De la Romania anationala la Europa americana

De la Romania anationala la Europa americana – 24 ianuarie 2016

 

Gheorghe Gradinaru

 

http://adrianseverin.com/de-la-romania-anationala-la-euro…/…

 

 

Eastern Europe Now

Some of the most enduring positive changes in politics occur slowly. The development and expansion of the European institutions that eventually brought about the European Union can be seen as an...

REALCLEARWORLD.COM

 

Mihai Ion Turcu "Festina lente" (?) Statul nu numai ca n-a protejat industria, bancile, resursele, dar a fost factor activ la devalizarea lor.

 

Prospectiv A-z Da, domnule Severin, asa se rescrie istoria, iar perioada reformelor dvs. este expediata intr-o nota de subsol a vreunui uliu care se uita sa rearanjeze istoria in functie de prada-i de moment.

Kaplan are verb si, spre deosebire de ceilalti scriitori  de istorie, a batut lumea despre care scrie in lung si'n lat. Cam atat caci mai departe imi amintesc distinct cum in penultima sa carte nu dadea nicio sansa Romaniei pe motive de geografie. 

Desi acest volum inca n-a aparut, preiau 2 comentarii dela Amazon care-l pun la locul lui:

Kaplan's followup to Balkan Ghosts (1993), January 23, 2016
By John E. Drury (3 stele din 5)
This review is from: In Europe's Shadow: Two Cold Wars and a Thirty-Year Journey Through Romania and Beyond (Hardcover)
Vine Customer Review of Free Product (What's this?)
Robert Kaplan's energetic inquiries stand out in "In Europe's Shadow" in which he revisits Romania/Hungary and the themes in his well received earlier book "Balkan Ghosts." With Romania as his stepping stone, he examines its Latinized Byzantium founding, its Communist/Ceausescu past ("that baroque synthesis of Communism and fascism") and the incipient nationalism of present day Eastern Europe as the stresses of disunion plague the European Union, a "revanchist Russia" looms, the United States backs away and Ukraine becomes in his words "more central to the European drama than Spain or Portugal." The most recent migrant emigration into Eastern Europe is not mentioned, but he does utter warnings of the rise of the right in Hungary. He warns "[i]f the European Union crumbled, there was only exclusivist ethnic nationalism and the dementia of ideologies."

The mid part of the book, however, lags. Kaplan, much given to embroidered prose and adjectival excess, too often rhapsodizes about his earlier visits to Romania in 1973 and 1981 and repeatedly cites to the thinkers of Eastern Europe without any clear indication of what he thinks. This detracts from the book's readability.

http://www.amazon.com/.../R40TJ96DS.../ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm...Vezi traducerea

 

 

"Kaplan's followup to Balkan Ghosts (1993)" a review of: In Europe's Shadow:…

AMAZON.COM

 

Prospectiv A-z .
Iata si al 2lea comentariu (2 stele din 5)

A White Man's Burden or... how bizarre, January 23, 2016
By Cthulhu
This review is from: In Europe's Shadow: Two Cold Wars and a Thirty-Year Journey Through Romania and Beyond (Hardcover)
Vine Customer Review of Free Product (What's this?)
As soon as he's done serving in Israel's military, New York City born Robert D. Kaplan decides that it would be optimal to cover Europe's East Side as a journalist because, unlike Israel or the United States, there was a lot less competition there because of "Europe's backwater" so he could stand out (see the big fish in small pond strategy). He immediately flies to Bucharest because it was the only place in East Europe El-Al flew at the time and... the rest is history. Love with Romania at first sight. Well... not exactly love because Romania was under a Communist-Nationalist-Fascist and mildly anti-Semitic despot, Nicolae Ceausescu and what he sees as he ventures outside his hotel on his way to the US or Israel's embassies is people with grey faces who look unhappy. He also sees Casa Scanteii, Bucharest's largest Russian-Stalinist-style building where a lot of the country's propaganda machine was located. He also sees a government-engineered rally to favor Ceausescu and 'peace' where poorly dressed peasants are bossed around by Securitate agents and ordered to shout "Ceausescu, Peace!!!". A few days later he watches one of Ceausescu's speeches where some 4000 of his top Communist nomenklatura applaud and shout on cue and look very stressed. He is sorry for them because... poor Commies, they were forced to mass-humiliate themselves.

But... that's not what the book is about. There's a lot of name dropping, lots of quotes of some notable persons quoting others... One page, probably not typical but I didn't try too hard, has the following names. Remember, it's ONE page: Voltaire, Settembrini, Settembrini, [Thomas] Mann, Settembrini, Voltaire, Voltaire, Voltaire, Isaiah Berlin, Berlin, Michael Ignatieff, Voltaire, Berlin, Hannah Arendt. Yes, it's ostensibly a book about Romania. Many, many long-ago-dead conversationalists, first and second-rate philosophers, ideologues are quoted because... why not? Names of countless despots, rulers, kings, politicians, political activists are dropped and that's not all. Because this is a book about Romania so, from time to time, the author shares some of his first hand impressions which are as follows: in the beginning, before joining the Israeli army, it was totally bad when he went there so there's not much to talk about. Then, in the early 80's, after the army, Ceausescu was still in command so it was bad. People all looked sad and tired and their life was Hell on Earth. How does he know? Well... his hotel room was not so good, there were lines for cheese and bread and there were those bussed-in peasants shouting "Ceausescu Peace!!!" as directed and the TV was only showing Ceausescu's face and folk dances. And the building looked bad too. He doesn't talk to anyone, apparently, other than some official he meets at Casa Scanteii and the guys at the US and Israel's embassy but, who needs talking, it all looks terrible without talking to people.

Prospectiv A-z .
Partea a 2-a

Then, there's a lot of talk about Romania's history. Kaplan, apparently, read a short history (60+ pages) of Romania written by Mircea Eliade, an author of some excellent fiction in Romanian (he's not aware of that) and an authority when it comes to history of religions and related fields. But he disagrees with Eliade because Eliade is a nationalist while Kaplan is a self-proclaimed 'cosmopolitan imperialist' so he finds some other sources. But, overall, Romania's history seems to be a terrible tragedy in a large part, Kaplan seems to believe, because the country or the smaller pieces that made up the country eventually were never firmly attached to any of the large and powerful empires shopping around for little countries to subjugate so, by playing the losing game of preserving some form of independence, the people suffered and the countryside was constantly pillaged and devastated. How does he know all these things? Apparently he took a bus and saw a few towns without actually talking to anybody then.

Of course, it all changes after Ceausescu is taken down and executed. Kaplan comes back to Romania shortly after the event but people are still grey then and he visits again in 2013 when there is a lot more color, especially in Transylvania because it's closer to 'Europe'. It's also when Kaplan takes the opportunity to tell the political leaders what must be done about Romania. It's supremely important to keep Putin at bay because Russia is bad. Yes Russia does seem to try to rebuild its empire and Kaplan is a cosmopolitan imperialist - see his "In Defense of Empire" essay where he explains how (intervention, air war, political influence) and why (because the world needs imperial order) the United States must police the Earth - but Russia's empire is a bad empire so Romania must be part of a string of states at Russia's border tasked with protecting 'Europe'. And, what or where is Europe? Well... for anyone who would think Greece, or... Spain, or most of Italy or even Poland are in 'Europe', Kaplan begs to disagree. "Europe as a whole has always had its destiny shaped by what takes place inside the boundaries of the medieval Holy Roman Empire, an area that today encompasses a united Germany and stretches from the Netherlands eastward to Czech-Bohemia, and from Denmark southward to the Italian Piedmont. In short, the geography that matters most currently signifies Berlin and the major cities of the European Union: Brussels, The Hague, Strasbourg, and so forth."

But I digress, probably because that's what the author does for most of the book and I must be fair because he does share some travel impressions and he does talk to a few people in 2013. The book records discussions he had with a number of 80- and 90-year old former Communists and former fascist-nationalists, a former post-Ceausescu president who happens to be a former Ceausescu era big party boss affectionately nicknamed "the old Stalinist wreck" (no the nickname is not in the book), the president in 2013 who is a former commercial navy captain, notorious for privatising the Romanian commercial fleet by, among other things, selling 16 modern ships for $16 dollars, a notoriously corrupt prime minister, a relative of Ceausescu and former Securitate boss - in other words, representative people. The government people he meets seem to be concerned by Russia's rising power because they would really like to sell themselves and their country to the West and Russia's buying spree in the region was not good. Of course, Kaplan never talks to 'ordinary' people. His non-government interactions seem to be limited to visiting his hotel's cafeteria where he usually notes that women look pretty but men look like slobs, a couple of conversations with priests and one extended lunch involving some wine consumption with professors in Transylvania.

Prospectiv A-z.
Partea a 3-a

People don't seem to matter as much as the architecture. Kaplan seems to classify the architecture into a few main categories: Stalinist, plexiglass cubes, corrugated iron structures and Gothic. Oh, and Russian-style onion-domes. Of course, Gothic is superior and it's desirable and he finds a lot of Gothic in Transylvania and some in Bucharest and even in small towns but not a lot. His travels involve visiting the birthplaces of a long dead - 1964? - and long forgotten communist strongman and Ceausescu's. He goes to Moldova's (Romanian Moldova) and Transylvania's unofficial capitals Iasi and Cluj, passes through some other cities and he notes that the hotels are better now with more dishes on the menus and there seems to be more Gothic including a nice and very new Gothic church in the southern town of Giurgiu which is a surprise. Of course, there's still a lot of Stalinist architecture, some new plexiglass cubes and corrugated iron structures. Interestingly, he visits Neptun a seaside resort town where Ceausescu had a villa but he never goes to the beach for a swim - it's where millions of Romanians and quite a few foreigners spend their summer vacations. He goes to Brasov but doesn't bother to go down on the slopes at Poiana, a first-class sky resort. He goes to all these high elevation towns but never for a hike. Oh well... Romanians are supposed to be obsessed with integrating themselves into the West and urgently resisting Putin's Russia so they shouldn't waste time relaxing and if they do, that's time-a-wasting. Even though their faces are not as grey now as they used to be, especially in western Romania which is closer to Europe.

To conclude, this is a good book for anyone curious about how the mind of an out-of-the-closet cosmopolitan imperialist works. There is a little about Romania too, mostly the quotes from Mircea Eliade's 'brief history' and Kaplan does 'like' Romania because it's a cute country with some Gothic in it but it really seems to be mostly about the author and what he offers as advice to the leaders of the Western world. As for his track record on 'advice', he enthusiastically supported the successful and brilliant invasion of Iraq so... a trillion wasted here, a couple hundred thousand killed there... Ooops...

_____________________________________________________

NOTE:

I had 'White Man's Burden' in my review title because, bizarrely, Kaplan, in his article defending imperialism, defends Kipling's (in)famous poem as "not, as is commonly assumed, a declaration of racist aggression, but of the need for America to take up the cause of humanitarianism and good government in the Philippines at the turn of the 20th century."

Kaplan seems to believe that there's still a lot more work to do, civilizing these little peoples who weren't lucky enough to be born in what he defines as 'Europe'.

Take up the White Man's burden—
Send forth the best ye breed—
Go send your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need
To wait in heavy harness
On fluttered folk and wild—
Your new-caught, sullen peoples,
Half devil and half child

Mark Twain, if I am allowed to drop one name, wrote a lot about the 'humanitarianism' that was gifted to Philippines' peoples, 'half child' but 'half devil' too so they were clearly asking for it.

Sursa:http://www.amazon.com/.../R1C275DMSE8B/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm...Vezi traducerea

 

 

"A White Man's Burden or... how bizarre" a review of: In Europe's…

AMAZON.COM

 

Prospectiv A-z  http://www.wsj.com/.../europes-new-medieval-map-1452875514

 

 

Europe's New Medieval Map

As the European Union unravels, the continent is reverting to divisions that go back centuries, writes…

WSJ.COM|DE ROBERT D. KAPLAN

 

Prospectiv A-z
Andrew Clearfield
10 days ago

President Obama has not evinced "a certain lack of interest in [Europe's] travails." He has evinced a total lack of interest in foreign affairs, period. He is the conscious inheritor of a poisonous mixture of classic American isolationism and a New Left ideology which attempts to weaken America's power, to make America just another country, like every other, with no special mission except to provide a social safety net for its own citizens. The problem is that such a world—leaderless, with constantly shifting alliances—is not one which would be at peace, but one which would be in a perpetual state of nationalistic rivalry and war such as Europe was for the better part of two millennia, from the decline of the Roman Empire to the catastrophe of World War II. 

Nathan Hoskinson
9 days ago

@Andrew Clearfield To be fair, the administration did take an interest in Libya for a while there. That worked out well, huh?

Diarmaid O Meara
9 days ago

I've been reading these articles about the collapse of Europe and the EU since over a decade, essentially since I've had an interest in politics. Every year it's the same, and every year the institutions become stronger, the politics become more polarised, time goes by, and no collapse.

I'll believe it when I see it.

And before any racist idiot says anything about 'the muslim hordes', get a clue. What happened in Cologne at NYE is the norm in any Bay Area Frat Party, just with less muslims.

Enne Pacific
9 days ago

I think we would do well to recognize what triggered recent problems for Europe. Economic problems intensified after the comparatively unregulated US created a credit bubble that broke. The growth of terrorism was triggered by unnecessary US and US-supported attacks on Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Problems from Russia were in the most recent case stimulated by US-supported demonstrations that deposed an elected president in Ukraine. So when the US is thinking of taking action to solve other people's problems, it should study very carefully what such attempts have produced in the recent past.

As for the EC, the idea of having a Europe-wide monetary policy while leaving fiscal policy in the hands of individual states was ridiculous from the start. 

And I think the idea of a "Muslim invasion" of Europe is overblown, but I have long thought that introducing large numbers of foreign immigrants into long-uniracial European nations was likely to stimulate racism.

 

Prospectiv A-z Steve Makler
9 days ago

All the arrangements and institutions put in place in recent decades to create a "United States of Europe"--the EU, the single currency, open borders--are turning out to be suicide pacts. They're all imploding at once and their problems so intertwined that they can't be isolated and solved individually, even if Europe's pathetic crop of so-called leaders were capable of doing so. A generation of politicians there have built their careers on touting this pan-European fantasy, and have now lost all credibility with their publics when it comes to solving these seemingly intractable issues. Europe's spongy soft political "center" is collapsing which is why nationalist movements like France's National Front are growing like wildfire all across the continent.

Diarmaid O Meara
9 days ago

@Steve Makler I've been hearing these views for years, and although I'm not affected either way, eventually it became obvious that the is just European politics. Similar to US politics being plagued by racist cops, serial killers, and ridiculous politicians. Similar to Chinese politics being plagued by freedom searching citizens, internet freedoms, pollution etc. etc..

The system is still there in Europe, and is there as a result of reaction to these issues. After hearing about this system falling apart for the past 15 years, I'll believe it when I see it. Apart from Spanish unemployment being a real issue, the rest is just populist media needing profits for shareholders, and using any issue available to print 'crisis in Europe' front page headlines.

Funny that you mentioned the extreme right parties, seeing as they won almost no seats across the entire EU in national elections. People say they support some of these parties ideas in private polls, but don't actually vote for them.

John Augsbury
9 days ago

I believe there is a karmic component to the European fate. The colonialism which built Europe is returning. 1,100,000 mostly Islamic refugees with more possibly entering will clearly change the status quo of Europe.

Without a strong governing body Europe could fracture and the EU is not in a position to provide the necessary strength to hold the cultural factions together.

 

Prospectiv A-z Charles Palson
9 days ago

"Europe, whose economy rivals that of the U.S. as the largest in the world, remains an asset and an ally, but it is also a profound problem. The pressing question is how to manage it."

Gee, he makes it sound a little like WE don't have some hefty problems of our own trying to manage very different regions who don't know how to co-operate and compromise. 

Richard Bassett
9 days ago

"....and they were succeeded by the post-Cold War dream of a united Europe with its single currency."

When did a united or federal Europe or a single currency become part of the cold war dream? 

Nato was a bulwark of the cold war but it didn't require pooled sovereignty by an unlocked and unaccountable elite.

Also, as the article seems to be about security and maintaining peace this is wholly inconsistent with the effects of the Euro currency bloc which has created massive strife in the Eurozone. 

All in all, not a very impressive effort.

William J Hirst
9 days ago

There is an opposite analysis and dynamic to Kaplan's dystopian world view. 

The next generation of Europeans will demand more responsive, inclusive and democratic governance that can only be provided on a regional basis with a relatively vestigial central authority to deal with external and common commercial and financial affairs. The post Westphalian nation states will be broken up into city/states. 

With respect to external affairs the glacis of Europe will be the Mediterranean and Europe East of Scandinavia, The Baltics, Poland and the Balkans. This Europe can control its external boarders.

Russia will dominate to the East of that line as it did in the 18th, 19th and 20th Centuries. Russia is different! 

A very rich Europe can and should provide for its common defense and with respect to that, and no doubt to the horror of Kaplan, the US should announce its withdrawal from NATO at a date certain.

 

Prospectiv A-z Patrick Meegan
9 days ago

Charlemagne's empire was short-lived, dependent upon his energetic personal leadership.

Where is such European leadership today? Chancellor Merkel? President Putin? EU Minister Federica Mogherini?

Charlemagne's empire was multiethnic and vast, but inclusion meant acceptance of an overall order, which at that time was Catholic Christianity.

What overall philosophy guides Europe today? Cultural self-loathing? Nationalism? Socialism?

Mr. Kaplan, a fine writer, points out some interesting developments. Whether what we are seeing is another failed attempt at a unified Europe or simply a weak moment as Russian aggression and refugee waves present new challenges are questions for the Europeans to work out, and for American foreign policy to anticipate. While anticipation and preparation have not been hallmarks of the current administration, they are still needed for success.

Greg Fletcher
9 days ago

Without ever mentioning it, Mr Kaplan is reminding us of the economic, much less the political, impossibility of asking the Amercian electorate to shoulder substantially more involvement in Europe and the Pacific. The swelling U.S. and international debt issues, that more or less began in the U.S. in the 2000s, cannot expand much further without yet to be imagined catastrophic consequences. Layered on top of America's and Europe's largesse in providing for the poor and disadvantaged (a good thing), larger and more demanding elderly populations that resist a redefinition of what defines retirement age, and millions and millions of others that are enabled by political expediency to work less and/or to receive benefits out of proportion to their contribution to society as a whole, the military costs implied by Kaplan would be crushing to the U.S. economy. And we have been watching U.S. Presidential wannabes completely unable to suggest practical economic solutions to the situation that Kaplan so vividly describes--solutions that grapple with the "costs of everything desired," except to suggest the inevitably non-auditable strategy that the U.S. can grow its way out it. Unfortunately the consequences of not maintaining an intelligent level of involvement, militarily and diplomatically, in the world that Kaplan describes is likely to have catastrophic results as well. Resolution somehow requires a President and Congress that works together in all of our shared best interests. Where are they?

 

Prospectiv A-z  Carl Falcone
9 days ago

Past is prologue.
When 'people' are told/convinced their cultural roots, heritages etc. are to be homogenized with others, their core values erode. They look back or toward something that will give them purpose and moral bedrock in place of what they have lost. Europe is exhausted, morally ethically ( we to are moving in that direction imho). What values are there to hold? 

People that believe in or hold no values will inevitably believe in something, if presented in a way that flatters those missing parts, thats how you wind up with a Hitler et al.

Rome didn't so much as fall as it dissolved because its institutions no longer held value or inspired. The 'barbarian' migrations and institutions they brought or melded were if nothing else more vigorous and responsive, providing renewed purpose. 

"It is a cruel misunderstanding of youth to imagine that the heart of man's desire is to be free. The heart of man's desire is to obey." T. Mann 

Andrew Clearfield
8 days ago

@Carl Falcone

"Rome didn't so much as fall as it dissolved . . ."

That's a bit of a facile generalization. Rome fell for a whole host of reasons, some of which had to do with demographics, and the unparalleled migrations of warlike peoples from Central Asia, which forced Germanic tribes (which had not been Latinized) to move within the Empire for their own safety. Unfortunately, the production of food was falling, and cities becoming depopulated. Slow internal communications didn't help. The invading barbarians who sacked Roman cities and destroyed infrastructure didn't bring "vigor" or "renewed" purpose to the Ancient World; it took at least 500 years for a new culture to supplant the old.

Mann puts your quote in the mouth of Leo Naphta, as part of a debate between Catholic ultramontanism and the liberal rationalism of Settembrini, another character, in The Magic Mountain (1924). I don't think even the still anti-democratic Mann of 1916 would have uttered these sentiments himself. 

Vittorio Marchi
8 days ago

@Andrew Clearfield very, very well said, thank you. As for Rome, the core issue was the disenfranchising of the ruling classes, i.e. the aristocracy, from the imperial power and the military, and retreating in their land properties ( that yes took 500 hundred years ). This for a host of reasons first of which the loss of political power with the end of the republic and the military becoming the king maker. Something very similar is happening today with the 0.1% of the populace holding all the financial power, going global and checking out the limited boundaries of the nation state. 

Carl Falcone
8 days ago

@Andrew Clearfield @Carl Falcone Of course its simplistic, we have a 1000 character limit. 

What came first; the erosion to collapse of civil moral authority or the debasement of specie and lethargy of commerce? There was and had been already a plethora of 'Barbarian' Generals leading 'Roman' armys etc.

Regards vigor & purpose etc. well, lets just say Theodoric didn't allie with Aetius to save 'Roman' Gaul. Some 50 years later, Clotilda converted Clovis and the Merovingian dynasty was born,birthing France.

Re: the quote, I am aware of the conversation, I quoted it for its literal value in the context I constructed.

Andrew Clearfield
7 days ago

@Carl Falcone @Andrew Clearfield

We seem to be agreed that the fall of Rome was a long, complex series of events, and that it was not, pace Gibbon, simply a question of moral decay nor was it the fault of the triumph of a 'pacifistic' Christianity over a 'vigorous' pagan religion.

I'm not sure what your point is regarding Theodoric. Was his purpose to assume the mantle of the Roman emperors or to dismantle what was left of the civilization they had built? More the former than the latter, I think. Aetius was assassinated the year Theodoric was born. I don't understand the link you've made. 

Despite the fact that the French trace the history of their monarchy from Clovis, he was more German than French, as were all the Merovingians. The Franks were a Germanic tribe. I was always taught that one can't speak of a "France" as distinct from a "Germany" until Charlemagne's empire was divided in 843. Aside from converting to Christianity I'm not sure how Clovis (who was barbarous in the extreme, as were his successors; read Gregory of Tours) demonstrates much in the way of purpose. Vigor he may have had, but to what end? Alaric and Attila were even more vigorous. As an agent of civilization, I suspect that Clovis was more inadvertent than intentional.

I must apologize: I was thinking of Theodoric II, "the Great", who is much better known to art historians, and those who have spent much time in northern Italy. Theodoric I did indeed ally himself with Aetius to defeat Attila's armies in 451. I'm not sure whether Theodoric's motive was to establish a novel, Germanic suzerainty over northern Gaul or simply rid himself of the Huns and exert Gothic influence over Gallo-Roman territory, but Aetius was, I thought, considered very much a Roman general, whether partly of "Scythian" origin or not. 

I still wonder whether the various armies scrambling to assert their sway over parts of the Roman Empire thought of themselves as destroying it to substitute something different, or inheriting its mantle. Although primarily Arians, the majority were Christian, I believe. And I think the "idea" of Rome exerted a fascination upon them long after the reality of its institutions had vanished. Is that the same or the opposite of today?

 

Prospectiv A-z bruce dunn
9 days ago

The author mistakes laws on paper for deep, cultural changes to reality. The EU was never what he imagines it to have been. Peoples take centuries of shared experiences to forge deep relationships, and a few years of bureaucratic wishful-thinking will never replace the bonds felt and allegiances held deep in their collective psyches. It's not a question of whether reassertive 'nation-cultures' will be dangerous per se, but how will they behave to each other as neighbors? 

Nationalism will never---and should never---die. And good for that. 

DOROTHY DIMOCK
9 days ago

I'd suggest that our own wannabe aristocracy (of which Obama is a part) has too much emotional investment in a "vision" of Europe. The vision is of a Europe that is stable, prosperous, pacifist, multicultural and totally secular. A Europe where people's physical needs are served by the state in return for conformity and 'faith' in the European ideal.

For them, it is unthinkable that this Europe, the place they see as the shining hope - a place, if they work hard and long enough, our aristocrats can bring America to emulate - could disintegrate. It's Europe - it cannot fail. So we can safely withdraw our attention.

The idea that their ideal state has existed because of American military power is anathema, because they want American military power to become irrelevant.

DAVID FISCHER
9 days ago

What globalists like Kaplan see as "dizzying incoherence" and "radically fractured" is actually the human-scaled and natural.

Haven't you people done enough damage?

Bernardus Pottker
7 days ago

@DAVID FISCHER Mr. Kaplan fails to understand that Europe is and will always be a place for Sovereign nations loosely united in a Federation. I know that the bureaucracy in Washington and Brussels would love to usurp the central powers to dominate the people. Unfortunately, in the US, Washington already has diminished the power of the States.. Decentralization is more efficient and democratic. In Europe, the fight is still going on and Mr. Kaplan is on the wrong side. He is ,it seems, somebody who loves the imperial powers of the Politicians and bureaucrats. Let's hope that Mr. Cameron succeeds in taking away much of the Central Power of Brussels and that the other European countries will join him. France, always a Paris-centered undemocratic country since the Kings, is the most dangerous power, followed by guilt-stricken Germany. We hope that the new countries, liberated from the Communist oppression will be the most vocal in their fight for sovereignty and liberty from Brussels.

WILLARD PHELPS
7 days ago

@Bernardus Pottker @DAVID FISCHER

I suggest that the EU is more like a confederation than a federation. Part of the EUs problem is a central authority that is trying to fashion a federation rather than a free trade zone.

 

Prospectiv A-z Alonzo Quijana
9 days ago

Fractured Europe of the 15th and 16th centuries with its city-states like Genoa, Florence, and Venice produced amazing innovations, discoveries, and art. At the same time, bureaucratic and centralized China produced, well, not much. 

GERALD PRAGER
9 days ago

if you think the u.s. is in any mood to send troops and money to support a build up in europe, then you're living on another planet. spend a few weeks here in the u.s. and listen to the siren call of a trump or a sanders' speech, and to what their followers are saying. trump promises, at least for now, that other countries will have to pay up big time for our help, if we decide to even give it. scholars like yourself should wise up and formulate policy conditioned on a much different political climate shaping up here in the u.s. no one on this side of the atlantic cares one bit about rumania or lithuania, or any intermarium nation, as you put it, for that matter.

Massimo Mazzone
8 days ago

I do not agree with my wife at least once a week, and we did choose each other. What hope is there for 300 millions strangers with different ethics, interests, dreams and preference scales? That is why the US at federal level was supposed to be not much more than a league of defense, and each state was to decide what was best for its citizens in order to pursue happiness as they saw fit. If I felt that New York was too socialist, I could move, for example, to South Carolina, and vice-versa.

By the way, the neo-cons always oversell the "external threat". Short of being ready to exterminate the local population, the cost of an occupation is always higher than its supposed benefits. The British learned it in America, Napoleon in Spain, the Americans in the Philippines and the Soviets in Afghanistan. Hitler did not invade Switzerland because he was afraid of their militias, and he could not exterminate the Swiss, good Aryans, instead of untermenshen like in the East. Putin is now annexing only territories where most of the population wants to be Russian to start with. Even the Chinese current leadership, I am sure, regrets Mao's decision to invade Tibet.

Therefore, yes, contrary to the piece, I do believe that the best course for Europeans would be to return to a continent with 1000 city-states competing economically, with free movement of people, goods and capital, like it was in Germany before the rise of Prussia.

https://massimo.liberty.me/it-is-time-to-abandon-the.../Vezi traducerea

 

 

It is time to abandon the Nation-State - Notes from the frontier

MASSIMO.LIBERTY.ME

 

Prospectiv A-z dan hill
dan hill
8 days ago

Kaplan - I agree with much of your article, except for you perception of Russia as an enemy. Russia is no longer communist, no longer has an iron curtain, no longer hates Christianity (in fact it is now more Christian than most of the West), and is not full of war-mongers. Putin has not "over-run" Eastern Ukraine. If he really wanted to "over-run" Ukraine, he could take the whole country in about a week. He is supporting basically 2 cities (Donetsk and Lugansk) that wanted independence from the new virulently anti-Russian administration that your friend Victoria Nuland helped put in place in Kyiv. I have lived in Moscow for 22 years - and can say that we have made a big mistake in advancing NATO to Russia's borders and trying to isolate them. Better to have Russia as an ally - which they would like to be.

Aristide Caratzas
8 days ago

Actually, my friend Robert Kaplan has it backward when it comes to Russia — it is not Russia's Putin that was the aggressor, but Mrs. Nuland and her ilk that brazenly toppled the legally elected government of the Ukraine and imposed a regime backed by all manner of monsters evoking a Nazi-collaborator past. Of course much of this was due Obama's apparent indifference (and ignorance).

It is interesting that the Nuland line prevailed and drove a wedge between the Europeans and Russia — there was little issue of conflict before that and much by way of financial relations as hundreds of German, French and other companies had investments in Russia, and there was little hint of trouble.

Indeed, if the US policy were not disruptive, many European states (including those from the late and unlamented Iron Curtain) would have been much more far along peaceful and mutually (inter alia, economically) rewarding relations with Russia. Such relations would benefit both Europe and the United States.

David O'Hanlon
8 days ago

The EU is founded upon a basic contradiction in that its raison d'être is anti-American pacifism, socialism and post modern moral relativism but in order to survive it requires U.S. military power, free markets and western civilization. In Obama EU elites have finally found a US President to their liking and the result has been catastrophic.

James Ransom
8 days ago

A few days ago we read that in Spain's Christmas Lottery, Spaniards plunked down an amount equal to 1% of their annual GDP. The article also said that this was the same amount Spain spends on national defense. The same approximate expenditures can be attributed to other NATO members. The Great Hegemon (aka the American taxpayer) has been defending these Europeans for 60 years at great cost in blood and treasure, while they enjoy their extended vacations, early retirements, big pensions and, of course, subsidized medical care and freedom to travel. This hedonism has led to low birth rates and a fin de siècle attitude. 

Louis XIV said, "Apres moi, le deluge," but he didn't change his ways. One sees this same attitude in Europe today.

 

Prospectiv A-z .
Marta Nora Țărnea 24.01.2016 File de jurnal politic
Fără să fie o noutate, în fond istoria rescrisă nu se bazează doar pe informaţii noi, tot mai multe cărţi sau articole în care concluziile dorite impun interpretarea conţinutului. Sunt scrise sau comandate de cei care îi ironizează pe adepţii teoriilor conspiraţioniste, adesea pe bună dreptate, dar care sunt un instrument sarcastic al intereselor comune unor grupuri ai căror membri de multe ori nici măcar nu se cunosc personal. 
Chiar şi atunci când scrierile se bazează pe adevăruri documentate, locurile comune folosite cu rea-credinţa, dar mai ales sarcasmul bine mascat sau făţiş sunt cele care conduc spre concluziile dorite.
„Noua hartă medievală a Europei". Nu de prea mult ori am citit un titlul mai potrivit politicii de dezbinare a noilor imperii, utilizând aşa zisa politica corectă cu ale sale unelte abuziv folosite: drepturile popoarelor, drepturile omului (copilului), egalitatea de şanse, egalitatea în faţa legii, egalitatea sexelor, chiar şi drepturile animalelor şi altele asemenea, al căror dublu tăiş scrâşneşte prin limbajul de tinichea folosit. Da, ca un contra curent la globalizare şi mondializare (a intereselor afacerilor desigur) harta Europei este tot mai fărâmiţată.
În cea ce priveşte România nimeni nu o să-mi scoată din cap că tratarea sa detaşat de grupul de la Visegrad avea vreo legătură cu Puterea de la Bucureşti şi politica Statului român. Acesta avea un guvern cât se poate de reformator, şi, chiar dacă nepregătit şi deja penetrat de puterea reală, cel mai de bună credinţă şi mai puţin corupt parlament de după 1989. De loc întâmplătoare multitudinea interpretărilor istoriei din anii 1989-1996.
A fost vorba, şi încă mai este, de continuarea utilizării României în strategia războiului rece, aşa cum a fost utilizată, pe seama suferinţelor cetăţenilor săi, din clipa în care comunismul naţionalist a lui Dej, dar mai ales Ceauşescu, de dragul dictaturii foarte personale interne, desigur bazată pe dorinţa de putere, cu orice preţ, subliniez cu orice preţ, a unei semnificative părţi a elitelor, juca la două capete, pierzând încrederea ambelor tabere. 
Războiul rece, în fapt nu s-a încheiat, sfârşitul său oficial, aşa cum îi spun în ghilimele în filele mele politice, marcat de căderea zidului Berlinului şi lanţurile de revoluţii şi lovituri de stat din Europa fostă comunistă (inclusiv URSS) nefiind decât o etapă foarte importantă dar nu sfârşitul real al acestuia. 
Imperiile secolului al XXI-lea, dincolo de legendele despre incompetenţa lor cu privire la istoria şi cultura neocoloniilor lor, în fapt cunoşteau exact metehnele elitelor din România, - şi nu mă refer doar la elitele politice -, cea mai importantă fiind menţinerea la Putere – şi nu mă refer neapărat la cea oficială, ci la Puterea reală - cu orice preţ.
Suntem „oul de cuc" al Europei în comportamentul elitelor pentru că originarea mentalităţilor sale este neschimbată din feudalismul bizantino-balcanic, regalitatea nereuşind decât o schimbare bună dar de departe insuficientă, de aceea în loc de Curte regală provenită din aristocraţie, am avut o camarilă regală, mediul academic civil, militarşi ecumenic, perpetuând un elitism secuvinist de „gaşcă", şi din acest motiv cu destule accente ce seamănă cu trădările.
În plus realmente suntem cea mai rusofobă ţară fostă comunistă. Nu fac excepţie nici măcar fostele republici ale URSS. Mă refer la o rusofobie compactă, fără voci semnificative, ca număr măcar, dubitative. 
În ceea ce priveşte germano-scepticismul aş fi mai rezervată. Avem prea multe complexe de inferioritate, adesea inexplicabile, pentru a nu avea reţinerile mele, foarte serioase. Dar, ţinând seama că cele se superioritate, acestea doar aparent inexplicable, - toate au izvorul în naţionalismul bazat pe simboluri, exces de superlative, istorii mai mult sau mai puţin contrafăcute - şi care sunt, cel puţin la elite, dominate, da, putem admite şi un scepticism faţă de toţi cei diferiţi. 
Realmente, ambele mentalităţi - uneori generatoare de comportamente (decizii, acţiuni) - au fost şi sunt magistral utilizate în strategiile imperiilor jucătoare în noua fază a războiului rece, cel ce poate părea mai degrabă economic. 
De aici marile noastre nedumeriri şi de acum chiar revolte, este drept fără şanse de coagulare în vreo mişcare semnificativă - fără elite cum ?! -, faţă de susţinerile pe faţă a unor politici, partide, persoane, prin ignorarea celor mai banale reguli ale democraţiei şi Statului de drept. 
Şi de aceea ne continuăm drumul european plătind toate costurile mai puţin obţinând şi beneficiile, oricum tot mai mici, rămânând o ţară cu o majoritate săracă, datorită muncii slab retribuite. Mereu sunt alte priorităţi – desigur ale interesului naţional! – care amână o valorizare justă a muncii, singura care ar micşora semnificativ corupţia-evaziunea fiscală şi ar schimba mentalitatea de descurcăreţi supravieţuitori.
Şi uite aşa, plecând de la naţional-comunism, am ajuns, de loc paradoxal, o ţară tot mai anaţională în care contează doar interesele elitelor vasali ai curţilor noilor imperii...

 

Smaranda Dobrescu Dupa un sfert de secol memoria colectiva pastreaza din ce in ce mai putine fapte ale perioadei postrevolutionare. Astfel, butada lui Roman "industria romaneasca -o gramada de fier vechi" a devenit cauza disparitiei multor intreprinderi de stat performante in ochii romanilor ce le-au construit, cauza instrainarii lor si a inceputului colonizarii in lipsa capitalului romanesc. Sigur ca putinele carti scrise in acea perioada, cum este "Lacrimile diminetii" a lui Adrian Severin prezinta punctul de vedere al reformistilor, adepti ai terapiei de soc. In legatura cu urmatoarea guvernare, a lui Vacaroiu exista un discurs persistent: ca nu ar fi fost reformista, nu a dorit sa privatizeze intreprinderile de stat, pierzand astfel contactul si sincronzarea cu grupul tarilor Visegrad. In ochii Vestului acesta era un lucru nou,nedezirabil, desi Kaplan reconsidera azi acele actiuni. 
De fapt, nu reformele si continutul lor reprezentau problema de fond a guvernarii Vacaroiu la inceputul mandatului sau, ci lipsa resurselor financiare necesare mentinerii in functiune a aparatului productiv, adaptarii lui la noul context, includerii economiei romanesti in procesul de globalizare. Chiar daca s-ar fi cunoscut intocmai pasii optimi de parcurs, dovada restructurarea economiei dupa 4 ani de guvernare, inflatia uriasa declansata odata cu liberalizarea preturilor a impiedicat accelerarea proceselor de reforma.
La aceste elemente obiective s-a adaugat contextul international:In jurul nostru erau grave conflicte, precum cel din Iugoslavia, Transnistria, destramarea URSS , proces plin de pericole si conflicte , unele nerezolvate nici astazi. Acestea au determinat investitiile straine sa stea departe de noi iar dobanzile la imprumuturile externe, atunci cand se puteau aborda sa fie de neacceptat. In concluzie, in acea perioada, Romania se pare ca nu avea alta optiune decat sa foloseasca aparatul productiv existent pentru a genera sursele necesare lui si pregatirii pentru privatizare. Adica, exact opusul terapiei de soc. 
Blamati atunci de lipsa reformelor si de persistenta comunistilor la putere, acum iata, suntem laudati pentru colonizarea lenta care a permis celor interesati sa mentina vie dorinta de integrare a romanilor cat mai mult timp si de a-i tine departe de trendul de revenire a curentelor nationaliste, centrifuge fata de integrare.
Guvernul nostru actual si personal, de factura coloniala are nevoie uneori si de laude pentru incurajare si stimulare, caci noile guverne suveraniste, nationalist conservatoare prea s-au invatat sa spuna si NU cand interesele tarii o cer.Atunci, intervine M.Kaplan.

 

Mihai Ion Turcu Nu stiu ce rezultat vor avea alegerile din anul acesta. Avem nevoie de ceva ce sa putem sustine, consilii locale, parlament guvern presedinte.Daca am avea am putea spune NU si guverna in interes national fiind parte a UE.

 

Alexandru Botu Doamna Smaranda Dobrescu daca despre afirmatiile si actiunile catastrofale pentru economia romaneasca vom folosi in continuare adjective/atribute de tip "butada" vom ramane de ras. In timp ce altii in mod programatic faceau dezastre, noi continuam sa-i creditam cu glume, cu povestioare nevinovate. Nu stiu daca altfel s-ar sesiza cineva, dar sigur nu daca o dam pe gluma.

 

Smaranda Dobrescu Alexandru, nu te poticni te rog in "butada", poti sa intelegi exprimare, declaratie, etc. Intentia a fost tocmai aceea de a atrage atentia despre o perceptie a romanilor de tip dezastru, mai ales pe masura ce nu a aparut in loc nici o bijuterie de fabrica, nici macar tot o gramada de fier vechi.

 

Alexandru Botu Nu va reprosez nimic, Doamna. As fi nedrept si nepoliticos, ceea ce nu se cuvine. Cele scrise de Dumneavoastra sunt, dupa cum bine stiti, citite de foarte multi din afara atelierului. Au dreptul si ei la speranta.

 

Smaranda Dobrescu Sandule, chiar te rog sa ma contrazici cand gresesc. Cred ca ti-as fi recunoscatoare.De data asta, recunosc o neadecvare de cuvant, nu de sens. emoticon smile

 

Prospectiv A-z Permiteti-mi, va rog, sa reiau unul din multele comentarii de mai sus:

GERALD PRAGER
9 days ago

if you think the u.s. is in any mood to send troops and money to support a build up in europe, then you're living on another planet. spend a few weeks here in the u.s. and listen to the siren call of a trump or a sanders' speech, and to what their followers are saying. trump promises, at least for now, that other countries will have to pay up big time for our help, if we decide to even give it. scholars like yourself should wise up and formulate policy conditioned on a much different political climate shaping up here in the u.s. no one on this side of the atlantic cares one bit about rumania or lithuania, or any intermarium nation, as you put it, for that matter.

Scuze pentru incadrarea in extenso facuta scrierilor lui Kaplan, dar cititorul atent poate observa cum se structureaza argumentul/miza in cercul cititorilor WSJ, ziarul sora-de-dreapta al NYTimes.

Mai adaug doar ca RD Kaplan este asociat formal cu Stratfor, acest echivalent modern al corsarilor de odinioara...

 

Gheorghe Gradinaru Si eu sunt de acord cu opinia exprimata de Pragher Gerald " no one on this side of the atlantic cares one bit about rumania or lithuania, or any intermarium nation,".Pe de alta parte politica externa a SUA nu este apanajul majoritati americanilor carepoate fi manipulata destul de usor.
In opinia mea cea ce scrie Kaplan este de luat in calcul deoarece reprezinta un grup de interese cu putere de influenta in randul factorilor de decizie privind politica externa a SUA in zona noastra.

 

Prospectiv A-z GG, e prea tarziu. Zona intermarium va pica la prima pala siberiana. Speranta *factorilor de decizie* este ca Rusia va ceda mai intai.

Daca te uiti, ai sa vezi ca URSSul trebuia sa pice de mai multe ori in estimarile factorilor de decizie occidentali dela cele mai inalte nivele. 

La momentul de fata, se pare ca rusilor le e mai rau decat le-a fost in mult timp, dar au si ei *un grup de interese cu putere de influenta in randul factorilor de decizie*...

P.S. Iata cat valoreaza Romania: http://www.mediafax.ro/.../mcdonald-s-a-vandut...

 

 

McDonald's a vândut operaţiunile din România

MEDIAFAX.RO

 

Mihai Ion Turcu Rusia a renuntat la URSS, implicit la enorme cheltuieli dictate de ideea revolutiei socialiste mondiale. Acuma are o politica ruseasca.Este interesata de cateva puncte strategice, printre ele posibil si Odesa si RMoldova. "Intermarium"este un proiect strategic american, complementar din pacate cu spatele european fragil. Intre SUA si Rusia va surveni o conventie de status quo. Atragerea Ucrainei in UE este cauza pierduta. Ucraina este o rusie. Faptul ca securitatea Romaniei depinde tot mai mult de SUA, ne costa. Cu SUA nu prea putem negocia. UE ne lasa cu placere pe seama SUA , scapa de o serie de probleme castigand securitate cu zero investitii. Cast valoreaza Romania pentru SUA ? Atata cat costa securitatea Romaniei in proiectul strategic SUA si cat pot jupui investitorii americani din Romania.