Skip to main content

                                                               LET'S READ

                             Article published on 27th February 2020


          I recommend you to lecture a very interesting book about Geopolitics. Its name is NATO Expansion to East. Battle for Europe, published at Pavel Coruț Publishing House, București, 1997. Author’s name is Florian Gârz, a retired officer who is well-known for many books on Military Strategy and Geopolitics. This officer activated in the Directorate of Military Intelligence of the Romanian Socialist Army. Between 1991-1997, he worked as a counselor in the Defense, National Security and Public Order Department and as a Secretary of National Supreme Defense Council’s chief.
          Why do I consider this book so interesting? Because it was published in 1997 and offers some forecasts and estimations regarding geopolitical evolutions, especially for Europe. Some of them have been confirmed, others were not confirmed and some aspects are just partially confirmed. It is amazing how an analyst could foresee the international situation and evolutions, 23 years ago. His ability in this field is admirable.
          In order to compare, it is necessary to have an overlook on the international 1997 environment:
-            Russia was undergoing a major economic and social crisis, which was about to deepen in 1998[1]; gloomy forecasts about the economy, reflected in statistics, indicated a great depression[2], fact confirmed by the reality next year; the internal security and public order became problematic, due to the alarming level of criminality in all area of the Russian society[3]; armed forces were compelled to withdraw from Chechnya in 1996; as an assessment, at that moment Russia was a weak and an almost failed state;
-            A NATO Summit took place at Madrid on 8-9 July 1997; the decision was to include Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary in the alliance;
-            China was on a visible economical developing trend, but no one could foresee the level that the country reached 10-15 later[4];
-            European Union was undergoing a full reforming and consolidation process;
-         There were some areas in Europe posing a high risk for military conflicts; their situation was unclear.
In order to figure out how the author forecasted the events and geopolitical evolutions, I propose you to put the elements in a table, containing quotes from the book, and to mark them according to the degree of confirmation as „Confirmed”, „Unconfirmed” or „Partially Confirmed”.

Forecast (Quote)
Degree of confirmation
Regarding the Russian Federation Nuclear Program, inherited from the former USSR, it exists and develops normally, although some so-called „analysts” wait from one day to the next the Russian Economy’s collapse (.....). Some types of high range cruise missiles are tested. – page 66.
CONFIRMED
NATO decision to expand to East, due to the pressure exerted by USA, is a classical action to fill the „vacuum” (security vacuum in Central and Eastern Europe). (.......) The „vacuum” theory has a destabilizing purpose, and the Russians, although they do not firmly oppose now, they will oppose later, after solving the great internal difficulties they face, as they did in 1940. – p. 83.
CONFIRMED
Washington no longer keeps secret the fact that they would wish to include Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in NATO, and even Belarus and Ukraine. – p. 84.
PARTIALLY CONFIRMED
The prevention of an military and political reintegration between Russian Federation and Ukraine seems to be one of the main strategic goals of the USA in the geopolitical area of the former USSR. – p. 84.
CONFIRMED
Military conflicts in the Caucasus area, as well as in the area of the republics inhabited by Muslim population, reveal local and international factors which try to separate them from Russia. USA, together with United Kingdom, make all possible to direct important oil and natural gas pipe lines that start from there, to Arabian Sea, not to Black Sea. – p. 84-85.
CONFIRMED
(.....) US military size down on the continent, from 350.000 in 1988, to less than 100.000 in 1997. Their presence, although symbolic, is uncertain in the future.  – p. 105.
UNCONFIRMED
The main and arduous problem now is the NATO expansion to East, in terms of methods, time and space. It is very difficult to establish a new line for demarcation between NATO and Russian Federation Western border.  – p. 126-127.
CONFIRMED
I think it would be quite difficult for those „Atlantists” (supporters of NATO expansion) interested in „NATO expansion to east” to obtain all member states’ consent. It is much easier to maintain the status-quo and there are also some opinions according to NATO will extend its existence in the 21th Century if it remains legally unchanged (....). – p. 129-130.
UNCONFIRMED
I am deeply convinced that NATO, as a military „victorious” alliance, will have the fate of other victorious alliances known in the history of Europe. – p.131.
UNCONFIRMED
As long as we get closer to the 21th Century, „the community of interests” in NATO will be more and more fragile, until disappearance, although its structures and assets seem impressive and they will however work for a limited period. – p. 133.
PARTIALLY
CONFIRMED
The Western Bloc needs to take into consideration Moscow’s interests and reactions regarding NATO expansion to East. In this way, they recognize Russia’s „veto power”, especially regarding Balkan Peninsula. – p. 133-134.
UNCONFIRMED
The effort to approach Ukraine in order to join „Visegrád Group” (.....) is, in my opinion, an intermediary phase to make this new European state to definitely separate from Russia and to adhere to Western policies. The purpose is to create the conditions for Ukraine to join NATO. – p. 141.
PARTIALLY CONFIRMED
(....) the image of a „Monopolar” Europe begins to appear, especially from the economic point of view, and Germany will have the main position in it. Its purposes will not totally be the same as USA ones. – p. 142.
CONFIRMED
(....) the US experts do not foresee any position for Russia in the future security architecture and they do not give a chance to this country. All the military alliances projected for Central and Western Europe exclude Russia and are anti-Russian. – p. 142.
CONFIRMED
The main Russia’s strategic goal is to rebuild its economic and military capabilities and, based on them, to rebuild, in a peaceful way or using force, the Independent States Community, in order to counterbalance the other military and economic blocs that exist in Europe and throughout the world. This process would take at least two or three decades.  – p. 145.
PARTIALLY CONFIRMED
From the beginning of the next century, OSCE[5] will exceed NATO in respect of involvement in the security policy in the integrating Europe. – p. 281.
UNCONFIRMED

I need to say that, in the table, I put just a few examples, which I considered relevant, taking into consideration the nowadays geopolitical situation, but there are still other interesting aspects in the book. This is why I recommend you to read it or to read other books written by Florian Gârz.


[1] Bolkhovitina Elena, An Analysis of the Currency and Financial Crisis in Russia, Department of Research Cooperation Economic Research Institute Economic Planning Agency, Tokyo, Japan, p. 12.
[2] Congressional Research Service, The Russian Financial Crisis of 1998: An Analysis of Trends, Causes, and Implications, Updated February 18, 1999, Order Code 98-578 E.
[3] Ilona Karpanos, The Political Economy of Organized Crime in Russia: The State, Market and Criminality in the USSR and Post-Soviet Russia, City University London Department of International Politics October 2017.
[4] Charles Adam, 1997 International Monetary Fund, Asia and Pacific Department, Annex I China—Growth and Economic Reforms, on Internet at https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/weo1097/pdf/octweo06.pdf, accessed on 25 Feb 2020.
[5] Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

  US INTERVENTION IN IRAN – A STRATEGIC TRAP?            I will begin with a straightforward question: what is the current state of affairs in Venezuela? Following the US-Israeli intervention in Iran, this Latin American nation has slipped off the geopolitical radar. Nonetheless, it remains a subject of interest .           Subsequent to the apprehension of the Venezuelan president on the night of January 2-3, 2026, by US special forces during a domestic military incursion, the United States has sustained its naval presence in the region to exert military pressure on the Venezuelan administration [1] . Despite Washington's recognition of the interim government, the continued deployment of significant military assets suggests that the primary objectives remain unfulfilled. Effectively, the state continues to be led by members of the previous regime. It is possible that they are now undergoing a strategic shif...
IRAN, US, THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ. HOW WILL IT END?          On an online forum where geopolitics and military analysis are debated ( Moon of Alabama ), I read a comment that seemed very convincing to me. I will rephrase it slightly, but keep the essence: 'Iran does not need a nuclear weapon. It already has one: the Strait of Hormuz.' Perfectly true. Control of the strait has proven to be a powerful weapon in the hands of the Iranian leadership . The negotiations, or rather the attempts at negotiations between the US and Iran, have been ongoing since April 11. With no result. The US is trying to negotiate from a position of strength, but it lacks the necessary tools of force. Iran is also negotiating from a position of strength, but it has the strong argument: the nuclear weapon – the Strait of Hormuz. Of course, no agreement will be reached. The US cannot afford to give in, and Iran can afford to maintain the current status quo. The situation is like a fisherman w...
  US INTERVENTION IN IRAN – HOW WILL IT END?           There is a heated debate in the media regarding how the current military conflict in the Gulf will end. It is naturally difficult to predict, as the US is at a deadlock. It has failed to achieve its objective (regime change in Iran); on the contrary, Iran's military retaliation has caused it major problems. The facts are well-known, so there is no need for further detail .           The US leadership has just announced a two-week suspension of military actions against Iran [1] . The real underlying motive is difficult to guess. Regardless, this move does not resolve the conflict; it merely provides a pause .           Let us try to identify and analyze the options for ending the hostilities. We proceed from the premise that it does not depend solely on the US-Israel camp, but also on Iran .     ...