No Place for Russia: European Security Institutions Since 1989

The optimistic vision of a “Europe whole and free” after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 has given way to disillusionment, bitterness, and renewed hostility between Russia and the West. In No Place for Russia, William H. Hill traces the development of the post-Cold War European security order to explain today’s tensions, showing how attempts to integrate Russia into a unified Euro-Atlantic security order were gradually overshadowed by the domination of NATO and the EU-at Russia’s expense.Hill argues that the redivision of Europe has been largely unintended and not the result of any single decision or action. Instead, the current situation is the cumulative result of many decisions-reasonably made at the time-that gradually produced the current security architecture and led to mutual mistrust. Hill analyzes the United States’ decision to remain in Europe after the Cold War, the emergence of Germany as a major power on the continent, and the transformation of Russia into a nation-state, placing major weight on NATO’s evolution from an alliance dedicated primarily to static collective territorial defense into a security organization with global ambitions and capabilities. Closing with Russia’s annexation of Crimea and war in eastern Ukraine, No Place for Russia argues that the post-Cold War security order in Europe has been irrevocably shattered, to be replaced by a new and as-yet-undefined order.

Reviews of No Place for Russia: European Security Institutions Since 1989

William H. Hill is the perfect person to tell the story of how the promise and hope that accompanied the end of the Cold War have been replaced by war and renewed division in Europe three decades later. As a longtime student of Russia and as a former diplomat directly involved in addressing some of Europe's most intractable security challenges, Hill brings a wealth of experience and insights into this clearly written, compelling, and timely narrative.–David Kramer, former U.S. assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights, and labor The end of the Cold War brought with it the expectation of a new era of peace and prosperity. What went wrong? A lack of trust and a lingering Cold War mentality in some quarters, compounded by misunderstandings, misperceptions, and missed opportunities, led to progressively worsening relations between Russia and the West. With his lucid and objective analysis, a direct witness and a protagonist of key events during the last quarter of a century helps us to understand.–Lamberto Zannier, high commissioner on national minorities, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe William Hill provides a superb analysis of the evolution of European and transatlantic security institutions since the end of the Cold War, explaining why they collectively failed to provide the comprehensive security regime that many on both sides of the Atlantic hoped would emerge after 1989. Combining the analytical skills of a well-trained historian with the experience of a senior diplomat who participated in many of the events he analyzes, No Place for Russia provides a comprehensive analysis of why relations between Russia and West failed to develop around a regime of cooperative security and explores the challenges for policy makers throughout the region to cope with the ambiguous, messy international security disorder that has emerged in the early decades of the twenty-first century.–P. Terrence Hopmann, Johns Hopkins University William H. Hill's No Place for Russia is the most comprehensive and lucid account I have read of how the post-Cold War Euro-Atlantic security order developed. Hill's long experience as a diplomat and his scholarly eye offer new insight into the unsuccessful project to integrate Russia into European security structures, explaining how and why the buoyant optimism of the late 1980s gave way to the rancor and resentment that define attitudes between Moscow and the West today. An indispensable work for understanding why the East-West divide has reemerged, and a source of wisdom on how both sides might begin to repair the damage done.–John Beyrle, former U.S. ambassador to Russia and Bulgaria