I'm taking Professor Urban's class on Soviet history, particularly recent political history, at Catholic University and we haven't even been assigned this book yet, but I really enjoy it. It's extremely interesting to see how people who lived under a distorted version of Marxism reconcile history with Marx's theories and ideology. The book is great, good for anyone who wants an epilogue to the history of the Soviet Union.

Reviewed by NIGEL CLIVE in International Relations, Volume XIII, No 2, August 1996 -

Neil Melvin's valuable study of the role of the Russian-speaking communities in the development of national identity in six former Soviet republics grew out of a project organized by the Royal Institute of International Affairs. In each case, Melvin has provided the historical background to the contemporary problems. Within the Russian Federation, the Russian national question is of fundamental importance, because in certain areas, of which Chechenia is the best known, Russians constitute a minority. The disintegration of the USSR created a situation in which some 25 million Russian settlers found themselves living in newly independent states. The consequent notion of a Russian diaspora was integrated into the definition of the Russian nation. It was only with the Gorbachev reforms of the 1980s and the rise of nationalist politics that Russian identity began to undergo significant change. After the collapse of the USSR, the leading members of the democratic bloc, led by Yeltsin and his Foreign Minister Kozyrev, claimed that interference in the internal affairs of neighbours belonged to the imperial and Soviet past. But by the winter of 1992, the democratic defence of the settler communities had become a basic tenet of Russia's external and domestic policies. In his 1994 New Year address, Yeltsin described the diaspora as 'inseparable from us', but by the early summer this line was being toned down.
In the Baltic states, each republic has followed different approaches to the settler communities. In Estonia, the official line has shown willingness to support the cultural and political development of the non-Estonian community, while Latvia has been the most extreme case of Sovietization. However, from 1989 to 1991, the Russian-speaking populations in both states demonstrated increasing support for Baltic independence. The defeat of the August 1991 coup in Moscow caused many leading Latvian politicians to encourage non-Latvians to leave, and in the June 1993 elections the nationalist parties were easy winners while most of the Russian-speaking population were unable to vote. In Estonia, the Russian settlers developed as a far more integrated community, notably in the north-east. Indeed, the integration of non-Estonians was further accelerated by the parliamentary elections in early 1995. In contrast to Latvia where a requirement to work in the bureaucracy is fluency in Latvian, Estonians have built important bridges with their Russian speakers. The final military withdrawal in August 1994 signalled Moscow's commitment to independent Baltic states.
Romania and the Russian Federation have had territorial and diaspora claims on Moldova. Six days after the Moldovan declaration of independence on 27 August 1991, the five districts on the left bank of the Dniester declared a separate independence in the Moldovan Transdniestrian Republic (the PMR). The PMR then formed the economic core of the Moldovan political economy. Industry on the left bank was closely tied to the Soviet military industrial complex. The proposed absorption into Romania constituted a central challenge to this position. From the bloody Dniester conflict in 1992, which finally halted Romanianization, emerged Moldovan nationalism personified in the Agrarian Democratic Party, which triumphed in the 1994 elections. On the right bank, the Socialist unity alliance and the Russian Centre in Chisinau guarded the position of the Russian-speaking community. The engagement of Chisinau with the IMF and the World Bank meant that the right bank was becoming more vital economically than the unreformed PMR and has been helped to do so by pro-Moldovan settler organizations backed by the Russian government.
Large-scale Russian settlement of the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine has led many Russians to conclude that a distinct Ukrainian nationality is a fiction. Ukrainian nationalism dates primarily from the post-war years when Ukraine became a member of the United Nations; but in the 1970s and 1980s nationalist and anti-Soviet forces were kept in check. In 1989, the leading independent movement, Rukh, was formed which provoked anxiety in the Russified East, where the new business class supported privatization, reforging links to industry in Russia and protecting the Russian language. From early 1994, Crimea's leading economic actors began to distance themselves from the more radical pro-Moscow line of Russian nationalist groups. Indeed, since October 1993 the Russian government has generally supported the Ukrainian position on the Crimean issue, fearing that its secession would establish a dangerous precedent for areas such as Chechenia. There is a strong sense among Russians in the west that they are Central Europeans rather than Russians of the Russian Federation. Overall, by mid-1995, despite continuing chronic economic problems, Ukraine seemed unlikely to disintegrate.
A distinct Kazakh national identity has been steadily developing since the late 1950s. Kunaev became First Secretary in 1960 and was the first Kazakh to rise to membership of the Politburo. The perestroika years did much to accelerate the development of a Kazakh national identity and transform the nationalist movement into a political force. In December 1986, there were riots in Almaty when Kolbin, a Russian from Ulyanovsk, replaced Kunaev. But during the debate on sovereignty in October 1990, a bill was passed acknowledging that the Kazakh language should have a special place in Kazakhstan, leaving a diminished role for Russian language and culture. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Kazakhstan became a single ethno-political unity and the Russian community in the north and east was left without an organization to speak on its behalf. President Nazarbaev's party, which has always strongly opposed dual citizenship, has profited from the immigration of some one million ethnic Kazakhs living in and beyond the former USSR and the exodus of some 200,000 Russians. With the settlers demanding unification with Russia, Russified Kazakhs calling for a confederation and Kazakh nationalists demanding even greater independence, Nazarbaev is confronted by a complex problem of balancing the promotion of links between the north-east and Russia and the retention of crucial elements of national sovereignty that will allow him to keep support in the key southern areas. Kazakhstan is the area in which the settler issue continues to pose the greatest challenge to peace and stability.
The central finding of Neil Melvin's study is that because of the poorly articulated character of Russian ethnicity, widespread conflict did not develop, as might have been expected, over the issue of Russian settler communities. There was no common understanding of what it meant to be Russian among the 25 million Russians living outside the Russian Federation. Moreover, the fact that many of the post-Soviet elite in Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Moldova (after the war in 1992) were drawn from the former communist system, ensured that ethno-nationalism was often moderated by the stress which national communism placed on inter-ethnic accord. If, however, after the presidential elections in June 1996, Russia enters an expansionist or nationalist trajectory, the issue of the diaspora might well play a central role in reviving Russia as a 'Great Power' which needs to protect its diaspora by possible territorial annexations.
NIGEL CLIVE

This book is a little dated - it came out in 1995, and the research is older than that. Amazingly, especially given the ever-changing nature of politics in the FSU, it is still relevant. If you are interested in the politics of diaspora Russians, you must read this book. Kolstoe (who is the author, despite what Amazon says) does a fantastic job of bringing together a plethora of research in this volume. It is a little light on theory and on the situation in Central Asia, but in general is a good overview of this topic.

This novel covers the campaign in Gaul. It is mainly written from the point of view of a new recruit. The historicl and social aspects of the time are nicely captured, despite some stylistic problems. I liked the book and still read it from time to time. The follow up novel "The bloodied Toga" is unfortunately unawailable.

I Purchased this book a little over a year ago because little else was available on this subject. I found that the presentation of the material was good and in chronological order from the development of the guns until their use in the the two world wars. Skoda Company history is presented as well but mostly in the context of it's realtion to weapon construction. This book is substantially aided by the numerous photos, illustrations and drawins throughout the book that help give the reader a feel for what the guns looked like and who was most responsible for their development. Recommended for anyone interested in Artillery, the Austro-Hungarian Army and the Skoda Company

The emphasis here is upon the "class" tensions within the slave South and between the North with its "wage labor" and the South with its slave labor. Far too many historians in recent years have been afraid to use the concepts of "class" and "capitalism" for fear of being tainted with the brush of Marxism. But these are clearly terms and concepts the abolitionists and the pro-slavery thinkers themselves used in their attempts to make sense of their world. Ashworth does an admirable job of employing these concepts while avoiding the pitfalls of dogmatism and economic reductionism. He draws inspiration from Antonio Gramsci's concept of "hegemony" to provide his class and material analysis with a balance that emphasizes the complexities of human motivation.

The author clearly reveals the points at which the slave system was in inner conflict and shows how the southern attempts to provide an intellectual defense of slavery were doomed to fail because of the conflicts and tensions within the southern class system. He goes on to detail the ideology and the foundations of the Jacksonian Democrats, the Whig Party, and the Republican Party and in the process gives the reader a balanced perspective on the forces that led to the Civil War. This is a book that should be read by anyone interested in why the two sections of the country were so different and came to think of themselves as different peoples.

Mr. Lee has taken this obscure but, currently vital topic of concern to a level of understanding based on the little information actually available on the smuggling of nuclear materials. His text is careful to explain that there is a lot of ambiguity and concern for facts in his statements. It is very clear that the actual materials successfully smuggled is not and will probably never be known. His lists and charts are a big help in understanding why people try to smuggle these terrifying products. His information is carefully researched and documented with a large array of footnotes in a block section at the end of the book. Although it is a small book, it represents a very large amount of available data condensed into one place. The information about the involvement of government officials and the manipulations of the Russian Mafia show how convoluted this racket can become and why they are getting away with it. In short, he has tackled an obscure subject in the same way he approached the Andean Cocaine trade. The book is an easy and alarming read.

Haynes is an excellent writer. The book almost reads like a novel. He does an excellent analysis of the Texas political situation prior to the Mier expedition, and provides interesting insight into the decisions made by Sam Houston and Santa Anna. An excellent historical read.

the topic of soviet policy towards Vietnam is not a heavily researched one and the majority of what exists is heavily tainted by American views and a reliance on propaganda laced official statements of the Soviet government at the time. Gaiduk was one of few who was able to look at the Soviet declassified archives during the short time that they were open and thus his book is built on information which was never released and which better represents the motives and characteristics of the Soviet (and also Chinese to some extent) foriegn policy towards the Vietnam War. Very intersting if the subject interests you. and an integral perspective which can be found few other places.

Birobidjan of course failed to be the capital of Sovet Jewry(did Brighton Beach, Brooklin win this title?) The book is based onfacts, and facts usually can scare more than any fiction. I don't feel like the author makes the most of the facts. I do feel that the author is too soft in his judgement, I guess presenting the facts is always easier than providing a personal outlook.