Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945

Magnificent one-volume work on the history of postwar Europe, as starters. To say this is a generic and easy read would be a massive disservice to the author, because it's written like an academic text, the stuff you'd expect to find in college textbooks. The sheer volume of information laid out in Postwar are simply amazing, and at times overwhelming and confusing to understand - much more comprehend. This is not something you can simply finish within a week, or even a month. To the faint of heart this is a scary and intimidating book… but this is what gives it so much power and authority, actually. The truth is, Tony Judt made a compelling case on the need for Europe to reexamine and reevaluate her own past, especially in her complicity in the Holocaust, and in the bloody Yugoslavian civil war of the 1990s. Both her highs - from the economic miracles of the 1950s, to the political dynamics behind the creation of the EU; to her lows - the indifference in the Yugoslavian crisis, her (in this case Western Europe) stalling of the applications of the Eastern European states, were all exposed and laid bare. Even the messy aftermath and the end of the colonial eras (UK, France, Belgium, the Netherland to name a few), and the actual reasons behind the formation of the EU (a mostly French political project to restrain Germany) were discussed in-depth, and in detail. If one were to look for an authoritative reference on postwar European history, this would be my recommendation. The author even dedicated a few chapters into the European culture, especially of the 1960s-1970s where the generations became more "liberal" in the sense that secularism and feminism began making waves in the various European states. Judt also adeptly discussed the culture surrounding the European sentiments into the Holocaust (the book's Epilogue) - which I found both surprising and noteworthy. Surprising since I did not expect an entire chapter to be discussed on the culture and the implications of the Holocaust (the Shoah), but noteworthy because how he connected it to the issue of Europe's identity, that Europe needs to confront its own past for it to understand and chart her future - as he said it: "...the recovered memory of Europe's dead Jews has become the very definition and guarantee of the continent's restored humanity." (p.804) More than that, Judt did a good job on explaining various key events in the continent's postwar history, notably the immediate postwar reconstruction, the Nuremberg trials and subsequent de-Nazification, the creation of NATO...the birth of (the future) European Union, the beginnings of the Cold War, even the fall of Communism and the bloody Yugoslavian civil war. Almost every important event in postwar Europe (of course, up until the early 2000s only), was covered in detail (at times even a bit of overload). Even the culture and the arts (from movies up to the music movements) were also discussed. However, noteworthy and comprehensive as the book was, there were a few shortcomings by the author - of which I do not find him at fault. Some notable absences (or glossed over in minor details) were the bloody Greek civil war (the focus was on the Greek economic reconstruction and subsequent slide to dictatorship), the obscure Cod Wars between Iceland and the UK (of which Iceland somehow won the conflict), the policy of Finlandization (the political balancing act of postwar Finland to maintain her independence), the 1983 NATO Able Archer joint military exercise (that almost brought the world to the brink of nuclear war again since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis), the 1994 Budapest Memorandum (in which Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan [not a European country] relinquished their nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantees from the West), and the 1999 bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade (in the height of the Kosovo War)...to name a few. I am sure there are more important events that were not mentioned by the author, these are the only notable ones I can remember. Another (though at the time minor given the year of its publication) noteworthy mistake was the Russification of Ukrainian identity, notably in the maps provided (Kyiv is spelled as Kiev, Kharkiv as Kharkov)… Again I do not blame the author for this, as it was still interchangeable (plus nobody expected that the region would descend into war...until 2014 and 2022 happened). Nevertheless, these should not take away the book's magnificent discussion and presentation of postwar European history. At least the review's fairly balanced - as it also had its own shortcomings. Overall, this is an astounding and magnificent piece of literature - a must-read and must-own for every history enthusiast out there. Despite being published in 2005, it is highly relevant to read and own in today's context, as it offered multiple invaluable lessons in how to study, understand, and analyze postwar Europe. While so much has happened since then, it's still worth reading. I'd say Ian Kershaw's The Global Age: Europe 1950-2017 (the 9th installment of The Penguin History of Europe series) is the 'lighter' and more updated version of Judt's book (as the content was similar in so many chapters, yet the coverage is until 2017 - which means the 2008 Global Recession, the EU crisis, and Brexit were all mentioned) - though Kershaw's version is as bit of a heavy and comprehensive reading as Judt's (I'd suggest you need to own both books to fully appreciate European history). I said to myself that the book would take me months to finish and absorb - and it's true. Despite devoting one and a half hours everyday, it still took me 4 months to finish it (as evidenced by the sheer number of self-adhesive notes I placed next to key information and statistics throughout the book). Though it's well worth the time, and the journey. Highly recommend, and I'd like to end this by offering my everlasting gratitude and thanks to my dear officemate who recommended the book to me - without her, I'd never discover and appreciate this literary and historical masterpiece! To her, thank you for opening my horizons and knowledge on this topic - I simply could not find words that could express how much I am grateful for you. I hope this simple message will be more than enough for you! Again, highly recommend - but be warned: it's not for the faint-of-heart, or for the causal reader. If you're considering buying this - better be prepared to invest your time into it, but well-worth it at the end.

It is a massive book, that took me close to two months to finish. The amount of information is enormous, mind-boggling. Even though I presumed I knew quite a lot on European political history after WW2 (my background is political science), it was this book that made me aware of how little, in fact, I know, especially about the first decades following The War. I always underline information that is both of relevance and new to me - half of Tony's Judt's book is now underlined. What I didn't know prior to reading this massive work? 1) in fact how little attention and effort was spent on evaluating the colaboration with Nazi regimes in Europe - the new Europe was built on the shoulders of former Nazi functionaries (teachers, judges, officials). How much silence on specific biographies underlies the history of post-war Europe 2) how come there is so little multiethnicity in post-war Europe; 3) to what extent the Marshall plan was crucial in rebuilding Europe; 4) to what extent the rapid development of Switzerland and Sweden depended on the role these two countries played in WW2 by supplying both sides; 5) to what extent the investments made by nazi's in German scientific research, helped post-war Germany to be competitive in business. 6) How costly were the colonies for Britain; 7) the specifics of French colonialism (colonies as departments), links with the peculiar nature of their state; 8)historic reasons on why so much of the EU funds is spent on agriculture; 9) the shock that leftists of the west felt after the events of 1956 in Hugary; how they changed the public opinion; 10) extent of unemployment in Portugal, Greece before 1970 (one third of Portugal's workforce worked abroad) 11) racism and ethnic discrimination in UK and Switzerland less than 50 years ago; 12) eugenics in Europe; 13) the double standarts of western leaders regarding soviet regimes, human rights issues; 14) different approaches towards privatisation in 1980's; 15) the scepticism in the West regarding whether Germany should be reunited after 1989; 16) Holocaust - how hard it still is for many countries involved to admit the guilt also of their societies. How long it took for some (France, Netherlands, Austria)... And there is so much, much more! And it is all written in clear, easy to read style. The book is filled not just with actions, facts, but also intellectual history of Europe. Yes, from time to time you get the sense of the author's own stance on the issues, but it is never all-pervasive and always substantiated. I believe it adds to the quality of the book.

Judt's exploration of postwar Europe is a fascinating examination of the events, people and culture that emerged after World War II. The book is at its best when examining the cultural changes that occurred in the European countries post war and the rise and fall of communism. It dispatches many of the immediate post-war myths about communist Europe and brings a slightly new perspective to that era. The book suffers at times from a lack of editing and some self-indulgent bits. For example, Judt seems determined to let us know how many films he has watched in his lifetime and how this all relates to his central thesis. The ending also falls down where he starts to make some sweeping generalizations and empirical claims that seem to lack any data to support them. Reading this book well after it was first published it is clear that Judt did not foresee more recent events such as Brexit. The Epilogue is something that I will leave other readers to evaluate. It seemed at times overwrought to the point of almost being maudlin. Overall, the book is worth the journey although I'm not sure it was worth the more than 800 pages between the covers. The photos were wonderful and not your typical pictures that you might find in most other post-war books. A good read although one I may not revisit in the future.

"Postwar - A history of Europe since 1945" by Tony Judt is the best book I have read on the subject. Its perspective on events since 1989 up to 2005 is remarkably good. Only two generations have passed since World War 2, and the risk with a book about this period is that its conclusions and themes may prove to be foolish in the fullness of time. One is reminded of Mao's response to a question about the consequences of the French Revolution, "It is too soon to tell." We can probably be reasonably sure that the history of Europe from the collapse of the Ottoman and Habsburg Empires plus the Soviet upheavals after WW1 to the final territorial and ethnic spasm in the Balkans in the 1990s can probably be written with some certainty, although we still lack access to original source documents for the Soviet role over that period. All books dealing with post-war European history suffer from the fact that limited archival material from the Soviet Union has been available for study. Historians are forced to rely on sporadic Soviet documents and speeches and the assessments of western diplomats and analysts to interpret Soviet thinking and intentions. The result is that this book (and others) views the history of the Communist world with Western eyes and Western mindsets. We are denied access to the thoughts, fears and hopes of communist politicians and dissidents and their influence on history. Hopefully, one day, more archival and other documents will become available to historians and a more balanced history will emerge over time. If I may give another analogy: at present historians writing of the Communist world are peering through the windows of a house trying to understand the lives of the family living there. They see people going to and fro in the rooms. Occasionally they get glimpses of what the individuals are reading and writing. Sometimes a resident will hold up a photo or document for the historian to see. But the historian cannot hear what they say, nor can he go inside the house to talk to them or inspect their documents, or ask them their views on the outside world. He can draw conclusions only from what he sees through the windows. A big message from this book is that the recovery and prosperity enjoyed by Western Europe for half a century is due to both the US and the USSR. The US provided critical economic aid and political support to Europe, including West Germany, because of the threat assumed to be posed by the USSR. Without such a threat, the US may have retreated into isolationism, leaving the Europeans to sort out the mess. Without the threat of the USSR, there may not have been the will forgo reparations from Germany and to encourage West Germany to recover. These were distinct possibilities in the immediate post-war period. The book deals only with the history of Western Europe, with very little explanation of the impact of the rest of the world on that history. Events and policies in the USSR and USA are covered to the extent that they directly impinged on Europe. However, Communist and post-colonial developments in Asia and Africa certainly reinforced cold war attitudes in Europe, if they did not directly influence them. What must still be provisional is the history of Europe since say 1990. Will the European Union and the Euro survive the test of time, or will one or the other go into the dustbin of history? Judt's description of the moribund Soviet economies in the 1970s is the best I have read on the subject. The joke "You pretend to work and we pretend to pay you" sums up the cynicism and inefficiencies of Eastern bloc economies. His account of the final years of the Eastern Bloc is excellent, as is discussion of the key issues facing Europe in the aftermath of its collapse and the apparent success of free market ideologies. The final chapters of the struggle between socialism (in the form of modern European social capitalism) and capitalist individualism on the US model has yet to be written. Communism has probably failed for all time, but that does not mean that unrestrained US-style free enterprise will take over Europe. Beware of historians who proclaim "the end of history" and the "triumph of liberal democratic capitalism". Fortunately, Judt is too sensible to make such hubristic claims, although he does lean towards the European model. Which model of society will "win" in the course of the 21st Century - the unfettered capitalism of the US, or the social capitalism of the EU? What is the future of the nation state in the face of the challenges from terrorist extremism? These are important questions, and Judt's book provides the reader with an excellent exposition of the political, social and economic circumstances surrounding them.

"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" The twentieth century as I thought I knew it ended in 1989 after President Reagan proclaimed an end to the Cold War, an order which ultimately marked the unraveling and eventual downfall of Communism across Eastern Europe. Many Americans remember where they were on 9/11. I was nineteen lounging in front of my parents' living room television when I witnessed east and West German youths using chisels and sledge hammers to gouge the iron flesh of the "Wall of Shame," a physical barrier that had separated them for thirty years. It was a monumental occasion but also surprising, considering that my generation had grown up accepting the unending conflict between Democracy and Communism, the "good guys" verses the "evil empire." How was one to explain such a transformative event? To answer this question, I turned to Professor Judt's Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945. It was on page 659 that I found an answer to my question: "Washington did not `bring down' Communism--Communism imploded of its own accord." The history that I had received in school had not meshed with what I had just read. Was it not American muscle that had brought the Soviets to their proverbial knees? My questioning of everything I had known about the twentieth century but especially Europe became a standard fixture as I worked my way through this text. Standing at a prodigious four sections, 24 chapters, an epilogue, and most importantly 831 pages, there are many themes to explore. So many, in fact, that I would need a different writing venue in order to examine them properly. One of the most important themes, however, is the one that I discovered after finding an answer to my question about the fall of Communism: the ease of collective forgetting and the obtuseness of remembering. Europeans, according to Judt, have belatedly endorsed official history following World War II as having been well intentioned and readily available to the public, but ultimately it was more fiction than fact. Through this declaration, Judt does not suggest that his interpretation is the definitive retrospective; in fact, he contends that future scholarship will likely prove some of his details inaccurate. However, the evidence he provides, combined with an encyclopedic rendering of postwar Europe, along with his pristine historical credentials, is convincing. His attacks are controversial bordering on scathing, but Judt is a fair arbiter when dishing out blame. For example, in chapter three he likely enraged the left when he praised the United States for saving much of impoverished Europe through the Marshall Plan. By the same token, conservatives may flummox to hear that Marshall dollars found their way to communist countries, notably to Tito's Yugoslavia. In many chapters, Judt also painstakingly shreds any romantic notions of Communism felt by Communists living in the West, especially France. By the time I finished reading how the Soviet politburo used Eastern European Communist parties to infiltrate, intimidate, torture, and murder as a means of effectively colonizing the eastern bloc, I became nauseous; sickness pulsed through my body when I read that west Europeans--especially Germans--readily accepted Stalin's iron walls because they were happily preoccupied chasing wealth. What we thought we knew about twentieth century political icons also falls under Judt's microscope. For example, there is Judt's analysis of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who, while certainly making Britain's economy more efficient and productive, was responsible for doing "serious harm to the fabric of British public life." Though Socialist, Francois Mitterrand followed Thatcher's lead in privatizing services and turning rapidly towards free market capitalism via the European Union. Even Greece joined the bandwagon when implementing austerity measures to reform its budget woes, only to be undercut by Germany which refused to abide by the E.U. economic charter right afer reunification. What appears did not really appear, and what was never said actually happened were the two thoughts that ruminated throughout my brain. Finally, in his epilogue, there is the heart wrenching unpacking of Europe's malfeasant treatment of Jews who somehow survived concentration camps, only to face a country whose citizens refused to acknowledge what had happened and who would foster the heroic myth that they had resisted when in fact they were willing accomplices without German provocation. If one reads Timothy Snyder's Bloodlands, this feat of Jewish survival is astounding considering that 90 percent of the Jews killed in the Holocaust were not even sent to a camp: they were simply shot or gassed. Remembering what is wrong, forgetting what is correct, and refusing to entertain either. This is what Judt's Postwar contributes most not only to an understanding of postwar Europe but to the twentieth century in general. The twentieth century indeed was a time of immeasurable economic prosperity, but it also was a temporary elixir for the brutal and discomforting memories of the past. As Judt suggests, in the last few decades, Europeans have openly accepted their crimes of the past as an admission ticket to the E.U. That may serve many of my generation well, but it can never replace history itself. Just ask the frustrated younger generation searching for gainful employment. If the next generation is to find its way, it must be equipped with an unvarnished past, an idea which is readily promoted in this text.

It was interesting to revisit and read Postwar in 2016, more than a decade since its original publication, amidst Brexit, the rise of right wing nationalism across the continent, etc. When the book came out ~2005/06, there was a lot of talk about the success of the EU 60 years after WW2: 1. The rapid expansion of the European Union: 10 countries, mainly from the former Soviet bloc, joined in 2004 and it seemed the spread of liberal democracy and reform was on the rise 2. Turkey was in the process of increasing civilian control over its army, liberalizing its justice system, abolishing the death penalty, etc. in a bid to join the EU More than a decade since the book was published, the tide appears to have turned, and the EU is facing more headwinds and uncertainty. But Tony Judt's superb account of Europe after 1945 is still the best book around to help make sense of what's happened in Europe after WW2. At almost 800 pages and packed with facts and figures, it's definitely an intense book. But Judt's simple yet elegant prose and crisp writing keeps the pages turning. Some of his statistics will boggle the mind (only one hospital in liberated Warsaw to treat 90,000 people; 87,000 women raped in Vienna in 3 weeks by the red army) Judt writes that the war in Europe did not really end in 1945. More than 36 million Europeans died between 39 and 45 because of the war. Many more millions were displaced from their homes, villages and cities by Hitler and Stalin. Even after Germany's defeat, the continent continued to be bloodied with violent retribution, purges and killings in places like Greece and Yugoslavia. Not only does the war not end by 45, but neither does the active persecution of Jews, including many murdered by Polish pogroms. Moreover, Judt believes that many of the other offenders such as Austria get away lightly, leaving Germany to bear the brunt of the blame for WW2. Judt brings attention to the phenomenon of "Waldheimer's disease" -- the inability to recollect one's actions during WW2, named after Kurt Waldheim, who went on to serve as the PM of Austria. Often overlooked, especially in Continental Europe, is the significance of the Marshall Plan - a $200 billion "investment" on Western Europe to help restore its infrastructure, housing, etc. Judt goes on to write that all this helped Europe create economic and public policy models that have now become the envy of the world, such as a robust social safely net, affordable healthcare, etc. On the flip side, the aging population, low birth rates, rampant immigration, the unsustainable welfare models, etc. are noted as serious challenges. Judt has no sacred cows and spares no one. For instance, he disabuses the reader of the notion that America singlehandedly defeated communism. In fact, the best parts of the book are Judt's country-by-country blow-by-blow account of how communism was actually defeated. No punches are held back as he describes postwar Britain as a dirty, cold and bankrupt land, including a complete takedown of PM Anthony Eden and co. for the Suez affair. One of the key takeaways from Postwar is that despite the human devastation and the destruction caused by WWII, it's remarkable that Western Europe has managed to rebound and exist peacefully, developing institutions and policies that ensure that such history never repeats itself and hateful ideologies do not manifest in large-scale violence.

Wonderful book. I

The book covers a wide scope of events in Europe since 1945 with some background history prior to that. It integrates the political, economic and social events in roughly chronological order and for various countries. This is done well. We have lived through much of it, but may not have seen the full scope which this book brings out. Because of the scope, it is a long book. The author is fond of obscure word and over uses hyphenated phrases. I think the book goes down hill after chapter 22 as he looks too much at the past and not to the present and future. Seems to contradict much of what was said earlier in the book

This book gives you an in deepth understanding of the dramatic transformation of Europe after the WWII, at the country by country level and all the implications of this transformation, detailed explanation of the plan Marshall, the creation of the UN, European Union and many other organisms, and it covers a number of variables political, cultural, economic situation at the time, etc, etc. The book covers from 1945 to the late 80s, including cold war. Anybody interested in understanding the dynamics of Europe should read this book.

Europe, politically, strategically and socially, from 1945-2005. Such a complex, multi-threaded topic brilliantly handled by Judt. The history of our times.

As much thought, effort, knowledge, research, etc. was invested in the subject of East Europe, that much and less was NOT invested in the subject of Yugoslavia. It is disappointing how badly was case of Yugoslavia presented. As it was written by an amateur writer. In the chapters and paragraphs that are explaining Yugoslavia, there was not even an attempt to investigate, explore, analyze and synthesize the data, facts and resource texts, the way it was done for the rest of the East. For example, it is stated that Yugoslavia's republic of Slovenia with 7% of population was contributing with about 25% of Yugoslavia's exports. There is no attempt to investigate and explain, how or why was that? The way it is put in the book, it suggests that Slovenians are, taller, prettier, handsomer, smarter, cleverer ( at the end, this may be so... cynically I add), than the rest of Yugoslavs. There is no attempt even to try to state the fact that Yugoslav economy was also the case of planned economy. The same as in the East bloc. Like in the case of East Germany, which was delegated to make computers for eastern bloc, or Czechoslovakia that was making steel. Yugoslavia was, if you look it from that perspective, small East Bloc for itself. It also does not mention anything about favorite East Bloc economy planning tool, Five Year Plan and planed transfer of industries. In case of Yugoslavia,there was a transfer of industrial companies, machines, people, knowledge and everything else associated, before 1948. from Vojvodina (north of Serbia) to Slovenia and Albania. Also It does not say that many Slovenians were exiled by Nazis to Serbia, and that they survived the war because of the help of Serbians. What I want to say is that, there was no effort by the author to explain that it was not only the enterprise spirit that made Slovenia exporter. It was delegated to them too, by politburo of SKJ. In Yugoslavia, factories, companies, mines, etc. were established per order of The Party, not only by economic wisdom, or common sense. Also, statements about Serbia are very much as if the author gave this chapter to one of his students to write, and he or she just copied Madeleine Albright (who also survived the war because of the help of Serbians), or William G. Walker opinions and statements. I have to add that, the introductory statement that Yugoslavia didn't die, but was killed, is really good summary of what was going on over there. For the rest of the book, I think that is really very well written. As far as I know. Great book by the author... as always...

Für Geschichtsinteresierte ein absolutes Muss! Wenn man sich auf neuere Perspektiven auf den kalten Krieg freuen will, dann nimmt man einen Judt zur Hand. Großartige Schreibe, allgemeinere Perspektiven, die mehr als nur einen Staat im Fokus haben.. Erfrischend und belebend für alle, die sich für die Nachkriegszeit interessieren, aber die alleinige deutsche / französische / amerikanische / britische / russische Perspektive auf diesen Zeitraum leid sind und nach größerem Überblick streben. Eines von Judt's letzten Meisterwerken und ein absoluter Tipp.

When you think of Europe, nature’s paradise , picturesque sights, romantic evenings, vibrant people, effervescent life and soccer league immediately comes into mind. Apart from these, there are products whose quality itself makes you identify it with an European nation. Perfection is the tag that goes with Swiss watches, German cars, Italian designer clothes, Belgian chocolates , French kitchenware and Danish furniture. There are more positive aspects that have been missed out but there is no point in discussing it here because the book is about something else. Behind the facade of aforementioned goodness and virtues, there is buried a very diabolic and virulent past, which is etched in surviving generation who have gone through the nightmares. For others, unfortunate past will be kept alive in the form of books, media and memoirs. The protracted World War-II which began with Hitler’s invasion of Poland in Sep’1939 and ended with it’s unconditional surrender in May’1945, was a total war which involved both military and civilians,and resulted in utter misery and desolation. Post World war offered a ray of hope but it was too feeble under prevailing circumstances. It presented conundrum issues in multitude. There may be only few cities or towns which were not sucked into the war. The human losses was uncountable and even if the number of casualties are recorded, it’s questionable. The scale of destruction, once threatened to lead the world to apocalypse. People vanished in large numbers. This includes extermination in death camps or killing field, diseases, starvation , shooting and burning. The war was not restricted to battles and movement but people had to endure horrific times where everybody have lost something and many lost everything. It was an anarchic situation where political parties were banned and elections rigged. People were hounded by the series of events and horrified by contemplating unforeseeable future. The race which suffered inexplicable ordeals and pain were Jews. The history has been unkind to them. Not only German driven Holocaust, but Polish, Swish , French and Dutch contributed no less to their suffering. They were identified, arrested , deported and subjected to death. The war if persisted for few more years would have completely obliterated Jews from this world. Post war , the myriad number of displaced and battered civilians presented a complicated problem to Europe and that was hitherto refugee crisis. The problem was that of feeding , housing , clothing and caring people in still not unified Europe. The economy of most nation was in doldrums but the situation has called for public investment . The moot question before government was where to channelize the investments when the resource was scarce. The war was a blizzard and once it passed through, it hardly provided the required relief to European colonial powers. The war left nations like Britain and France in economic shambles. To add to their woes, there were increasing demand from Asian and African colonies which compelled this powers to relinquish their traditional claims. During the war , Britain had lost some territories to Japan. Their surrender to Japanese forces in Singapore was a humiliation from which Britain could never recover. France too suffered humiliating defeats in Indo-China, which along with Syria, Lebanon and North African nations like Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia were its key colonies. The colonial power were following the lower trajectory and were in steady decline . Moreover, military defeats , domestic instability and economic deterioration compounded their problem. So it did not make much sense to hold on to colonies and soon these nations began to retreat from their colonies. It was an economically, politically and militarily predicament for these powers. For few centuries, they have kept the colonial subjects under servitude. Now the myth of European might and invincibility was broken. Post World War-II, there was a shift in power equation. Traditional power like Germany was defeated while France and England, albeit victorious were completely drained out . Two new superpowers emerged - USA and Soviet Union. Then entire Europe was polarized. The Western Europe was under the influence of USA while Eastern Europe became satellite states of Soviet Union and headed by Communist government. There was a distrust and there was a geopolitical tension between Western and Eastern blocs, which came to be known as Cold War. This continued for more than four decades. Due to the intensifying Cold War, there was no peace treaty. The Europeans lived under the shadow of World War and there was always a scary anticipation of a third . What troubled American blocs were the possibility of German revival again and expansion of Soviet Union. These were the rationales that gave birth to NATO , which was inter-government military alliances between USA and most of the Western European nations, with the key objective was to strengthen western allies against possible attack of Soviet Union on Western Europe. On similar lines, Eastern European formed a similar alliance known as Warsaw Pact. Both USA and Soviet Union started flexing muscles on their sphere of influence. After Suez Canal was nationalized by Egypt, France and Britain had secretly planned to attack Egypt but the plan was shot down by the USA. The objective of Sovietization of Eastern Europe was to draw it steadily away from Western Europe. They were in a position to eliminate anyone, it wished in the Soviet blocs through staged administrative procedures and false testimonies and confessions. Their military tanks also entered Hungary and erst while Czechoslovakia, when they felt Communism was threatened . These Soviet satellite states exercised authority at home and at the same time maintained modus vivendi with the Soviet Union. The single parties and its rulers in their respective boundaries were suffering from megalomania. Staying in power was such an obsession. The immediate aftermath of the World War-II left most cities shattered and the male workforce out of the scene. It was a revival time to atone what have been lost after staggering times. During the first five years , nations began to put their economies on the track. Then begin an era of exultant and prosperity, an unprecedented one in the next two decade in Western Europe. Germany, whose infrastructure like roads, railways, shipyards, factories and mines had survived the war, were in the forefront surprisingly. The Nazis in the 30’s had invested in communications, vehicle manufacturing, optics, light engineering industries. The objective was war but it began to pay divided post World War economic revival. Companies like Mercedes Benz and BMW went on to established reputation for engineering quality and manufacturing reliability. After three decades of economies, growth in Western Europe followed inflation and declining growth rates, resulting in unemployment and social discontentment. Post Yom Kippur War in 1973, where Syria and Egypt attacked Israel, Arab nation doubled the price of oil in frustration with Western support for Israel, leading to rising oil import bills. This coupled with inflation and declining exports led to budget deficit and payment crisis. There was recession in every traditional industries like coal, iron and steel. From 1980 onwards, economy was again on track. First, governments accelerated development in technology and financial market . Secondly , they offloaded non performing public assets and the money helped them to balance the budget, albeit in short term. On the other side, communist economies were in doldrums and in a wobblier state from the beginning. They barely managed to provide citizen with sufficient food. Mass productions of redundant industrial goods were produced. On the contrary, there were demand for consumer goods but supply was never sufficient and was of mediocre quality. Distribution and sale of goods was badly managed . There was skimming and rampant corruption , which lead to artificial induced scarcity. Amidst the progress, there was also a discontentment in certain section and region, regarding unfulfilled expectations and loss of pride. This gave way to spurt of terrorism across the prosperous region of Western Europe. There have been frustrated call for Basque independence, comprising of regions of France and Spain. This lead to armed struggle with the authority. When Ireland was finally relinquished, The United Kingdom still retained Northern Ireland, which they felt had a sizeable Protestant majority. However , this abandonment was an humiliation to certain section of mainland Irish population , who under the flagship of IRA demanded unification , if possible by force. Another group that emerged was from West Germany by the name of Baader Meinhof. They indulged in bombing, shooting, assassination, kidnapping, taking hostages and robberies. They assassinated soldiers, policemen, politicians and some person holding key positions. German partner in World War - Italy was bedevilled by Left terrorists. They were into murders, mutilations, assault, kidnapping. Their victims include politicians , policemen and magistrates, prosecutors and judges. Some of these organizations had also collusion with West Asian counterpart. The Soviet Union which played a key role in defeat of Hitler, occupied half of Europe. In military weapons, it matched west for four decades. More than 30% of its resources were diverted towards military funding. Later the burden was too much. The Soviet Union and communism was beginning to crumble. Communism depends on control of economy, knowledge, opinion, people and their movement. Soviet Union also exercised control over its satellite states. There were demonstrations in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 but was crushed by Soviet tanks. This invasion left a very bad taste but the message was conveyed that East Europe was deviating from ideological politics. During later years, communism was no longer an obstacle but ironically it was becoming irrelevant. After liberal minded Micheal Gorbachev became head of Soviet Union, he preached freedom of choice and reforms from within. Not only control on citizen was relaxed but also satellite states. In 1989, there was storm of revolutions, which began in Poland and soon extended to Czechoslovakia, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and East German. One common feature was the irrepressible campaign and demonstrations in opposition to single party rule and change. The upshot was the fall of Communism from Central and Eastern Europe. There was solemn abjuration of Communism.Four established nations disappeared from world map. Fourteen new countries were born. East Germany was unified with West Germany. Czechoslovakia became two separate nations - Czech Republic and Slovakia. USSR and Yugoslavia disappeared in the course of 90’s and what remained was splintering of new nations. Balkan region was a dormant region ready to erupt at any time. The region was plagued by xenophobia. Then chain of events led to full fledged ethnic war , resulting in disintegration of pluralistic Yugoslavia and creation of five new nations as an aftermath. Soviet Union case was a remarkable one where there was no war, no catastrophe and no bloody revolution. It’s institution and authority lost relevance and soon evaporated. The breakup resulted in formation of eleven new nations in 1991. In the last decade of 20th century, there was a greater emphasis on European Unity. European union was formed , which is a unified trade and monetary body of member countries. It eliminates border control between members, which allow flow of goods and people . Anything manufactured in one country can be sold to other member country and that too without any additional tariffs or duties. Taxes were standardized and a common currency Euro was introduced. Now it had become a possibility for families to work in one nation and stay in another. The world order had changed from what it was immediately after World War-II. There have been lot of positive developments but still atmosphere of distrust, resentment and lack of confidence stays on . The relation between US and Europe is on frosty ground. The rift widened after US generals were reluctant to share decision making with European counterpart during Balkan war. NATO future goal is obscure and after end of Cold War, it has lost its relevance. European Union is now powerful enough to put pressure on US Congress and on individual American manufacturers to conform to its norms and regulations or else risk being squeezed out of their market. The future of the relationship looks unpropitious.Though ex-Communist countries were inducted into European Union, still investors are wary of risking their capitals there. Chronic absence of legal protection is an issue. Even German investors are not investing on the eastern side as they can find better quality and low wage worker in Poland and Slovakia. In the last month, Catalonia in Spain was in news as their parliament voted to declare independence. The Catalonia parliament was dissolved by Spanish head of State. Catalonia is virtually a state within a state with its own language, institutions and governing councils. The book was shortlisted for Pulitzer Prize. The subject is extensive and comprehensive. Every key event and occasions have been covered. The review has been written based on the contents that could be retained in memory after completion of the book. The author deserves loads of appreciation for presenting such a vast subject and wealth of information in a simple and lucid manner. The presentation of the subject matters has been done with such finesse that this 960 page book managed to hold on to my attention till the last page. It’s must have been an arduous task on the part of author to do an research on the subject . He has been scrupulous with his observation. The book subject matter is simply outside the ambit of the review. It cannot do justice to the book. If you are a history buff, this cannot be missed. It has to be in your collection. The book is worth every penny and time spent on it. This is highly recommended.