Post Wall, Post Square: How Bush, Gorbachev, Kohl, and Deng Shaped the World after 1989

by Kristina Spohr

This book offers a bold new interpretation of the revolutions of 1989, showing how a new world order was forged—without major conflict. Based on extensive archival research, Kristina Spohr attributes this in large measure to determined diplomacy by a handful of international leaders, who engaged in tough but cooperative negotiation to reinvent the institutions of the Cold War. She offers a major reappraisal of George H. W. Bush and innovative assessments of Mikhail Gorbachev and Helmut Kohl, as well as Margaret Thatcher and François Mitterrand. But, she argues, Europe’s transformation must be understood in global context. By contrasting events in Berlin and Moscow with the brutal suppression of the pro-democracy movement in Beijing, the book reveals how Deng Xiaoping pushed through China’s very different Communist reinvention. Here is an authoritative yet highly readable exploration of the crucial hinge years of 1989–1992 and their consequences for today’s world.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics

784 pages, Hardcover

First published October 3, 2019

Reviews

[La Central · Rating 5 out of 5]

"La caída del Muro no acabó con los muros. De hecho, hoy hay más muros y fronteras blindadas que hace treinta años, los populismos campan a sus anchas a lo largo y ancho del planeta, cuando no directamente dictaduras, los conflictos se eternizan y las organizaciones internacionales aparecen divididas e inoperantes. Todo esto no es una casualidad, asegura Kristina Spohr, sino que es el fruto de los fallos en el diseño improvisado de un nuevo orden internacional, gestado entre los años inmediatamente posteriores a 1989, de una diplomacia enorme enquistada en una lógica de la confrontación y, en última instancia, de las decisiones tomadas por unos líderes a los que los acontecimientos sorprendieron en el poder. El trío Gorbachov, Bush, Kohl afrontaron el inesperado y enorme reto bajo la atenta mirada de un Deng Xiaoping consciente de las capacidades de una pujante China. Cooperando entre ellos tomaron decisiones que, sin duda, moldearon y determinaron nuestro presente. Spohr reconstruye este momento crucial y determinante para nuestro presente de manera magistral, tejiendo un texto ágil y claro, con argumentos sólidos y un uso de recursos impresionante. Una fotografía de un momento abrupto en el que el mundo cambió sin avisar y no necesariamente a mejor." Oriol Pastor

[J.J. Garza · Rating 4 out of 5]

Cuando uno lleva cursos de Historia Universal es frecuente que no llegue al final del temario. A duras penas llegara a ver la Segunda Guerra Mundial y eso probablemente a las carreras. Esta situación me frustraba porque Historia se convirtió en mi materia favorita desde la Secundaria y de pronto (y más concretamente, después de 2001) quería conocer qué decían los libros sobre su “final”. Sobre aquellos turbulentos y sorpresivos años de las transformaciones acaecidas entre 1989 y 1991. Lo que Octavio Paz llamaba “los grandes días”.

Entonces a mí nunca me llegó la oportunidad de conocer ya documentada esta parte de la historia, pese a mi fascinación por ser una parte de “La” historia universal que ya me había tocado vivir. Así que este libro, ampliamente documentado y agresivamente detallado ofrece una crónica pormenorizada de aquellos años caracterizados por la sorpresa ante velocidad de cambio, lo muy relativamente poco sangriento de cómo se desenvolvió todo y cómo dieron al traste con ese mundo en perenne terror apocalíptico que vivía en la cuerda floja desde hacía más de cuarenta años.
Pueden no creerme, pero al leerlo me llegaron ecos de palabras que yo escuchaba mucho en los noticieros que se veían en mi casa cuando yo era niño. La palabra “multilateralismo” era una de ellas. Las reconvenciones de mi abuelita para que pensara en los niños de “Bosnia y de Somalia”. Los periodistas con sus grandes audífonos y micrófonos acolchonados.

Al ser un libro tan largo (casi 900 páginas de las cuales 250 son fuentes, citas, glosario e índices) su ritmo es un vaivén. De la narración de hechos fascinantes y a veces trepidantes (como la huida de los alemanes del este en los meses previos a la caída del muro) a una serie que se hace cansina de llamadas y entrevistas de líderes mundiales en foros de un puñado de organismos internacionales. Si bien esta última parte narra la hábil gestión diplomática de algunos de los protagonistas termina siendo la parte menos dinámica del libro. Otra cosa es que la autora decida ir y regresar entre cada uno de los escenarios mundiales y eso puede desorientar el lector.

Hablando de los protagonistas, el libro se maneja entre tres de ellos: la figura de Gorbachov que en su afán de creer que podía reformar las cosas y de su franca buena onda optó por no intervenir agresivamente cuando todo su “imperio” se le venía abajo. La figura de Helmut Kohl, el canciller alemán que todos tenían por campirano y pedestre pero que con habilidad reunificó su país y acalló las reservas de aliados y no tan aliados por el retorno de Alemania. Y ante todo, el protagonismo de Bush padre, un presidente hecho a un lado por las personalidades de su antecesor y su sucesor y la reacción de su propio hijo al traumático desafío que dio al traste con la idea de ese mundo nuevo. Bush padre aparece como un presidente mesurado, triunfador en política externa en la mayoría de los casos, pero incapaz de hacer un impacto interno. Además se toma aparte el caso de China, que sí terminó dando un manotazo para vencer la disidencia y continuar con su particularísimo modelo de desarrollo. Con la suma de sus acciones (y de los personajes secundarios del libro Thatcher y Miterrand) todos estos líderes mundiales crearon una arquitectura que no duró mucho y cuyas falencias nos tienen en otro mundo nuevo.

Y ése es el punto central del libro: quitar la idea de que esas proclamas triunfalistas del “fin de la historia” fueron alguna vez creíbles. Ese mundo de confianza y esperanza, que se sentía (y que en mi concepción de la Historia hasta 2001 se sentía como el final de un cuento de hadas) y que se bebía en el ambiente no era sostenible. Que había fisuras, tendencias internas, orgullos y ansiedades nacionales que iban a regresar al mundo a angustias que vemos. En estos días que parece que estamos viendo el refrito malo (y trágico) de una película que teníamos la idea de que había terminado hacía mucho tiempo es una lectura mesurada y detallada para darnos ese contexto

[Wiom biom · Rating 4 out of 5]

To understand the dynamics of the 21st century, in which a multipolar world is emerging, it seems to make sense to look back on the Cold War between the USA and the USSR. However, we usually neglect the crucial years following the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989, the lowering of the hammer and sickle on 25/12/91.

What this book offers is a very detailed and in-depth analysis of the way world leaders (from Bush to Kohl to Gorbachev to Deng) attempted to forge a "new world order", in Bush Sr's words, from the remains of the Cold War. Through the chronological uncovering of primary sources such as diary entries and notes from aides, Spohr weaves a narrative of personal diplomacy, albeit one that is a bit too US-centric. Indeed, other than being a review of the formative years of the new world order, Post Wall, Post Square (PWPS) also reads like a major reappraisal of Bush Sr's underrated term.

Fortunately, PWPS does not stray into a narrow American perspective -- while Bush seems to pick up the initiative towards the end of the Cold War (1991), the first few years of his term was characterised by deliberate passivity; arguably, leaders like Kohl and Gorbachev played a more crucial role in shaping post-post-war Europe from 1989 to 1991.

A major pitfall of PWPS is that the chronological retelling of the post-Cold War years seems unanchored at times. A more thematic approach would have complemented the chronological approach as the reader then would not have to draw conclusions (which may not be the author's) on their own.

I really really really loved the conlusion/epilogue!
1) Putin's nationalist rhetoric being a reasonable 0utcome of Yeltsin's failure to integrate Russia into the Western world by 1992/3.
2) Xi's nationalist rhetoric being a continuation of the modern Chinese state's re-assertion of its regional hegemony after a century of humiliation at the hands of Western powers; the shady historical relationship between the West and China in recent memory also further deepens the gulf between the two value-systems and world orders.
3) Market economics may not necessarily result in liberal democracy, as the PRC has shown.
4) As an extension from point 3, how far can we expect the future convergence of world orders? Is capitalism the only thing we can all agree on? Is liberal democracy not universal? And will this conflict between democracy and authoritarianism (and its variants) necessarily put the world on a more dangerous footing?
5) The end of the Cold War ushered in a way more unstable world. In Bush Sr's words, "unpredictability is our greatest enemy"; whereas the latter half of the 20th century was predictable in that the USA could shape its foreign policy against the USSR, the 21st century seems to present a myriad of challenges from various corners of the globe (Russia, China, Middle East, North Korea...).
6) The way Bush navigated the end of the Cold War and the formation of his new world order really pushed me to appreciate the importance of diplomacy, as opposed to aggressive rhetoric or military posturing (which the USA and PRC are falling back on). Maintaining diplomatic channels based on the mutual respect of sovereignty and more importantly, the recognition of similarities rather than irreconcilable differences, can certainly limit the chances of unwanted conflict and the expand the realm of possibilities for collaboration and cooperation. After all, every country under rational leadership would aspire to the same things -- better living conditions, sovereignty, prosperity, peace...
7) Am i still a proponent of American unipolarity? Is it even feasible considering the geopolitical (isolated between the Pacific and the Atlantic) and political (the American populace's oscillation between isolationism and globalism) realities of the USA?
8) ok i guess i believe in the global dominance of 'Western' values (which should not be labelled 'Western' in the first place) but also the importance of multilateralism

also, i really admire/respect Bush Sr

[Mateo Toledo · Rating 2 out of 5]

Muy largo y repetitivo. Panegírico sobre la gestión de G. Bush padre.

[Iván Braga · Rating 4 out of 5]

Un libro sobre el vertiginoso periodo histórico de fines de los 80 e inicios de los 90, escrito con la perspectiva que dan más de 30 años desde los hechos. La autora revisa y analiza la caída de Europa Oriental y la Unión Soviética, así como la tremenda reconfiguración de la política internacional que siguió a las revoluciones que forzaron la caída del bloque de países que surgieron tras la segunda guerra mundial, al amparo de la Unión Soviética y en el marco de la guerra fría. La obra es muy detallada y va recorriendo los acontecimientos, las negociaciones y los personales que fueron protagonistas de este gran cambio. Muy recomendable para entender esa transición de la que fuimos testigos, pero que hoy podemos revisar con una mirada más completa con la ventaja que dan los años transcurridos.

[Yannick M · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'd give it four stars if it was 200 pages shorter.

I think the central concept of the book - a reordering of the post-45 world - is a very interesting and useful one. And the idea of looking not just at europe but also focussign on Asia is also very good. Although I think the potential of what could have happened is almost more interesting than what actually happened, especially because what actually happened was actually pretty conservative. So i would have like if she focussed a lot more on that.

When it comes to telling the actual history she mostly does a good job, although i think she sometimes focusses a bit too much on the details and in relative terms spends not enough time to but things in context

[Michael Suire · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent overview of the events surrounding 1989-1992, with special emphasis on the relationship Kohl-Bush-Gorbachev. It does go into minute detail in many instances, and the style can at times be somewhat academic (i.e. dry), so you definitely need to be (very) interested in the topic. But it nonetheless is a momentous and impressive work.

[Nzric · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting, detailed insight into personal diaries of some key players, but the author succumbs to a 'Great Man' narrative of recent history and manages to avoid anything too controversial to the Bush dynasty or 'Gorby'.

[Irl · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an impressively researched and often illuminating study of the fragile world that emerged after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Kristina Spohr’s command of the archival material is beyond doubt. Her use of meeting minutes, diplomatic records, and high-level correspondence gives the book real authority, particularly when dealing with US–Soviet negotiations at the end of the Cold War.

The sections on the fall of the Berlin Wall and the immediate diplomatic aftermath are the book at its strongest. The detailed treatment of US–Soviet relations sheds genuine new light, especially in its portrayal of Gorbachev’s increasingly desperate pleas for Western financial assistance as the Soviet system began to unravel. Spohr is particularly effective in showing how consistently George H. W. Bush resisted these appeals, grounded in his view that the USSR was no longer economically viable. This careful, document-led analysis deepened my understanding of why the Soviet collapse unfolded as it did.

Equally strong is the book’s handling of Gorbachev’s political turn in 1990. Spohr clearly traces his drift towards hardliners and extremists, culminating in the bloodshed in the Baltic states in January 1991. These chapters are show how fragile reform had become and how quickly Gorbachev let his ideals give way to permitting coercion.

That said, the book is not without its frustrations. Some quotations are excessively long and frequently repetitive. In many cases, tighter paraphrasing would have conveyed the same point more effectively and kept the narrative moving. The extended treatment of the European Community’s steps towards economic union also becomes tedious, with an accumulation of detail that feels disproportionate to its analytical payoff.

I was also unconvinced by the attempt to link European developments too closely with Pacific history beyond 1989. While the inclusion of Tiananmen Square is intellectually ambitious, the connection does not always feel persuasive or necessary to the core argument of the book.

Finally, a note on the audiobook narration. The attempted American accents are very poor and genuinely distracting. They add nothing to the listening experience and would have been far better omitted.

Overall, this is a serious, scholarly work that rewards patient reading (with extensive footnotes), particularly for those interested in high diplomacy at the end of the Cold War. Its depth of research is admirable and parts of it are genuinely enlightening, but stylistic excesses and uneven focus hold it back. A solid and worthwhile read, but not without its flaws.

[Mat]

“Here Spohr finally brings her knowledge together in a masterly, broad narrative international history of this pivotal time in world history. It is political and diplomatic history in a grand style, done with nice balance, empathy, and an eye for telling detail. It will be one of the standard works on this period for many years to come.”— Philip Zelikow, co-author of To Build a Better World

“Kristina Spohr beautifully reconstructs the events of the 1989-92 era, reminding us of the importance of intelligent, responsible political leadership at critical moments of history . . . Uses recently declassified material in the British, French, German, Russian and US archives … [and] pays deserved tribute also to the “people power” of central and eastern Europe. She mentions not only those who filled the streets of East Berlin and Prague in peaceful demonstrations, but also brave individuals such as Lech Walesa, the earthy, politically astute electrician from Gdansk, who symbolised Poland’s non-violent move to democracy.” —Financial Times

“Post Wall, Post Square is a work of historical sweep and ambition . . . a magisterial account of the momentous events of 1989 and the diplomacy that put in place a new global settlement.”—The Times Literary Supplement


“A gripping and compelling account…. The peaceful ending of the Cold War between West and East remains one of the greatest achievements of modern statecraft.”—Christopher Andrew, Literary Review

[Filip Zajíček · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kristina Spohr vás přiměje přemýšlet nad rokem 1989 jako nad globálním fenoménem. Uvidíte, jak se světoví státníci potýkali s úplně novou situací.

Někteří zůstanou utopení v minulosti (Tchatcherová), někteří se chopí šance kormidlovat budoucnost navzdory tomu, kolik to bude stát (Kohl), jiní vyšlou svou loď po proudu, který ji nakonec potopí (Gorbačov). Další se rozhodnout, že změnám budou vzdorovat silou a nebudou hledět na počet mrtvých, protože uvěří, že jsou dost silní na to, aby mezinárodní rozhořčení a sankce (které zase nebyly tak velké) ustáli (vedení Čínské komunistické strany).

U popisu rozpadu SSSR je zajímavé připomenout si, jak moc jej (kromě jiných faktorů) popohnala mocichtivost jednotlivých národních lídrů svazových republik a že kdyby Jelcin neviděl v samostatném Rusku vehikl, který mu poslouží na cestě k moci, tak by třeba historie vypadala zase o něco jinak.

Historička Spohr tak znovu ukazuje, jak je krátkozraké myslet si, že rozpad SSSR nějak způsobil, nebo podporoval Západ – naopak. Speciálně americká administrativa do poslední chvíle čekala, že Gorbačov bude dál její partner (kromě jiného totiž SSSR představoval soupeře a pak už i partnera, kterého "uměli".) Přesně proto Bush starší nepřišel v roce 1989 s žádnou triumfalistickou rétorikou o vítězství ve studené válce, na tu došlo teprve, až když bylo jasné, že se SSSR rozpadne.

[Lauren Koop · Rating 4 out of 5]

great detailed history of the late 80s/early 90s and deep dive into the paramount leaders of the time, highlighting the role of personality and personal relationships in world affairs.

especially great coverage of HW Bush's foreign policy approach.

wish there was a bit more on the "post square" side of the equation.

[Ab · Rating 4 out of 5]

An amazing, fascinating, and riveting academic work which provides a German perspective on the issue of Euro-Russian geopolitics. Highly recommended to anyone who wants a historical insights into the current Russian-Ukraine conflict!

[David Alonso vargas · Rating 5 out of 5]

Un análisis sobre los enormes cambios acaecidos en el mundo durante la presidencia de George H.W. Bush.
De la caída del muro a Yugoslavia pasando por Iraq y tiananmen.
Imprescindible

[Alin C. · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a book!

[Kareen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Este libro me a costado leerlo por que es larguísimo y tiene varias palabras rebuscadas y técnicas pero igual disfruté mucho leyéndolo, y aprendiendo bastante de la historia mundial.

[Paco Agüera · Rating 5 out of 5]

Indispensable para entender el fin de la Guerra Fría. Un ensayo histórico de 10.

[Yves]

A thorough dissection of the very interpersonal ways a world can change. Very Bush-centric (understandable for an English language piece of scholarship).

[George · Rating 5 out of 5]

Despite its magnitude and its 600 pages, it is easily read.
People that have a lively memory of the events will enjoy slightly more.
Like Adam Tooze' "Crashed", it makes you realise not only what happened to non-existing countries (like USSR, Yugoslavia), but most importantly why and how we result with contemporary EU, China, US.