It is both interesting and typical of the Clintons that this statement was not publicized at the time or at any time since.
One presumes the foreign policy establishment, the intelligence community, and the upper echelons of the military were aware of the statement, and I would be shocked if his successor GW Bush was not aware of it. I’m also guessing our allies in Europe - at the very least the 5 Eyes - were told about it.
Apparently, no one took Yeltsin seriously. Nor Putin.
For those of us cursed to have studied history, Russia’s self-identification as a European, and world, great power, are clear and go back to Peter the Great.
The ultimate European question is the extent to which a Russia which does not really share Western values can be part of Europe, with the corollary issue of which dog is big enough to enforce Europe’s revulsion of authoritarian Russia.
The US simply replaced first Lithuania/Poland, then Prussia and Austria-Hungary as the bulwarks of the West.
I generally supported NATO expansion into Central Europe - eastern Germany, Poland, Hungary, Czech, Slovak, etc., but have always been concerned about the Balkans…
Ukraine is a special case, despite the Western orientation of parts of Ukraine, its geography makes it problematic, especially if one considers Crimea to be Ukrainian (I don’t).
US meddling in Ukraine has been a problem and forcing Ukraine to give up its deterrent nukes in 1994 was an unforced blunder of world historical proportions. Compounded by the color revolution and hints of NATO.
The best possible outcome is an essentially neutral Ukraine with economic ties to the West. Some Eastern territory lost, Crimea back to Russia where it was until Khrushchev gave away. Painful, but better than a nuclear war the Europeans can’t fight.
The fecklessness of the Europeans about defense may be understandable, given their devastation in the two world wars in the 20th century, but if the Ukraine-Russia war doesn’t wake them up nothing will.
I note the others with Russian borders are all in for defense: Finland and Sweden now in NATO and with formidable forces, the Baltics, Norway, and Poland are all very serious about defense. It’s the Germans, French, Italians and the rest who aren’t even willing to think about it. And, the poor UK, once the only remaining European power of even the second class, has good manpower but not nearly enough of it, and little modern equipment.
Sigh. Fortress America is looking more and more likely….
Unfortunately, I think Europe has gotten too comfortable with being under the US shield and won't step up to the plate.
You're probably right, but they really need to adjust their thinking because the US isn't going to fight them alone for very long.
a cursory glance at the history might gently suggest that this sort of thing always has been.
but modern, willful historical ignorance has become the norm throughout the west.
It is both interesting and typical of the Clintons that this statement was not publicized at the time or at any time since.
One presumes the foreign policy establishment, the intelligence community, and the upper echelons of the military were aware of the statement, and I would be shocked if his successor GW Bush was not aware of it. I’m also guessing our allies in Europe - at the very least the 5 Eyes - were told about it.
Apparently, no one took Yeltsin seriously. Nor Putin.
For those of us cursed to have studied history, Russia’s self-identification as a European, and world, great power, are clear and go back to Peter the Great.
The ultimate European question is the extent to which a Russia which does not really share Western values can be part of Europe, with the corollary issue of which dog is big enough to enforce Europe’s revulsion of authoritarian Russia.
The US simply replaced first Lithuania/Poland, then Prussia and Austria-Hungary as the bulwarks of the West.
I generally supported NATO expansion into Central Europe - eastern Germany, Poland, Hungary, Czech, Slovak, etc., but have always been concerned about the Balkans…
Ukraine is a special case, despite the Western orientation of parts of Ukraine, its geography makes it problematic, especially if one considers Crimea to be Ukrainian (I don’t).
US meddling in Ukraine has been a problem and forcing Ukraine to give up its deterrent nukes in 1994 was an unforced blunder of world historical proportions. Compounded by the color revolution and hints of NATO.
The best possible outcome is an essentially neutral Ukraine with economic ties to the West. Some Eastern territory lost, Crimea back to Russia where it was until Khrushchev gave away. Painful, but better than a nuclear war the Europeans can’t fight.
The fecklessness of the Europeans about defense may be understandable, given their devastation in the two world wars in the 20th century, but if the Ukraine-Russia war doesn’t wake them up nothing will.
I note the others with Russian borders are all in for defense: Finland and Sweden now in NATO and with formidable forces, the Baltics, Norway, and Poland are all very serious about defense. It’s the Germans, French, Italians and the rest who aren’t even willing to think about it. And, the poor UK, once the only remaining European power of even the second class, has good manpower but not nearly enough of it, and little modern equipment.
Sigh. Fortress America is looking more and more likely….