What do you think?
Rate this book
Flashpoints: The Emerging Crisis in Europe
A major new book by New York Times bestselling author and geopolitical forecaster George Friedman (The Next 100 Years), with a bold thesis about coming events in Europe. This provocative work examines "flashpoints," unique geopolitical hot spots where tensions have erupted throughout history, and where conflict is due to emerge again.
With remarkable accuracy, George Friedman has forecasted coming trends in global politics, technology, population, and culture. In Flashpoints, Friedman focuses on Europe--the world's cultural and power nexus for the past five hundred years . . . until now. Analyzing the most unstable, unexpected, and fascinating borderlands of Europe and Russia--and the fault lines that have existed for centuries and have been ground zero for multiple catastrophic wars--Friedman highlights, in an unprecedentedly personal way, the flashpoints that are smoldering once again.
The modern-day European Union was crafted in large part to minimize built-in geopolitical tensions that historically have torn it apart. As Friedman demonstrates, with a mix of rich history and cultural analysis, that design is failing. Flashpoints narrates a living history of Europe and explains, with great clarity, its most volatile regions: the turbulent and ever-shifting land dividing the West from Russia (a vast area that currently includes Ukraine, Belarus, and Lithuania); the ancient borderland between France and Germany; and the Mediterranean, which gave rise to Judaism and Christianity and became a center of Islamic life.
Through Friedman's seamless narrative of townspeople and rivers and villages, a clear picture of regions and countries and history begins to emerge. Flashpoints is an engrossing analysis of modern-day Europe, its remarkable past, and the simmering fault lines that have awakened and will be pivotal in the near future. This is George Friedman's most timely and, ultimately, riveting book.
With remarkable accuracy, George Friedman has forecasted coming trends in global politics, technology, population, and culture. In Flashpoints, Friedman focuses on Europe--the world's cultural and power nexus for the past five hundred years . . . until now. Analyzing the most unstable, unexpected, and fascinating borderlands of Europe and Russia--and the fault lines that have existed for centuries and have been ground zero for multiple catastrophic wars--Friedman highlights, in an unprecedentedly personal way, the flashpoints that are smoldering once again.
The modern-day European Union was crafted in large part to minimize built-in geopolitical tensions that historically have torn it apart. As Friedman demonstrates, with a mix of rich history and cultural analysis, that design is failing. Flashpoints narrates a living history of Europe and explains, with great clarity, its most volatile regions: the turbulent and ever-shifting land dividing the West from Russia (a vast area that currently includes Ukraine, Belarus, and Lithuania); the ancient borderland between France and Germany; and the Mediterranean, which gave rise to Judaism and Christianity and became a center of Islamic life.
Through Friedman's seamless narrative of townspeople and rivers and villages, a clear picture of regions and countries and history begins to emerge. Flashpoints is an engrossing analysis of modern-day Europe, its remarkable past, and the simmering fault lines that have awakened and will be pivotal in the near future. This is George Friedman's most timely and, ultimately, riveting book.
258 pages, Hardcover
First published January 27, 2015
About the author
George Friedman
53 books578 followersGeorge Friedman is an internationally recognized geopolitical forecaster and strategist on international affairs and the founder and chairman of Geopolitical Futures.
A New York Times bestselling author, Dr. Friedman's most recent book, THE STORM BEFORE THE CALM: America’s Discord, the Coming Crisis of the 2020s, and the Triumph Beyond, published February 25, describes how “the United States periodically reaches a point of crisis in which it appears to be at war with itself, yet after an extended period it reinvents itself, in a form both faithful to its founding and radically different from what it had been.” The decade 2020-2030 is such a period which will bring dramatic upheaval and reshaping of American government, foreign policy, economics, and culture.
His most popular book, The Next 100 Years, is kept alive by the prescience of its predictions. Other best-selling books include Flashpoints: The Emerging Crisis in Europe, The Next Decade, America’s Secret War, The Future of War and The Intelligence Edge. His books have been translated into more than 20 languages. Dr. Friedman has briefed numerous military and government organizations in the United States and overseas and appears regularly as an expert on international affairs, foreign policy and intelligence in major media.
For almost 20 years before resigning in May 2015, Dr. Friedman was CEO and then chairman of Stratfor, a company he founded in 1996. Friedman received his bachelor’s degree from the City College of the City University of New York and holds a doctorate in government from Cornell University.
A New York Times bestselling author, Dr. Friedman's most recent book, THE STORM BEFORE THE CALM: America’s Discord, the Coming Crisis of the 2020s, and the Triumph Beyond, published February 25, describes how “the United States periodically reaches a point of crisis in which it appears to be at war with itself, yet after an extended period it reinvents itself, in a form both faithful to its founding and radically different from what it had been.” The decade 2020-2030 is such a period which will bring dramatic upheaval and reshaping of American government, foreign policy, economics, and culture.
His most popular book, The Next 100 Years, is kept alive by the prescience of its predictions. Other best-selling books include Flashpoints: The Emerging Crisis in Europe, The Next Decade, America’s Secret War, The Future of War and The Intelligence Edge. His books have been translated into more than 20 languages. Dr. Friedman has briefed numerous military and government organizations in the United States and overseas and appears regularly as an expert on international affairs, foreign policy and intelligence in major media.
For almost 20 years before resigning in May 2015, Dr. Friedman was CEO and then chairman of Stratfor, a company he founded in 1996. Friedman received his bachelor’s degree from the City College of the City University of New York and holds a doctorate in government from Cornell University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 205 reviews
March 24, 2015
Flashpoints packs in some good information but it is too cursory, needlessly conspiratorial and unfoundedly biased.
Almost a half of the short book is a summary of the "European" history. From protestant reformation and renaissance to scientific revolution, French revolution and Napoleonic wars, colonialism, Marxism and the two big wars to the fall of the Wall and even the 2008 GFC along with the rise and decline of many states and kingdoms (I am getting breathless just highlighting some of the topics covered!) are discussed with summaries that are likely to be useful only to those completely uninitiated. The biases present in deriving the implications of these events are more galling because of a near complete lack of substantive proofs - for instance, the rise of Germany's economy (like Japan's) post WW2 is solely attributed to the US tariff policies and is apparently desired by Germany to reassert its regional superiority in the absence of militarism rather than any wish to have prosperity.
The book turns more interesting as the author begins his European travelogue. There are good insights when the book leaves the known or larger Western European countries to describe the life in the Balkan, the Baltic, the Caucasus or the Carpathian regions. Even if there are as many errors and sweeping generalizations in these sections as elsewhere, for most like me they will not be as apparent.
The discussion turns shallow again when the author journeys the larger countries. From the English' use of the cutlery to the French's "comfort with contradictions",many absurd history lessons and supposed facts are used to draw massive predictions. Effectively, the premise is that in Europe everyone hates everyone else as they have a lot of bad history. Nobody is anyone's friend as per the author. The author expects some economic, social or political tension somewhere or the other to result in massive chaos because of the hidden animosities.
In some ways, the author's personal history and/or pre-conceived conclusions mar the book from the start to the end. With the logic provided here, the author would have forecasted WW3 all through the cold war. Or he would make equally strong case for civil wars leading to the break-ups in the US, China or India. Wars will happen again. And people do have long memories. But whenever and wherever next wars happen, they will not be for the reasons explained here (at least largely).
Almost a half of the short book is a summary of the "European" history. From protestant reformation and renaissance to scientific revolution, French revolution and Napoleonic wars, colonialism, Marxism and the two big wars to the fall of the Wall and even the 2008 GFC along with the rise and decline of many states and kingdoms (I am getting breathless just highlighting some of the topics covered!) are discussed with summaries that are likely to be useful only to those completely uninitiated. The biases present in deriving the implications of these events are more galling because of a near complete lack of substantive proofs - for instance, the rise of Germany's economy (like Japan's) post WW2 is solely attributed to the US tariff policies and is apparently desired by Germany to reassert its regional superiority in the absence of militarism rather than any wish to have prosperity.
The book turns more interesting as the author begins his European travelogue. There are good insights when the book leaves the known or larger Western European countries to describe the life in the Balkan, the Baltic, the Caucasus or the Carpathian regions. Even if there are as many errors and sweeping generalizations in these sections as elsewhere, for most like me they will not be as apparent.
The discussion turns shallow again when the author journeys the larger countries. From the English' use of the cutlery to the French's "comfort with contradictions",many absurd history lessons and supposed facts are used to draw massive predictions. Effectively, the premise is that in Europe everyone hates everyone else as they have a lot of bad history. Nobody is anyone's friend as per the author. The author expects some economic, social or political tension somewhere or the other to result in massive chaos because of the hidden animosities.
In some ways, the author's personal history and/or pre-conceived conclusions mar the book from the start to the end. With the logic provided here, the author would have forecasted WW3 all through the cold war. Or he would make equally strong case for civil wars leading to the break-ups in the US, China or India. Wars will happen again. And people do have long memories. But whenever and wherever next wars happen, they will not be for the reasons explained here (at least largely).
March 8, 2015
Friedman is in serious need of an editor. The first two sections, which intend to provide a brief history of 500 years of European history, are too short to be useful and too long to be interesting. The third part, which actually discusses the flashpoints of the title, is often unfocused and rambling. Interesting idea, but it should either have been a long form article on the European flashpoints of the third section, or a shorter book that provided a more focused discussion of flashpoints around the globe.
April 10, 2016
Job well done from the Master of geopolitics
Deep understanding of the roots of European conflicts of the the last 500 years of its history. It makes a fascinating and enlightening read. A little sad, maybe, because of the clear understanding that the wars are far from over. Nothing new for me. More then that, it actually proofed my own predictions which I shared in my own writing (see my novel "Fort Ross").
Deep understanding of the roots of European conflicts of the the last 500 years of its history. It makes a fascinating and enlightening read. A little sad, maybe, because of the clear understanding that the wars are far from over. Nothing new for me. More then that, it actually proofed my own predictions which I shared in my own writing (see my novel "Fort Ross").
October 8, 2023
Flashpoints is a book written by the well known geopolitical analyst George Friedman about the upcoming crisis in Europe.
The main flashpoints discussed are the Balkans/former Yugoslavia, the Caucasus, the Russia-Ukraine border, Turkey or the Mediterranean but also some very unlikely areas such as the French-German border or the French-English channel. Some of the predictions of Friedman are actually quite accurate especially when it comes to Russia and the Mediteranean.
There are some very interesting discussions about Russia and the Caucasus and about the Eurocrisis and the competing interests of Germany and France following 2008. But there are also some very dated assessments. I found particularly ridiculous the claim that Germany wanted to punish the Cypriot middle class. No, they just wanted to get their money and they didn't care what impacted it would have. There is no discussion about the Northern-Ireland border even though UK sentiment had been turning against the EU before actual Brexit occurred (the book was written in 2015 so obviously Brexit is not actually discussed).
Friedman spent way too much talking about the history of Europe and European expansion. That is interesting in itself but it's not that relevant when it comes to the actual flashpoints.
Overall the book is probably a 2.5 out of 5 but rounded it 3.
The main flashpoints discussed are the Balkans/former Yugoslavia, the Caucasus, the Russia-Ukraine border, Turkey or the Mediterranean but also some very unlikely areas such as the French-German border or the French-English channel. Some of the predictions of Friedman are actually quite accurate especially when it comes to Russia and the Mediteranean.
There are some very interesting discussions about Russia and the Caucasus and about the Eurocrisis and the competing interests of Germany and France following 2008. But there are also some very dated assessments. I found particularly ridiculous the claim that Germany wanted to punish the Cypriot middle class. No, they just wanted to get their money and they didn't care what impacted it would have. There is no discussion about the Northern-Ireland border even though UK sentiment had been turning against the EU before actual Brexit occurred (the book was written in 2015 so obviously Brexit is not actually discussed).
Friedman spent way too much talking about the history of Europe and European expansion. That is interesting in itself but it's not that relevant when it comes to the actual flashpoints.
Overall the book is probably a 2.5 out of 5 but rounded it 3.
June 18, 2015
I had been intending to read a current political/economic analysis of Europe and its challenges for the future, considering the 2008 financial crisis and its fallout, the possibility of countries opting out of the EU, and the strategic implications of recent Russian intervention in the Ukraine. This is not that book, as I quickly found out, but I decided to see what Friedman had to say.
Friedman, according to the publisher’s blurb on the jacket flap, founded Stratfor, “the world’s leading private intelligence company.” One envisions some sort of trench-coat antics, but in fact, my research determined that Friedman has gathered a group of people to scour publicly available information and then assemble that into a package sold to clients willing to spend $40,000 per year for a subscription. In one Atlantic article, the author said that leading foreign policy analysts think of Friedman as a businessman repackaging "last week’s The Economist articles" for his unsuspecting clients. My research also indicated that in at least a few of Friedman’s previous best-selling books, he made predictions about Japan, the next decade, and the next 100 years. In the case of Japan, “The Coming War with Japan”, he was (reportedly) spectacularly wrong about nearly everything he predicted.
[As an aside: while doing so, I found information regarding a hack of Stratfor’s computers by Anonymous. It seems that they hacked emails, including one that announced Friedman’s resignation. Security experts determined that Stratfor had no firewalls protecting their data. Hmm.]
Although I by now suspected that this belonged to that class of books that contain very little astute analysis but whose authors have an astute pulse on what sells, I plunged in.
Friedman knows that what a lot of readers want to hear is about is violence, particularly the possibility of war(s) breaking out, and so this book is extremely light on global economics and globalization, and heavy on the political. As such, he seized on the motif of the haunting past, the premise that Europe has demons that it will never be rid of, and that the “European mind” (which he leaves unexplained) is fragmenting. For him, Europe (yes, apparently everyone) has forgotten the bad and the lessons of history. When it suits him, he makes bald assertions about Europe (in general) or a particular country without a cohesive argument before sprinting to his next conclusion of what is happening or will soon happen. Have you ever noticed that the predictions in these books are always negative?
Sometimes he relates entire paragraphs of historical facts before some baffling statement pops up. Apparently, he discerns that his target audience is a bit ignorant about European history, so a complete Rehash Lite of the last 500 years is in the offing. But, goodness me. So much has to be left out, so Friedman cherrypicks just the stuff that will bolster his assured opinions (in fact, the entire book can be considered a long editorial piece, or the ultimate blog entry of a mind leaping from one “flashpoint” to another, crossing those “borderlands” that have continued to foment so much military mischief in the past).
He starts off, however, with his personal story as the infant son of Hungarian Jews fleeing 1949 Budapest (having luckily survived the Holocaust). It’s an interesting tale that is not without its baffling omissions — suddenly they are somehow able to skirt being caught. I have to admit that I may have seen too many WWII films about betrayal to suppress some unease in this section. Basically, the section helps to add some 20 pages to the book (lessening the drudgery of composing the next 100 pages covering those 500 years that you should remember from history class but were too busy shooting spitballs at Tommy at the time).
On page 28, we get a map of the world labeled “Muslim population”, showing a shaded area that includes most of India. What is the shading supposed to mean? India has a population of over a billion people, but only 13% of that is Muslim. This map appears in a chapter primarily about Christian exploration of the world, so it’s puzzling as to its intent.
Sometimes I found myself thinking, really? 1912 was a very good year for Europe. No one saw WWI coming. Yow! I bet a lot of historians would reel at those two!
But compounding the problems is the extremely poor editing (or rather, lack thereof) of our author’s egregious factual errors. On page 109, the population of Britain is stated to be 94 million — it doesn’t matter if he’s talking about the 1950’s or today --the number has to somewhere downwards of 60 million, the current estimate. Oops. But wait, I forgot about page 83, and the first sentence of Chapter 5 — he states that Hitler committed suicide on May 5, 1945, not April 30, the actual date. I fact-checked those online in less than thirty seconds. Friedman thanks Rob Bloom in the Acknowledgments for “his close editing.” Well, you can pick who to blame. I knew that those were mistakes immediately, so it just made me think, what else is just blatantly wrong? Why the rush to publish a book so full of errors?
His discussion of Nazism is one example of where he just runs wild with his own beliefs without justification. He equates Nazism with nihilism without building a case for that claim. Also, even as a Jew he seems not to understand that Hitler was able to blame Jews for German woes because of many centuries of anti-Semitism and subsequent blame for calamities such as the bubonic plague in the 1300’s. The causes of both World Wars were the same, he says. Gee, is there anyone who might dispute that? Again, it’s stated without further comment.
Whew! Only 100 pages to go. To be fair, there is some informative stuff here if you haven’t been reading a newspaper or watching your favorite cable news station. But if you are a close follower of European events, then a lot of this you already know. Now he argues that EU is fragmenting (and he implies that this is irreversible — there’s no “unless…”) because they haven’t been able to deal with the 2008 crisis, wars in the Balkans and the Ukraine, etc. Well, the EU was only formed right when the Balkans blew up, and it’s an economic union, not a military one. So he blames them for not using military action, while at the same time acknowledging that NATO is primarily an American affair with token European effort. By the way, where is the map of NATO countries that would have been useful to the reader? I mean, he spends a fair number of page on them...
But one of the most ridiculous (at least, for me) notions is that resentment of Germany (from Greece and unnamed others), and a subsequent hostile public reaction in Germany, might push Germany into an alliance with Russia. Wow! Shades of Hitler and Stalin! Does anyone else find this one absurd? Maybe an action-filled sci-fi could be written around that premise (note to filmmakers: don’t forget the exploding helicopters. I love those).
June 17, 2017
I picked up this book because I am living in Europe for another 18 months and wanted a bit of forewarning or basic knowledge of what I could expect to see in European politics and economics prior to my leaving. Since my second tour of living in England, I have seen the Scottish Independence referendum, the Brexit vote, numerous terrorist incidents, austerity measures, and the rise of hard right-wing parties gaining more political clout and votes across Europe.
The book is broken down into three sections: the Enlightenment Era and the beginnings of modern science; the thirty-one years from the start of World War I to the end of World War II; and a regional look at the current political and economic climate of today's Europe. I hope the reader likes a lot of European history, because 2/3rds of the book is just that, with an additional introduction that tells the story of how Friedman's family escaped Europe and came to America. Honestly, I wished I had skipped the introduction and first section of the book - it had nothing to do with the rest of the book. Section two's history focus related and influenced what you will read in the third section, so please start there. Section two's history lesson is very basic, but puts all readers (regardless of their depth in World War II and modern European history) on the same page and ready for the third section's content.
I like how the third section was organized and I found the multiple maps of the region very useful; my geography skills get weaker the farther east I go into Europe. Germany and Russia are the dominant players within a lot of the third section's content. Luckily, I found no Muslim bashing; when the conflicts arise between the Muslim and Christian world views, there was a balance to the writing and a depth of knowledge given. Friedman is definitely in the camp of viewing the EU and NATO as too weak to be of anything effective or significant. I found my knowledge growing of little talked about regions such as the Balkans and Baltic states as I read their respective chapters.
I was disappointed in the chapter on Britain - there wasn't much talk of the upcoming (as of the date published, Brexit was just in the beginnings of the campaign stages) EU referendum, the Scottish Independence referendum vote was swept under the rug, and there was no talk about the growing popularity of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) or the rise in both Islamphobia and anti-Semitism (the UK editions of the newspaper The Guardian has a few articles on the latter you should check out). There was also very little to no talk of the backlash to the austerity measures the Tories have enacted. The crisis point here may be internal, but no less flammable, as the riots and demonstrations have shown.
Overall, a good primer for Americans to learning more about European politics and economics today and what to look for in the near future. But it would also help to read newspaper and magazine articles from specific countries as well to keep your knowledge accurate and up to date.
The book is broken down into three sections: the Enlightenment Era and the beginnings of modern science; the thirty-one years from the start of World War I to the end of World War II; and a regional look at the current political and economic climate of today's Europe. I hope the reader likes a lot of European history, because 2/3rds of the book is just that, with an additional introduction that tells the story of how Friedman's family escaped Europe and came to America. Honestly, I wished I had skipped the introduction and first section of the book - it had nothing to do with the rest of the book. Section two's history focus related and influenced what you will read in the third section, so please start there. Section two's history lesson is very basic, but puts all readers (regardless of their depth in World War II and modern European history) on the same page and ready for the third section's content.
I like how the third section was organized and I found the multiple maps of the region very useful; my geography skills get weaker the farther east I go into Europe. Germany and Russia are the dominant players within a lot of the third section's content. Luckily, I found no Muslim bashing; when the conflicts arise between the Muslim and Christian world views, there was a balance to the writing and a depth of knowledge given. Friedman is definitely in the camp of viewing the EU and NATO as too weak to be of anything effective or significant. I found my knowledge growing of little talked about regions such as the Balkans and Baltic states as I read their respective chapters.
I was disappointed in the chapter on Britain - there wasn't much talk of the upcoming (as of the date published, Brexit was just in the beginnings of the campaign stages) EU referendum, the Scottish Independence referendum vote was swept under the rug, and there was no talk about the growing popularity of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) or the rise in both Islamphobia and anti-Semitism (the UK editions of the newspaper The Guardian has a few articles on the latter you should check out). There was also very little to no talk of the backlash to the austerity measures the Tories have enacted. The crisis point here may be internal, but no less flammable, as the riots and demonstrations have shown.
Overall, a good primer for Americans to learning more about European politics and economics today and what to look for in the near future. But it would also help to read newspaper and magazine articles from specific countries as well to keep your knowledge accurate and up to date.
September 2, 2022
Avrupa'daki politik patlama noktalarının tarihsel arka planları ışığında geleceğe dair öngörüler içeren bir kitap. Avrupa ve çevre ülkelerde yaşanabilecek her problemin artık barış içinde, Avrupa Birliği gibi uluslararası örgütlerde müzakere ile çözümlenebileceğine yönelik genel kanıya ters iddialar sunuluyor. Özellikle Almanya'nın AB içindeki güçlenen ve domine eden pozisyonunun diğer AB ülkelerini düşürdüğü durum çarpıcı. Bu açıdan bakıldığında Almanya'ya ciddi ekonomik avantaj sağlayan bu sistemin, askeri caydırıcılığı olmayan, politik olarak güçsüz bir Almanya ile devamı çok zor şeklinde bir iddia mevcut. bkz: Almanya'nın Ukrayna krizi sonrası silahlanma kararı alması.
Rusya için ayrılan bölüm de ilginç. Yazar özellikle Rusya'nın Ukrayna, Belarus, Baltık ülkeleri hattındaki faaliyetlerini Rusya'nın politik ve coğrafi güvenliği açısından makbul ve meşru sayıyor. Amerikan bir yazarın bu yönde bir fikir belirt(ebil)mesi dikkate değer.
Kitapta Türkiye ile ilgili de bir bölüm var ancak çok doyurucu olduğunu söyleyemeyeceğim. Türkiye'nin kırılma ve patlama noktaları Kürt meselesi, Ermeni meselesi ve seküler-muhafazakar fay hatları olarak çizilmiş. Yazar, ayrıca Türkiye'nin içine kapanma sürecini atlattığını ve daha da çok güçleneceğini iddia ediyor ama çok fazla ayrıntı vermeden.
Avrupa politik durumuna ilgili kişiler için güzel, basit ve keyifli bir okuma olarak tavsiye edilir.
Rusya için ayrılan bölüm de ilginç. Yazar özellikle Rusya'nın Ukrayna, Belarus, Baltık ülkeleri hattındaki faaliyetlerini Rusya'nın politik ve coğrafi güvenliği açısından makbul ve meşru sayıyor. Amerikan bir yazarın bu yönde bir fikir belirt(ebil)mesi dikkate değer.
Kitapta Türkiye ile ilgili de bir bölüm var ancak çok doyurucu olduğunu söyleyemeyeceğim. Türkiye'nin kırılma ve patlama noktaları Kürt meselesi, Ermeni meselesi ve seküler-muhafazakar fay hatları olarak çizilmiş. Yazar, ayrıca Türkiye'nin içine kapanma sürecini atlattığını ve daha da çok güçleneceğini iddia ediyor ama çok fazla ayrıntı vermeden.
Avrupa politik durumuna ilgili kişiler için güzel, basit ve keyifli bir okuma olarak tavsiye edilir.
April 9, 2024
İkinci Dünya Savaşı’ndan sonra Avrupa’nın aldığı şekil üzerine bir kitap. Friedmann çokça yanlı bir kitap yazmış. Avrupa’nın geldiği hal hakkında okunabilir düşünceleri olsa da bu kaynaklardan bahsedişinden hoşlanmadım. Tüm liberallerin yaptığı gibi Sovyetleri, Nazi Almanyası ile bir tutuyor.
Yazarın özel istihbarat şirketi olduğu için takip edilmesi gereken insanlardan biri olarak söz ediliyor. Ama öngörülerinin boşa çıktığını söyleyebilirim. Bahsettiği kriz teorisi bir teori olarak kalmış.
Yazarın özel istihbarat şirketi olduğu için takip edilmesi gereken insanlardan biri olarak söz ediliyor. Ama öngörülerinin boşa çıktığını söyleyebilirim. Bahsettiği kriz teorisi bir teori olarak kalmış.
March 31, 2016
Geopolitics of today's Europe and how WWI and WW2 reflect on it. Geography, and nationalistic identity play great role.
Japan defeated in WWII is not allowed to have real army, yet Germany is, why? Because of Cold War and Germany's proximity to Russia so Americans armed them, and much more stuff like that in the book.
But I don't agree on the pessimistic view. And I am not relying on this book for predicting the future, I am here only for the historical information especially that I never read about WWI and WWII.
-----
I was fearing that the Jewish American author with Hungarian parents who escaped WW2 will exaggerate the horrible Holocaust, not being biased in the process, but no, he was far from that and even show how he and her parents are glad for what Horthy (the leader of Hungary who cooperated with Germany) did: "Horthy conceded the deportation of 100,000. In Europe at that time, this was what humanitarianism had degenerated into. A man who collaborated in killing only 100,000 but kept perhaps 800,000 others alive a bit longer was doing the best that could have been expected of him".
Then speaking of Hitler: "At certain point there are actions by states that defy rational analysis. I have tried to understand Hitler's view of the Jews and imagine what he was thinking. The decision to kill Jews had a logic, however bizarre, as we shall see later. But the decision to kill the Hungarian Jews in the face of the urgent need to focus all resources, at a time when the Allies were clearly planning to come ashore in France and the Red Army was surging westward, is a decision that is extremely difficult to follow. The logic does not work."
-----
The book isn't boring, it's filled with (interesting) stories, and add to that the poetic style of the author, at least in the beginning, where he makes Ode To Joy and Odyssey and Faust metaphors, I didn't think his poetic style is that good but at least he's trying. But the personal style in the first chapter, where he shows the history of Hungary and WW2 through the journey of his parents and his older and himself (six months years old) escaping the Nazis, you're suspended in the story and when they are finally in New York safe and sound you find that you learned a lot about the complex situation of WW2: They managed to escape Hungary to Austria through Czech because Stalin wanted to weaken England by befriending the Israelis, confused already?
-----
Copernicus showed that Earth is not the center of the universe, Columbus showed that Europe is not the center of Earth, Luther showed that the Catholic Church is not the center of Europe: every individual is the center, no one holds the absolute truth, certainty was going, nationalism and other things developed, conflict and conflict!
"Romantic nationalism rested on a commonality of culture, language, and religion, something it had in common with all other countries; thus, it was not superior to any. Therefore romantic nationalism could no longer mova a cynical and exhausted country, angry about what had happened [Germany after WW1]. Hitler believed that to resurrect Germany he had to resurrect pride. He redefined the foundation of nation, from culture to blood, from real history to toal myth ... The Grimm brothers saw myth as an element of the nation. Hitler saw myth [Teutonic knights], along with blood, as its essence ... When Hitler charged the Jews with being responsible for both capitalism and communism, he saw both as flowing from the same source, the Enlightenment."
Japan defeated in WWII is not allowed to have real army, yet Germany is, why? Because of Cold War and Germany's proximity to Russia so Americans armed them, and much more stuff like that in the book.
But I don't agree on the pessimistic view. And I am not relying on this book for predicting the future, I am here only for the historical information especially that I never read about WWI and WWII.
-----
I was fearing that the Jewish American author with Hungarian parents who escaped WW2 will exaggerate the horrible Holocaust, not being biased in the process, but no, he was far from that and even show how he and her parents are glad for what Horthy (the leader of Hungary who cooperated with Germany) did: "Horthy conceded the deportation of 100,000. In Europe at that time, this was what humanitarianism had degenerated into. A man who collaborated in killing only 100,000 but kept perhaps 800,000 others alive a bit longer was doing the best that could have been expected of him".
Then speaking of Hitler: "At certain point there are actions by states that defy rational analysis. I have tried to understand Hitler's view of the Jews and imagine what he was thinking. The decision to kill Jews had a logic, however bizarre, as we shall see later. But the decision to kill the Hungarian Jews in the face of the urgent need to focus all resources, at a time when the Allies were clearly planning to come ashore in France and the Red Army was surging westward, is a decision that is extremely difficult to follow. The logic does not work."
-----
The book isn't boring, it's filled with (interesting) stories, and add to that the poetic style of the author, at least in the beginning, where he makes Ode To Joy and Odyssey and Faust metaphors, I didn't think his poetic style is that good but at least he's trying. But the personal style in the first chapter, where he shows the history of Hungary and WW2 through the journey of his parents and his older and himself (six months years old) escaping the Nazis, you're suspended in the story and when they are finally in New York safe and sound you find that you learned a lot about the complex situation of WW2: They managed to escape Hungary to Austria through Czech because Stalin wanted to weaken England by befriending the Israelis, confused already?
-----
Copernicus showed that Earth is not the center of the universe, Columbus showed that Europe is not the center of Earth, Luther showed that the Catholic Church is not the center of Europe: every individual is the center, no one holds the absolute truth, certainty was going, nationalism and other things developed, conflict and conflict!
"Romantic nationalism rested on a commonality of culture, language, and religion, something it had in common with all other countries; thus, it was not superior to any. Therefore romantic nationalism could no longer mova a cynical and exhausted country, angry about what had happened [Germany after WW1]. Hitler believed that to resurrect Germany he had to resurrect pride. He redefined the foundation of nation, from culture to blood, from real history to toal myth ... The Grimm brothers saw myth as an element of the nation. Hitler saw myth [Teutonic knights], along with blood, as its essence ... When Hitler charged the Jews with being responsible for both capitalism and communism, he saw both as flowing from the same source, the Enlightenment."
March 17, 2015
If you watch or read international news in a state of befuddlement (which is where I find myself more often than not), this book is for you. “Flashpoints: the Emerging Crisis in Europe” is a good overview of Europe with some interesting analysis. The author looks backward & covers the last 500 years, with a focus on colonialism & how it has spawned so many of today’s problems. He explains why the geography of Europe is crucial to understanding it – why are mountainous regions so volatile, why is there such a difference between Northern Europe & Southern Europe?
In Chapter One the author describes how his family managed to escape from Hungary after WW II, it is dramatic & explains his unique perspective. By itself it is a fascinating tale on its own.
The spends a great deal of time explaining how things have played out on the borders of Europe & how they continue to show signs of strain that are "potentially" revealing about how Europe is slowly tearing itself apart. Though he states that she is forced to we see that Germany is once again exploiting the rest of Europe & this is clearly evident when you examine the size & sources of the economic imbalances being created in Europe.
Mr. Friedman also writes of the effects of liberalism, the enlightenment & scholars & philosophers & Hitler explains the growing seeds of nationalism that were always brewing.
He raises & answers many interesting questions: How did Germany end up starting two world Wars – yet is the most prosperous country in Europe today? What is the European Union (EU) & why is it in such turmoil today? Most importantly, why does Russia continue to threaten Europe?
It is a good read, & helps a great deal in making some sense from what is happening in Europe today.
In Chapter One the author describes how his family managed to escape from Hungary after WW II, it is dramatic & explains his unique perspective. By itself it is a fascinating tale on its own.
The spends a great deal of time explaining how things have played out on the borders of Europe & how they continue to show signs of strain that are "potentially" revealing about how Europe is slowly tearing itself apart. Though he states that she is forced to we see that Germany is once again exploiting the rest of Europe & this is clearly evident when you examine the size & sources of the economic imbalances being created in Europe.
Mr. Friedman also writes of the effects of liberalism, the enlightenment & scholars & philosophers & Hitler explains the growing seeds of nationalism that were always brewing.
He raises & answers many interesting questions: How did Germany end up starting two world Wars – yet is the most prosperous country in Europe today? What is the European Union (EU) & why is it in such turmoil today? Most importantly, why does Russia continue to threaten Europe?
It is a good read, & helps a great deal in making some sense from what is happening in Europe today.
February 24, 2015
Have to wonder if some of these 4 and 5 star reviews read the same book I did!
I understand the desire to immortalise one's family background, especially when it has been so fraught and full of courage and risk. However the amount of it included in this book, along with a very patchy 'whistlestop' tour of VERY selective points in European history, took up half the volume...way too much irrelevancy.
The analysis of the meat of the publication was also profoundly unconvincing. There was little actual analysis, and even less in the way of supporting evidence. The snippets of history used were cherry-picked and often not given a full context - this made it harder to trust/believe the results of the author's analysis. There was a lot of anecdotal description in place of professional level depiction.
There were strange, Amerocentric assumptions about what "Europe" is, thinks, wants, or will be in the future. There were huge,sweeping generalizations made about people or nations or that continent as a whole. The whole thing felt shallow and narrow, which made the hawkish viewpoints difficult to trust. As it's written by someone in the business of being paid for geopolitical advice, I suppose emphasizing aggression and crisis makes sense!
It is an easy, well-written volume that could certainly be enjoyed out of general interest in the region. The author is an accomplished writer (and it seems like he could produce a very successful book on his fascinating family history).
But I couldn't possibly recommend it to anyone for academic level reading, and I'd be highly concerned if policy makers were using it to inform their world-view!
I understand the desire to immortalise one's family background, especially when it has been so fraught and full of courage and risk. However the amount of it included in this book, along with a very patchy 'whistlestop' tour of VERY selective points in European history, took up half the volume...way too much irrelevancy.
The analysis of the meat of the publication was also profoundly unconvincing. There was little actual analysis, and even less in the way of supporting evidence. The snippets of history used were cherry-picked and often not given a full context - this made it harder to trust/believe the results of the author's analysis. There was a lot of anecdotal description in place of professional level depiction.
There were strange, Amerocentric assumptions about what "Europe" is, thinks, wants, or will be in the future. There were huge,sweeping generalizations made about people or nations or that continent as a whole. The whole thing felt shallow and narrow, which made the hawkish viewpoints difficult to trust. As it's written by someone in the business of being paid for geopolitical advice, I suppose emphasizing aggression and crisis makes sense!
It is an easy, well-written volume that could certainly be enjoyed out of general interest in the region. The author is an accomplished writer (and it seems like he could produce a very successful book on his fascinating family history).
But I couldn't possibly recommend it to anyone for academic level reading, and I'd be highly concerned if policy makers were using it to inform their world-view!
June 29, 2016
First, I'm a George Friedman fan. His perceptions of Geopolitics I find not only refreshing but well articulated and persuasive. His arguments are primarily based on the hard reality of how Geography often determines more of international politics than people. Leaders are ultimately forced to react to their Geography and that translates to the same conflicts re-occurring over and over again in the same areas. He argues that Europe's dark past is still alive and well just under the current veneer of wealth and prosperity and that the forces that drove conflict in the past will rear their demonic heads once more. To him there are 4 Europes and each is pulling in a different direction. The other problem the EU is facing is that they are Wealthy but Weak which is a dangerous combination because sooner or later human nature in that situation seeks to balance out that discrepancy.
I wouldn't say this is one of Friedman's better books but it felt extremely pertinent given the recent events in Europe with Britain's exit from the EU.
I wouldn't say this is one of Friedman's better books but it felt extremely pertinent given the recent events in Europe with Britain's exit from the EU.
September 11, 2018
Highly recommended if you are interested in the World War 1 & 2 and the geopolitics of Europe and Russia. George Friedman puts a lot of effort to make it so easy to understand. Every page is worth reading.
November 14, 2016
Spicuiri din recenzia finala care se gaseste pe blogul meu
..........................................
Nu am înțeles ce a vrut Friedman să facă în Puncte de presiune. Vrea să fie şi istoric, şi futurolog, şi analist geopolitic, totul amestecat într-o ciorbă care ajunge să plictisească cu atât mai mult cu cât autorul începe să îndruge verzi și uscate dovedind că ceea ce-și propune îi depășește atât inteligența cât și cunoștințele.
Friedman și-a propus ca în câteva zeci de pagini să treacă prin 500 de ani de istorie a continentului european considerând astfel că este suficient pentru a-și permite să fie lovit de o serie de revelații cu privire la apariția unor conflicte în Europa. O tentativă puerilă încă din start.
Dincolo de problemele de construcție ale cărții, Friedman abuzează de stilul oratoric manipulator și plin de idei conspiraționiste demne de situri și reviste pe care paranoicii le adoră.
Friedman e plictisitor, exprimările pe care le vrea inteligente sunt nefericite, nu reușește să se concentreze pe temele propuse și de multe ori vorbește de parcă e un bătrân ramolit care a uitat povestea pe care o spunea.
„Catolicismul era, în același timp, accesibil și foarte misterios, așa cum sunt toate modurile serioase de gândire” – nu, nu e de pe TNR, e din cartea lui Friedman.
Friedman mai departe nu face altceva decât să tragă concluziile că dacă ceva s-a întâmplat în Europa, dacă au fost unele conflicte armate, atunci acestea categoric se vor repeta și utilizează în interesul argumentului său cartea lui Norman Angell, Iluzia cea mare, în care autorul spune că în Europa nu se mai poate întâmpla vreun război datorită relațiilor care există între națiuni și a legăturilor strânse între investiții și comerț dintre acestea. La fel de ușor putea utiliza și mitul eternei reîntoarceri al lui Mircea Eliade, îl ajuta la fel de mult ca să tragă concluziile cu privire la exploziile punctelor de presiune pe care Friedman le citește atât de bine.
Pe scurt, teoria lui Friedman este una cât se poate de simplă și banală: dacă iei istoria Europei și analizezi modul în care s-au format statele din Europa actuală și adaugi câteva observații cu privire la cele două războaie mondiale, atunci poți identifica punctele de presiune care pot porni un nou război distrugător, acesta însemnând sfârșitul vechiului continent.
Revelator, de-a dreptul.
Ce-i scapă lui Friedman este că din Texas, SUA, e greu să-ți dai seama ce mai este în sufletul europenilor, cu atât mai greu cu cât ai în spate și amintirile, peste care nu prea poți să treci, pe care tatăl tău ți le-a lăsat moștenire – un evreu ungur care a reușit cu multe sacrificii să-și salveze familia din ghearele mașinăriei naziste de exterminare.
.......................................
..........................................
Nu am înțeles ce a vrut Friedman să facă în Puncte de presiune. Vrea să fie şi istoric, şi futurolog, şi analist geopolitic, totul amestecat într-o ciorbă care ajunge să plictisească cu atât mai mult cu cât autorul începe să îndruge verzi și uscate dovedind că ceea ce-și propune îi depășește atât inteligența cât și cunoștințele.
Friedman și-a propus ca în câteva zeci de pagini să treacă prin 500 de ani de istorie a continentului european considerând astfel că este suficient pentru a-și permite să fie lovit de o serie de revelații cu privire la apariția unor conflicte în Europa. O tentativă puerilă încă din start.
Dincolo de problemele de construcție ale cărții, Friedman abuzează de stilul oratoric manipulator și plin de idei conspiraționiste demne de situri și reviste pe care paranoicii le adoră.
Friedman e plictisitor, exprimările pe care le vrea inteligente sunt nefericite, nu reușește să se concentreze pe temele propuse și de multe ori vorbește de parcă e un bătrân ramolit care a uitat povestea pe care o spunea.
„Catolicismul era, în același timp, accesibil și foarte misterios, așa cum sunt toate modurile serioase de gândire” – nu, nu e de pe TNR, e din cartea lui Friedman.
Friedman mai departe nu face altceva decât să tragă concluziile că dacă ceva s-a întâmplat în Europa, dacă au fost unele conflicte armate, atunci acestea categoric se vor repeta și utilizează în interesul argumentului său cartea lui Norman Angell, Iluzia cea mare, în care autorul spune că în Europa nu se mai poate întâmpla vreun război datorită relațiilor care există între națiuni și a legăturilor strânse între investiții și comerț dintre acestea. La fel de ușor putea utiliza și mitul eternei reîntoarceri al lui Mircea Eliade, îl ajuta la fel de mult ca să tragă concluziile cu privire la exploziile punctelor de presiune pe care Friedman le citește atât de bine.
Pe scurt, teoria lui Friedman este una cât se poate de simplă și banală: dacă iei istoria Europei și analizezi modul în care s-au format statele din Europa actuală și adaugi câteva observații cu privire la cele două războaie mondiale, atunci poți identifica punctele de presiune care pot porni un nou război distrugător, acesta însemnând sfârșitul vechiului continent.
Revelator, de-a dreptul.
Ce-i scapă lui Friedman este că din Texas, SUA, e greu să-ți dai seama ce mai este în sufletul europenilor, cu atât mai greu cu cât ai în spate și amintirile, peste care nu prea poți să treci, pe care tatăl tău ți le-a lăsat moștenire – un evreu ungur care a reușit cu multe sacrificii să-și salveze familia din ghearele mașinăriei naziste de exterminare.
.......................................
February 26, 2015
The emerging crisis in Europe part of the book is only in the final third and it's lacking in great detail or discovery. First third is more biographical and then there's a full second third that's your basic high school history of Europe. Still, it held my attention and it moved fast. But I'd suggest skipping that middle section.
In the final third we finally get to the meat of the title. It's readable and interesting. But I don't think I came away from it learning a whole lot I didn't already know. Served as a nice refresher on recent European history and current events.
He seems to think NATO is is pretty sad shape. That was a bit startling to me. Sounds pretty reasonable though. He gives a good run down on Russia, Putin and the Ukraine (with Georgia in the rear view mirror). Could have gone into more depth on that. Russia gets about a 15 page chapter.
Also touches on Germany and the European Union a lot and I learned quite a few details I didn't know.
He only quotes a couple sources, maybe three or four. And there are no attributions. So it's basically commentary/editorial. I'd recommend borrowing it and just reading the final third.
In the final third we finally get to the meat of the title. It's readable and interesting. But I don't think I came away from it learning a whole lot I didn't already know. Served as a nice refresher on recent European history and current events.
He seems to think NATO is is pretty sad shape. That was a bit startling to me. Sounds pretty reasonable though. He gives a good run down on Russia, Putin and the Ukraine (with Georgia in the rear view mirror). Could have gone into more depth on that. Russia gets about a 15 page chapter.
Also touches on Germany and the European Union a lot and I learned quite a few details I didn't know.
He only quotes a couple sources, maybe three or four. And there are no attributions. So it's basically commentary/editorial. I'd recommend borrowing it and just reading the final third.
October 14, 2018
ABD'li stratejist George Friedman'ın kitabı, tarihi, ekonomik, coğrafi ve sosyolojik temelleriyle Avrupa'nın geçmişte yaşadığı krizler ve bu sorunlu alanlar ekseninde gelecek projeksiyonları üzerine...
Kitap 2015 gibi yeni bir tarihte basıldığı için (Türkçesi de 2015 yılı sonunda yayınlandı) gayet güncel. Bilhassa Almanya-Fransa-Rusya-İngiltere ekseninde krizlerin ele alınması, nispeten karamsar ama son derece gerçekçi bir çerçeve sunmuş. Tarihte Avrupa'nın altını üstüne getiren çatışmaların asla sona ermediği ve hemen hemen aynı toplum-coğrafyalarda zamanı gelince savaş baltalarının tekrar günyüzüne çıkacağı, ekonomik krizlerin de bunu tetikleyeceği öngörüsü çarpıcı ama aynı zamanda gerçekçi de...
Satır aralarında Almanya ve Rusya'ya ilişkin kimi önyargı ve kötümser yaklaşımlar öne çıkıyor. Gerçi Friedman, aslen Macaristan Yahudilerinden olduğunu ve Soğuk Savaş'ın hemen başında Doğu Avrupa'nın kaotik ortamında yetiştiğini gizlemiyor ve kitapta bunu uzun uzun anlatmış.
Nihayetinde, Avrupa'nın dünü ve bugününün yanısıra, gelecek projeksiyonları açısından da okunmayı hakeden bir kitap...
Kitap 2015 gibi yeni bir tarihte basıldığı için (Türkçesi de 2015 yılı sonunda yayınlandı) gayet güncel. Bilhassa Almanya-Fransa-Rusya-İngiltere ekseninde krizlerin ele alınması, nispeten karamsar ama son derece gerçekçi bir çerçeve sunmuş. Tarihte Avrupa'nın altını üstüne getiren çatışmaların asla sona ermediği ve hemen hemen aynı toplum-coğrafyalarda zamanı gelince savaş baltalarının tekrar günyüzüne çıkacağı, ekonomik krizlerin de bunu tetikleyeceği öngörüsü çarpıcı ama aynı zamanda gerçekçi de...
Satır aralarında Almanya ve Rusya'ya ilişkin kimi önyargı ve kötümser yaklaşımlar öne çıkıyor. Gerçi Friedman, aslen Macaristan Yahudilerinden olduğunu ve Soğuk Savaş'ın hemen başında Doğu Avrupa'nın kaotik ortamında yetiştiğini gizlemiyor ve kitapta bunu uzun uzun anlatmış.
Nihayetinde, Avrupa'nın dünü ve bugününün yanısıra, gelecek projeksiyonları açısından da okunmayı hakeden bir kitap...
January 19, 2015
Friedman is a better futurist than he is a historian or a memoirist, and the fact that he tries here to wear all three of these hats makes his latest work an ungainly and strangely organized read. The first third seems to belong in another book altogether (perhaps a family history work of narrative nonfiction?), and the second section, his cursory summary of European history and colonialism, is often just plain awful. Stay for his analyses of current borderlines in Europe and their predicted troubles, and this book's value finally becomes apparent -- although its subtitle ("The Emerging Crisis in Europe") seems like overheated alarmism even from Friedman's perspective.
February 15, 2015
A great history of Europe that paints the direction of possible future conflicts. Unlike many of his other books, George Friedman doesn't call out any specific conflicts, but rather provides insight into where and why conflicts might occur.
October 31, 2019
Good read, albeit needs more structure
The book gives a good overview of European flashpoints and reasons well as to why the peace won’t last for too long. The flow of the book though is a bit chaotic and certainly a lot less structured than The Next 100 Years. And, of course. The author being very pro-American, USA is featured in a somewhat idealistic way, presented as an all-knowing, all-powerful model country, which, despite its indisputable achievements, is far from the truth.
The book gives a good overview of European flashpoints and reasons well as to why the peace won’t last for too long. The flow of the book though is a bit chaotic and certainly a lot less structured than The Next 100 Years. And, of course. The author being very pro-American, USA is featured in a somewhat idealistic way, presented as an all-knowing, all-powerful model country, which, despite its indisputable achievements, is far from the truth.
January 15, 2020
A must read for those seeking a greater understanding of the competition and conflicts that are occurring or may occur in the future in Europe. The author frames his understanding of the European environment and predictions of future conflict within a historical context and current geopolitical realities.
The book is easily understood by those with limited historical knowledge but provides sufficient depth for those who routinely work within this context.
Highly recommend.
The book is easily understood by those with limited historical knowledge but provides sufficient depth for those who routinely work within this context.
Highly recommend.
January 20, 2018
Patiko. Patiko, kadangi atnaujino istorijos žinias, paaiškino, kas vyko Europoje po II WW, apskritai apžvelgė Europos istoriją ir nurodė galimus ir esamus “karštus” taškus. O svarbiausia - davė peno pamąstyti kodėl valstybės elgiasi vienaip ar kitaip. Ir tada galima pabandyti suprasti kodėl jos taip elgiasi. Geopolitika - tikrai svarbus veiksnys, nulemiantis valstybių elgesį.
December 20, 2019
O carte pentru cine vrea să înțeleagă mai mult Europa și mecanismele după care ea funcționează ca întreg
November 16, 2017
iki šiol nemažai skaičiau istorinių knygų, bet ši knyga nunešė visus lūkesčius. Labai išsamiai ir įdomiai aprašo laikotarpį po WWII, kokie niuansai vyko Europoje dar prieš karus. Anglijos santykius su Europa ir kodėl ji taip elgiasi. Jei nors kiek įdomu Europos politinė istorija, norisi sužinoti faktų kurių mokykloje arba kitose knygose nerasite, čiupkit šį kūrinį ir skaitykit, tikrai verta kiekvienos praleistos minutės.
July 22, 2021
I thought this book would be similar to 'the next year's' by the same author as a geopolitical book however most of the narrative is historical in nature. If viewed for its historical content with the author's personal perspective it is a very good read
January 3, 2016
Frankly, I was disappointed with this book. The first half of the book is dross. The book only becomes interesting at 'Part Three'.
Part One is a failed literary attempt by the author to show personal affinity with the subject. It could easily have been deleted or edited down to three pages. Part Two is too short to be meaningful, but too long in the context of the book. It should have likewise have been mercilessly edited down.
Part Three is the redeeming part of the book. However, most readers will have given-up from exhaustion by the previous two sections.
The most valuable part of the later half of the book is the straightforward explanation of the roots of the Arab Spring and the Crimea Annexation. I also found his description between the relationship of the EU and NATO and their roles (and failures at them) in the flashpoints to be very good. Although, the author would have better served his readers by not having made uneven historical analogies. 'Uneven' in the sense they are sometimes very detailed explanations, and other times very brief, virtually unexplained references to events two hundred years apart.
This book is too flawed for me to recommend for general reading. The author's literary pretensions, and the peculiar use of historical references make for a disjointed and needlessly long read. I only read it completely out of respect for the author's previous work, and my fascination with his ability to craft a 'train wreck' out of something I was terribly interested in.
However, its not a complete loss. This book would be most useful to someone who already has some back ground in political history, and they started at Part Three. This means ignoring the first half of the book.
Part One is a failed literary attempt by the author to show personal affinity with the subject. It could easily have been deleted or edited down to three pages. Part Two is too short to be meaningful, but too long in the context of the book. It should have likewise have been mercilessly edited down.
Part Three is the redeeming part of the book. However, most readers will have given-up from exhaustion by the previous two sections.
The most valuable part of the later half of the book is the straightforward explanation of the roots of the Arab Spring and the Crimea Annexation. I also found his description between the relationship of the EU and NATO and their roles (and failures at them) in the flashpoints to be very good. Although, the author would have better served his readers by not having made uneven historical analogies. 'Uneven' in the sense they are sometimes very detailed explanations, and other times very brief, virtually unexplained references to events two hundred years apart.
This book is too flawed for me to recommend for general reading. The author's literary pretensions, and the peculiar use of historical references make for a disjointed and needlessly long read. I only read it completely out of respect for the author's previous work, and my fascination with his ability to craft a 'train wreck' out of something I was terribly interested in.
However, its not a complete loss. This book would be most useful to someone who already has some back ground in political history, and they started at Part Three. This means ignoring the first half of the book.
May 13, 2018
Absolutely a brilliant book. Explained how Europe had such a disastrous 20th century, and why the Ukraine is currently an area under dispute.
May 20, 2016
Europe is certainly in the news of late. The economies of southern Europe are struggling, the Russian "adventures" in Ukraine are unsettling eastern Europe, and extreme fundamentalist Muslim activity is making life difficult everywhere for long-time residents as well as recent Muslim immigrants who just want to live their lives. These are some of the obvious flashpoints described by Friedman, along with a great deal of background on how we've gotten to where we are. One of the less obvious flashpoints is in Belgium, where the Flemish side and the French-speaking side could split.
I think the background information is the most valuable part of this book If you read the news, I don't think you'll be surprised by the main points. But the sense of history is important.
I do question some of the author's sweeping statements, especially in regard to what Putin does or doesn't want. Can anyone really predict his actions or desires? I also question the fact that this seems to be based entirely on the author's knowledge and experience as an intelligence gatherer. There are no footnotes, no reference to any prior books or reference materials. That always makes me a bit cautious in taking everything an author says at face value.
I think the background information is the most valuable part of this book If you read the news, I don't think you'll be surprised by the main points. But the sense of history is important.
I do question some of the author's sweeping statements, especially in regard to what Putin does or doesn't want. Can anyone really predict his actions or desires? I also question the fact that this seems to be based entirely on the author's knowledge and experience as an intelligence gatherer. There are no footnotes, no reference to any prior books or reference materials. That always makes me a bit cautious in taking everything an author says at face value.
February 11, 2015
3.5 stars. Although the book didn't quite live up to my high expectations, I would still recommend it for reading by political & military leaders interested in European security. The parts I found most entertaining were not necessarily the most relevant, such as the personal history of Friedman's family. However, I love real stories and his did provide context to the book's major theme -- that the borderlands within and on the periphery of Europe have historically been the source of conflict and will likely remain so in the future. If not sources of violent conflict, then at least enduring tension. Not a happy thought, but realistic. Friedman explains what he sees as the sources of friction and does a good job of explaining why old sources haven't gone away and new ones are in the making (due to immigration, multi-culturism versus assimilation, language differences and religious tensions, diverging economic interests, the pull of nationalism versus pan-Europeanism...). Overall a good treatise of places to watch and trends to track.
April 8, 2015
Friedman says Europe's history of conflict is far from over. The resentment and anger of Europeans against other Europeans still exists. An unresolved economic crisis, unrealized expectations placed on the EU, unease about Germany, and Russia reasserting itself are areas of concern. The most important potential conflict is between the mainland and the peninsula, evidenced by the struggle for Ukraine. Friedman does not anticipate a war but flashpoints do remain, as they do in the Mediterranean nations.
This book is very personal in that Friedman adds many of his own experiences, some of which I thought were not needed (like the way he eats soup). I did very much appreciate his insights into the current state of Europe, however.
This book is very personal in that Friedman adds many of his own experiences, some of which I thought were not needed (like the way he eats soup). I did very much appreciate his insights into the current state of Europe, however.
August 15, 2015
Probably Friedman's worse book. It is extremely badly written and in great need of an editor. Between basic misunderstanding of political, geopolitical, cultural or social issues and the lack of depth of the analysis, it's a miracle that this book got ever published. Friedman just tried to rewrite The Clash of The Civilisations twenty years too late without fluidity or knowledge. Unmitigated disaster in my opinion.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 205 reviews