Europe/EurAsia Book Reviews -- March 1999

Editor's Note: This first regional column covers both Europe and Eurasia. Stating the obvious and resurrecting an old term, the area extending from the Atlantic to the Urals (ATTU) is vast. I'd be willing to wager that the equally vast amount of published material dealing with issues within ATTU could carpet the region. As regional editor, I will attempt to achieve balance and include reviews covering issues of interest to both 48C's and 48E's, as well as publications specific to each area. Contributions from readers will greatly assist in this endeavor. With your help, I hope this will become a stimulating forum for thought and another tool for keeping Europe and Eurasian FAO's current on issues affecting their regions.

"The Geopolitics of NATO Enlargement." By John Hillen and Michael P. Noonan. Parameters, U.S. Army War College Quarterly, Autumn 1998, pp. 21-34. Reviewed by LTC Rick Runner.

The Army War College's professional publication, Parameters, along with CGSC's Military Review, should be basic tools in the FAO's professional reading kit bag. Not only do these journals help keep the FAO "green" and informed on issues important to the Army, they keep the FAO aware of how the Army views regional issues. For the FAO inclined to publish, the journals also provide a very visible means to educate the Army about regional nuances. It is very appropriate then that this first review is of an article from the August 1998 edition of Parameters.

NATO's future remains the single most important security issue cutting across the Europe/Eurasian landmass. The authors accurately state that the debate over whether NATO should enlarge effectively ended when Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic were accepted as new members of the Alliance. They also point out quite accurately in the first seven lines that the enlargement issue subsumed perhaps the more important question of "just what is this enlarged alliance to do?" Rather than add their own specific suggestions to the mountain of existing ideas for NATO's future, the authors serve a better purpose. They remind us that geography and geopolitics matter and must be considered in the ongoing discussion concerning NATO's future.

On the down side, the authors plod through textbook discussions of geopolitics and resurrect old geostrategic theorists like Alfred Thayer Mahan to convince the reader that geography matters. In the conclusion, however, the authors' message becomes clearer: "Geopolitical considerations in deciding what NATO does and who belongs in the Alliance must underpin any collective military grouping that hopes to respond effectively in times of crisis." This should not be a surprise. Geography always has been one of the most important nuances of European security. The warning is that policy makers dealing with NATO's future, particularly in the United States, have forgotten this basic premise.

The authors contend that the idea held by some, including Secretary of State Madeline Albright, that NATO can evolve into "a force for peace from the Middle East to Central Africa" ignores European geopolitical realities. This is a very valid contention. The NATO of Lord Ismay that was said to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down is not that far from the NATO that many Europeans still desire. Given its geopolitical history, it is hard to imagine Poland joining NATO in order to bring peace to the Middle East or Central Africa. It is even harder to imagine this idea motivating the Baltic countries' desire for NATO membership. Old fears and desires still have an impact on security in the Old World. Despite the graduate school textbook flashbacks, this article is a timely reminder that geography frames many of those fears and desires. It should be a primer for anyone dealing with NATO's future. (Note: The article is available on-line at the Parameters web site: carlisle-www.army.mil /usawc/Parameters

William E. Odom, The Collapse of the Soviet Military (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998), Pp. 523. Review by Joe Tullbane.

LTG (R) Odom has an impressive history as a Soviet/Russian FAO and a distinguished military career. He was a noted academician even before his retirement from the Army and continues so today. His military service includes a tour as a permanent professor at USMA, as the Defense Attaché in Moscow, as the military assistant to the Advisor on National Security Affairs to the President, as the Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence on the Army Staff, and finally as the Chief of the National Security Agency. He is still probably the United States' top expert on Soviet/Russian military affairs.

Frankly, his book is equally impressive and lives up to his credentials, both military and academic. In it, Odom carefully outlines the evolution of the military, government, and Communist Party mechanisms that made the Soviet military machine operate. He discusses changing Soviet/Russian military strategy, as well as changes in day-to-day operations of the military establishment. He literally covers every facet of the question as he draws the reader a detailed illustration of the current Russian military situation and how it arrived at it current state.

For old Soviet hands, this book is an excellent refresher and for new Eurasian FAO's it is the ultimate primer on the Soviet/Russian military establishment. It is vital to understanding the state of affairs in which the Russian military finds itself today. Last, even for other FAO's, who choose to stray from their own regional studies, it is a very readable and enjoyable book.

1999, Foreign Area Officer Association
Springfield, Virginia
Maintained by LTC Steve Gotowicki.
http://www.faoa.org