like you said it wasn't possible. There was too much pent up frustration from years of suppression of local people and cultures. A small crack and the pressure blew everything up. It would have taken a Stalin type of crack down in East Germany when a million people demonstrated to put the genie back in the bottle.
There weren't even laws on the books for privitization when auctions were being held for millions of dollars to assets! No one knew the rules because there were none yet!
Remember that Putin was selected by the Oligarchs that rose from the chaos, or ultimate free market economy some might say as there was no rules. When his name first surfaced everyone said "Who is Putin?". He was picked as a person that could work within the old power structures to manage the country while being controlled by the Oligarchs who wanted to maintain the huge gains they had attained. He didn't grab power as he had no significant power base to support him. He wasn't even very high in the KGB and service in the St. Petersburg government never counted for much in Moscow. Putin was simply the person picked to manage the new system of power.
27 - roger nowosielski
Interesting article and comments, Noel. I believe you're correct in your analysis - namely that US has too much on its plate right now to deal pro-actively with the Eastern Europe. I don't view the situation of there being two distinct spheres of influence as necessarily bad or dangerous. The "annexing" of the Eastern European powers by the West would definitely be worst and a continuous bone of contention, so I think the present course is a better strategy. So let's "enjoy" two spheres of influence while we still can - before the world becomes one, as it were.