Geopolitical Journey, Part 2: Borderlands

Editor’s Note: Stratfor’s George Friedman is continuing his trip this week across the region, including the countries of Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Poland, Serbia, Turkey and Azerbaijan. This report on the same region was written in 2010, as he was returning from a similar journey that explored the geopolitical imperatives of those nations. The observations and forecasts then in many ways mirror the reality today, four years later.

By George Friedman
Founder and Chief Executive Officer

A borderland is a region where history is constant: Everything is in flux. The countries we are visiting on this trip (Turkey, Romania, Moldova, Ukraine and Poland) occupy the borderland between Islam, Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity. Roman Catholic Hapsburg Austria struggled with the Islamic Ottoman Empire for centuries, with the Ottomans extending northwest until a climactic battle in Vienna in 1683. Beginning in the 18th century, Orthodox Russia expanded from the east, through Belarus and Ukraine. For more than two centuries, the belt of countries stretching from the Baltic to the Black seas was the borderland over which three empires fought.

There have been endless permutations here. The Cold War was the last clear-cut confrontation, pitting Russia against a Western Europe backed – and to a great extent dominated – by the United States. This belt of countries was firmly if informally within the Soviet empire. Now they are sovereign again. My interest in the region is to understand more clearly how the next iteration of regional geopolitics will play out. Russia is far more powerful than it was 10 years ago. The European Union is undergoing internal stress and Germany is recalculating its position. The United States is playing an uncertain and complex game. I want to understand how the semicircle of powers, from Turkey to Poland, are thinking about positioning themselves for the next iteration of the regional game.

I have been accused of thinking like an old Cold warrior. I don’t think that’s true. The Soviet Union has collapsed, and U.S. influence in Europe has declined. Whatever will come next will not be the Cold War. What I do not expect this to be is a region of perpetual peace. It has never been that before. It will not be that in the future. I want to understand the pattern of conflict that will occur in the future. But for that we need to begin in the past, not with the Cold War, but with World War I.

Regional Reshaping after World War I

World War I created a radically new architecture in this region. The Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires collapsed, the Russian empire was replaced by the Soviet Union, and the German empire was overthrown and replaced by a republic. No region in the world suffered more or was left more impoverished by the war than this region. Indeed, the war didn’t end for them in 1918. It went on as the grip of empires reluctantly subsided and the new nations struggled within and among themselves.

The collapse of empires allowed a range of nations to emerge as independent nations. From the Baltic states to Bulgaria, nations became nation-states. Many of the borders and some of the nations were fixed by the victorious powers at Versailles and Trianon. They invented Yugoslavia, which means „land of the southern Slavs,” out of a collection of hostile nations. They reshaped their borders. If France, Britain and the United States shaped the region, the Poles saved it.

The border between the Russian empire/Soviet Union and Europe is divided into two parts. The Carpathian Mountains form a rough boundary between the Russians and the rest of Europe from Slovakia to the south. These mountains are not particularly tall, but they are rugged, with scattered villages and few good roads. The Carpathians have belonged at various times to all of the countries in the region, but the Carpathians are not easily controlled. Even today, bandits rule parts of them. It is not impossible to move an army across it, but it is not easy, either.

The northern part of Europe is dominated by a vast plain stretching from France to Moscow. It is flat and marshy to the north but generally good terrain for armies to move on. Except for some river barriers, it is the route of Europe’s conquerors. Napoleon moved along the plain to Moscow, as did Hitler (who moved across the Caucasus as well). Stalin returned the way Napoleon and Hitler came.

The Intermarium

Following World War I, Poland re-emerged as a sovereign nation. The Russians had capitulated to Germany in 1917 and signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in 1918, which ceded a great deal of territory, including Ukraine, to Germany. With Germany’s defeat, Brest-Litovsk lost its force and the Russians tried to regain what they had given away in that treaty. Part of that was Poland. In 1920, a climactic battle took place in Warsaw, when an army led by Polish Gen. Jozef Pilsudski, who had struck an alliance with Ukraine that couldn’t work, blocked a Soviet invasion.

Pilsudski is an interesting figure, a reactionary in some ways, a radical in others. But it was his geopolitical vision that interests me. He was, above all else, a Polish nationalist, and he understood that Russia’s defeat by Germany was the first step to an independent Poland. He also believed that Polish domination of Ukraine – an ancient ploy – would guarantee Poland’s freedom after Germany was defeated. His attempt to ally with Ukraine failed. The Russians defeated the Ukrainians and turned on Poland. Pilsudski defeated them.

It is interesting to speculate about history if Pilsudski had lost Warsaw. The North European Plain was wide open, and the Soviets could have moved into Germany. Undoubtedly, the French would have moved to block them, but there was a powerful Communist Party in France that had little stomach for war. It could have played out many different ways had Pilsudski not stopped the Russians. But he did.

Pilsudski had another idea. Germany was in shambles, as was Russia, but both would be back. An alliance in place before they revived would, in Pilsudski’s mind, save the region. His vision was something called the Intermarium – an alliance of the nations between the seas built around Poland and including Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Finland and the Baltic states. This never came to be, but if it had, World War II may never have happened or could have played out in a different way. It is an idea that has been in my mind of late, thinking about what comes after NATO and ambitious concepts of European federation. Pilsudski’s Intermarium makes a kind of logical if not historical sense. It is not historical because this borderland has always been the battleground for others. It has never formed together to determine its fate.

The Russian-German Relationship

In many ways, this matter doesn’t rest in these states’ hands. It depends partly on what Russia wants and plans to do and it depends on what Europe wants and plans to do. As always, the Intermarium is caught between Russia and Europe. There is no southern European power at the moment (the Austro-Hungarian empire is a memory), but in the north there is Germany, a country struggling to find its place in Europe and in history.

In many ways, Germany is the mystery. The 2008 and Greek economic crises shocked the Germans. They had seen the European Union as the solution to European nationalism and an instrument of prosperity. When the crisis struck, the Germans found that nationalism had reared its head in Germany as much as it had in other countries. The Germans didn’t want to bail out the Greeks, and the entire question of the price and value of the European Union became a central issue in Germany. Germany has not thought of itself as a freestanding power since 1945. It is beginning to think that way again, and that could change everything, depending on where it goes.

One of the things it could change is German-Russian relations. At various times since 1871 and German re-unification, the Germans and Russians have been allies as well as mortal enemies. Right now, there is logic in closer German-Russian ties. Economically they complement and need each other. Russia exports raw materials; Germany exports technology. Neither cares to be pressured by the United States. Together they might be able to resist that pressure. There is a quiet romance under way between them.

And that rivets my attention on the countries I am visiting. For Poland, the specter of a German-Russian entente is a historical nightmare. The last time this happened, in 1939, Poland was torn apart and lost its sovereignty for 50 years. There is hardly a family in Poland who can’t name their dead from that time. Of course, it is said that this time it would be different, that the Germans are no longer what they were and neither are the Russians. But geopolitics teaches that subjective inclinations do not erase historical patterns. Whatever the Poles think and say, they must be nervous although they are not admitting it. Admitting fear of Germany and Russia would be to admit distrust, and distrust is not permitted in modern Europe. Still, the Poles know history, and it will be good to see what they have to say – or at least how they say it. And it is of the greatest importance to hear what they say, and don’t say, about the United States under these circumstances.

Romania’s Role

The Romanians are in a different position. The Romanians are buffered against the Russians by Ukraine and Moldova, and their sense of unease should be lower. Unlike the Poles and the North European Plain, they at least have the Carpathians running through their country. But what are we to make of Ukraine? Their government is pro-Russian and trapped by economic realities into strong Russian ties. Certainly, the increasingly German-led European Union is not going to come to their rescue. The question in Ukraine is whether their attempt to achieve complete independence is over, to be replaced by some informal but iron bond to Russia, or whether the Ukrainians still have room to maneuver. It seems from a distance that there is little room for them to breathe, let alone maneuver, but this is a question to be put to Ukrainians. They will, of course, vigorously assert their independence, but it will be important to listen to what is not said and what is answered by small shrugs and resignation. There is no more important question in Europe at the moment than the future of Ukraine.

For Romania, this is vital because its buffer could turn into its boundary if the Russians return to the border. This is why Moldova matters as well. Moldova used to be called Bessarabia. When Stalin made his deal with Hitler in 1939, part of the deal was that Bessarabia, then part of Romania, an ally of Germany, would be seized by the Soviets. This moved Romania farther from the port of Odessa, the critical port on the Black Sea, and across the Dniester River. Bessarabia remained part of the Soviet Union after the war. When the Soviet Union collapsed, Moldova became independent, stretching from Romania to the eastern bank of the Dniester. The area east of the Dniester, Transdniestria, promptly seceded from Moldova, with Russian help. Moldova became a Romanian-speaking buffer on the Dniester River.

Moldova is the poorest country in Europe. Its primary export is wine, sent mostly to Russia. The Russians have taken to blocking the export of wine for „health reasons.” I think the health issue is geopolitical and not biological. If Moldova is an independent, pro-European state, Ukraine is less isolated than the Russians would like it to be. Moldova could, in the distant future, be a base for operations against Russian interests. Every inch that potential enemies are from Odessa is beneficial. There was a reason why Stalin wanted to take Bessarabia from Hitler. That consideration has not dissolved, and the Russians are acting to isolate and pressure Moldova right now and, with it, Romania.

My visit to Romania and Moldova is to try to get a sense of how they view the situation in Ukraine, what they think Russian intentions are and what they plan to do – if anything. Romania is always a hard country to read. Geopolitically, its capital is on the wrong side of the Carpathians if the Russians are the threat, on the right side if Austria or Germany is the threat. Romania is oriented toward the European Union but is one of the many countries in the union that may not really belong there. Unlike the Poles, for whom history and resistance is a tradition, the Romanians accommodate themselves to the prevailing winds. It will be good to find out where they feel the winds are blowing from right now. I doubt that they will do anything to save Moldova and anger Moscow, but it is not clear whether Moldova is in danger. Still, this much is clear: If the Russians are reclaiming Ukraine, then Moldova is an important piece of territory, not only to protect Ukraine but also to create options toward Romania and southwestern Europe. Sometimes small pieces of land that are not on anyone’s mind represent the test case.

Turkey is a place I have gone to several times in the past few years and expect to revisit many times. In my book, „The Next 100 Years,” I argued that Turkey will be a great power in the next 50 years or so. I’m comfortable with my long-term prediction, but the next decade will be a period of transition for Turkey, from being one of the countries confronting the Soviets under the U.S. alliance system to being a resurgent power in its own right. It will be no one’s pawn, and it will be asserting its interests beyond its borders. Indeed, as its power increases in the Balkans, Turkey will be one of the forces that countries like Romania will have to face.

I will be interested in hearing from the Romanians and Moldovans what their view of Turkey is at this point. Its re-emergence will be a slow process, with inevitable setbacks and disappointments, but even now its commercial influence can be felt in the Black Sea basin. I will be interested in hearing from the Turks how they view the Russians (and, of course, Iran and the Arab countries as well as Central Asia). Russia as seen through the eyes of its neighbors is the purpose of this trip, and that’s the conversation I will want to have. Poles, Ukrainians, Romanians and Moldovans will all want to talk about Russia. The Turks will want to discuss many issues, Russia perhaps least of all. I will have to work hard to draw them out on this.

A Geopolitical Theory

In the end, I am going to the region with an analytic framework, a theory that I will want to test. It is a theory that argues that the post-Cold War world is ending. Russia is re-emerging in a historically recognizable form. Germany is just beginning the process of redefining itself in Europe, and theEU’s weaknesses have become manifest. Turkey has already taken the first steps toward becoming a regional power. We are at the beginning of a period in which these forces play themselves out.

For the United States, Turkey’s emergence is beneficial. The United States is ending its wars in the region, and Turkey is motivated to fill the vacuum left and combat radical Islam. Those who argue that the Turkish government is radically Islamist are simply wrong, for two reasons. First, Turkey is deeply divided, with the powerful heirs of the secular traditions of Kemal Ataturk on one side. They are too strong to have radical Islam imposed on them. Second, the Islamism of the Turkish government cannot possibly be compared to that of Saudi Arabia, for example. Islam comes in many hues, as does Christianity, and the Turkish version derives from Ottoman history. It is subtle, flexible and above all pragmatic. It derives from a history in which Turkish Islam was allied with Catholic Venice to dominate the Mediterranean. So Turkish Islam is not strong enough to impose itself on the secularists and too urbane to succumb to simplistic radicalism. It will do what it has to do, but helping al Qaeda is not on its agenda. Still, it will be good to talk to the secularists, who regard the current government with fear and distrust, and see whether they remain as brittle as ever.

While the United States can welcome a powerful Turkey, the same can’t be said for a powerful Russia, particularly not one allied with Germany. The single greatest American fear should not be China or al Qaeda. It is the amalgamation of the European Peninsula’s technology with Russia’s natural resources. That would create a power that could challenge American primacy. That was what the 20th century was all about. The German-Russian relationship, however early and subdued it might be, must affect the United States.

It is not clear to me that the American leadership understands this. Washington’s mind is an amalgam of post-Cold War cliches about Russia and Europe and an obsession with terrorism. This is not a time of clear strategic thinking in Washington. I find it irritating to go there, since they regard my views as alarmist and extreme while I find their views outmoded and simplistic. It’s why I like Austin. I know that the Poles, for example, are deeply concerned that Washington doesn’t understand the issues. But in the United States, Washington makes position papers and only rarely history. The United States is a vast nation, and Washington thinks of itself as its center, but it really isn’t. The United States doesn’t have a center. The pressures of the world and the public shape its actions, albeit reluctantly.

I have no power to shape anything, but for Washington to support Poland they need to be shown a path. In this case, I am going to explore the theory that Pilsudski brought to the table, of the Intermarium. I regard NATO as a bureaucracy overseeing an alliance whose mission was accomplished 20 years ago. From an American point of view, moving France or Germany is both impossible and pointless. They have their own interests and the wrong geography. It is the Intermarium – Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and perhaps Bulgaria – that represents this generation’s alliance. It blocks the Russians, splits them from the Germans and gently limits Turkey’s encroachment in southeastern Europe.

The Intermarium countries remain infatuated with the European Union and NATO, but the infatuation is declining. The year 2008 and Germany’s indifference to these countries was not pleasant, and they are learning that NATO is history. The Poles must be the leader of the bloc and the Romanians the southern anchor. I think the Poles are thinking in these terms but the Romanians are far from this idea. I’m not sure. I want to find out. For me, a U.S.-backed Poland guarding the North European Plain, with Slovakia, Hungary and Romania guarding the Carpathian approaches, would prevent what the United States should fear the most: an alliance between Russia and Germany plus Western Europe. The key is the changing perception of the European Union in the Intermarium. I want to see how far this has come.

Nothing, of course, could be further from Washington’s mind. Washington still thinks of Russia as the failed state of the 1990s. It simply doesn’t take it seriously. It thinks of the European Union as having gone over a speed bump from which it will recover. But mostly, Washington thinks about Afghanistan. For completely understandable reasons, Afghanistan sucks up the bandwidth of Washington, allowing the rest of the world to maneuver as it wishes.

As I said, I have no power to shape anything. But it is the charm of the United States that powerlessness and obscurity is no bar to looking at the world and thinking of what will come next. I am not making strategy but examining geopolitical forces. I am not planning what should be but thinking about what will likely happen. But in doing this I need a reality check, and for this reality check I will start in Romania.


Geopolitical Journey, Part 2: Borderlands is republished with permission of Stratfor.”

Anunțuri

84 responses to “Geopolitical Journey, Part 2: Borderlands

  1. sä vedetzi ce läträturi o sä facä Buldogul, ” trädätori au plecat,”
    cä el a bätut palma cu haita rosie de atatea ori, cä a trimes
    militzienii sä-l injure pe presedinte la cotroceni, cä el hotäreaste in numele celor din PDL, sä uneascä cu cei ce l-au suspendat pe presedinte, au aprobat confiscarea institutziilor cand erau in USL,

    nu este cea mai mare trädare???????????
    PREMIER NU O SÄ FIE NICIODATÄ.

    • theo, 🙂
      buldogul nu poate hotari in numele PDL-ului,sa vedem ce decide partidul.De aceasta decizie depinde cursul Dreptei romanesti.
      Cu toata ura buldogului fata de presedinte(nici acum n-am inteles de ce),cum de S-a facut plecat din localitate cand oamenii lui ,politistii,isi aruncau cashetele si-l injurau pe presedinte.Nu am date sigure ca buldogul era partas la aceasta miselie:( ,dar nerecunoasterea actului reprobator sau tacerea complice e suspecta si la fel de incriminatorie.

  2. Foarte interesant, cum suntem toti vorbitori de limba engleza in mod curent, incepand cu Theo si sfarsind cu mine, fii sigur Filadel, ca toate comentariile vor fi la tema 🙂 Mai, dar romaneste nu mai stiti ?

    • …al naibii, nesimtitul asta de Gheorghe Friedman, cum papagaliceste el tocmai ca sa nu pricepem noi nica! Asa si viata. Sa ne traduca Kiril si Imodium!

      • Acum sa fiu corecta,chiar si cu Loda noastra.Nici eu nu pricep o iota din englezeasca si ma abtin de obicei sa dau cu presupusul la texte in respectiva limba.Ma deosebesc de cartitori prin abtinere si recunosterea limitelor mele.
        Ascult pe altii si reflectez.

    • Pai ce sa facem @Loda ?
      O tulim si noi pe afara ca la noi daca iti platesti darile cele multe si inventate de tovii nostri ajungi in sapa de lemn cu coada de cauciuc si unde sapa sapa locul te loveste sapa in frunte nu sare din pamant norocul sau poate sare cel galben si moale copt la soare.

    • Am permisiunea doar să repostez articolul aici.

    • @ Loda,
      oarecum te inteleg.
      Dar traducrea unui asemenea text cere timp, si nu toata lumea are timpul nostru, al pensionarilor; cine intelege, caci exista si vorbitori de engleza nu doar de rusa, citeste, mediteaza sau trece mai departe. Nu e o tema frivola.. Si nu e neaparat nevoie sa vina cu idei proprii.
      Analize de genul George Friedman nu au aer mioritic.
      Eu, par egzamplu, cind imi permit sa mai intru in zonele discutate de George Friedman imi dau seama ca judec, uneori, emotional.
      Si trebuie sa fii bun cunoscator ceea ce, recunosc rusinat, nu sint 😛
      NB,
      poate ai observa (chiar tu sa nu observi?) ca una e tema articolului de obicei, si altele sint comentariile; fiecare cu OF-ul lui/ei.
      La noi marea dezbaere este misterul „Cretinel”
      Dece, nene, Anghelache, ne-ai parasit asa brusc si enigmatic?
      Unii critici literari spun ca nenea Anghelache, ajuns sef, si-a dat seama ca „ochiul dracului” il va tenta si a preferat ca in loc sa fie considerat delapidator, mai bine pleaca in alta lume cu renumele curat.
      La Cretinel a fost invers, ca asa e lumea, sucita rau.
      Dindu-si seama ca puterea, odata ajuns presedinte, il va impinge sa fie dictator si prost, a preferat sa se retraga din viata, viata politica, demn si plin de.
      Complecteaza tu 😛

      • victore, 🙂
        nu te contrazic deloc! Ai tot dreptul s-o „imbratisezi”pe Loda pentru distorsiunile ei tematice si stilistice.Sa stii ca eu o consider” fata ” buna ,politicoasa in general si neagresiva,calitate destul de rar intalnita printre adversarii ei ideologici.M-am contrat si eu cu ea(si nu m-au surprins contrele 😦 ei pe teme istorice unde ne intersectam),dar ii recunosc si partile pozitive.
        Sunt convinsa de reactia diversilor puristi,fundamentalisti la acest comentariu.Eu sunt Dora 🙂 cea controversata si de amici si de inamiciNu credeti ca reprezint calea de mijloc intre bine si rau spre victoria binelui?
        Sunt pregatita pentru orice batalie spre binele comunitatii din care fac parte,nu exclud variantele ,nici macar compromisurile acceptabile.,excluse fiind greselile de neiertat.
        Si cred,aici,se include marele perdant KKR cu ale sale slalomuri de la stanga la dreapta si viceversa.E adevarul momentului!

        Scuza-ma,victore :)! v ,am intercalat raspunsul la comentu; tau cu o declaratie de principiu,o confesiune a ceea ce cred eu ca este esential in mentinerea unei constiinte curate ,fara reziduri de nuanta comunista.Sunt o anticomunista convinsa si o voi dovedi in ciuda unor tolerante acceptabile. 🙂

        • @ dora,
          acum si tu sari in apararea ardelencei tale 😛
          Nu am nimic cu @ Loda doar ca nu ne intelegem politic si istoric.
          Da, este altfel de interlocutor decit multi altii; civilizata, dar ii place sa bage strimbe. Si cum lumea nu-i perfecta, reuseste.
          Este clar de stinga romaneasca.
          Poftim, o destainuire si de la mine.

          Pentru lamurirea unora asupra enigmei „a plecat sau nu de bunavoie?” un bun articol de dl Cornea:
          „http://www.revista22.ro/articol.php?id=42851

          • victore, 🙂
            da,victore ,Loda e ardeleanca de a mea complet in discordanta cu opiniile mele civice si politice.Eu n-am facut decat sa-i recunosc „prezumtiile” calitatii si s-o disociez de talibanii ,extremisti stangisti fanatici.Cand o ia pe aratura n-o iert.Cand isi exprima optiunile politice civilizat o accept cu conditia s-o critic dupa optiunile mele fara s-o jignesc.

    • Salutări tuturor de la un noctambul ocupat până peste cap cu treburi diurne! 🙂

      Cu săgeata/cursorul pe text și un click pe butonul din dreapta al mous-ului deschideti un meniu in care există optiunea „traducere”.
      Aici Google se dă în spectacol cu translatorul său automat, rezultând un text acceptabil de aproape cu ceea ce a vrut să spună GF dar care îți din greu nervii la încercare.
      Mai ales că americanu’ are obiceiul să-și condimenteze articolele sale și cu expresii care depășesc de departe posibilitățile lu’ goagăle…

  3. Pai nu spune prostii cand afirma ca suntem dupa cum bate vantul.
    Este interesant articolul si tipul este un bun observator dar analizele acelea puteau facute si fara sa calatoreasca numai cititnd ziarele online cu google translator si luand un pic in mana cartea de istorie.
    Cred ca o fi vrut sa vada cu ochii lui si situatia economica a tarilor vizitate care se poate reflecta si prin locuintele populatiei.
    O fi vrut sa faca o comparatie dintre ce se scrie si ce se vede in teritoriu.

    • Eu asa am citit mare parte din articol, dar doar pentru ca ma intereseaza cite ceva. Nu intervin cu opinii, sint din alta Liga 😛
      Azi la cafea un amic imi zice „cum dreaq trec asa repede liberalii de la Alde, parca, la PPE?”
      „Ca, mai zice, nu ar fi corect chiar inainte de desemnarea presedintelui PE. Doar nu se procedeaza ca in Romania”.
      Nu am stiut ce sa-i raspund, dar parca are dreptate, si chiar nu ii vad prea bine pe aliatii buldogului. Nu am mai citit nimic despre asta.

      • victore,
        cunosti proverbul”interesu’poarta fesu’?

        Trendul popular incita interessul politicienilor pt.ca e vorba de 5 ani electorali si nu se simt confortabil sa stea pe tusa si sa accepte decizii ce contravin directiei familiare politice din care fac parte. Ne mai punem problema oportunismului politic?

    • Stiu Filadel dar chiar, vorba lui Victor pensionarii au tot timpul (e un cliseu, eu de exemplu n-am) a apela la google translate care traduce ca o cizma uneori este riscant cand e vorba de o analiza, presupun politica.Ei ma descurc la vorbit engleza pe o strada sau intr-o conversatie relativ simpla, dar nu am terminologia unui articol de specialitate.in schimb in romana ,cu toata modestia, cred ca ma descurc sa inteleg si sa am o opinie.

      • De obicei Teophyle făcea analiza asta pe textul lui Friedman și era foarte calificat s-o facă dar acum cred că înțelegi că nu mai este posibil, din păcate, iar eu nu mă simt atît de calificat. Oricum textul trebuie semnalat fiindcă pe baza lui (și a altora) vor fi construite scenariile viitoare de securitate ale mărginimii Europei, dacă pot spune așa. 🙂

      • parafraza dupa un raspuns celebru: „daca eu nu pot canta Mozart la pian, asta nu inseamna ca pianul nu poate”.

  4. Blaga a fost la ambasada SUA.
    Cred ca s a dus ca sa obtina traducerea in romana a articolului publicat mai sus.
    Ca pe linga traducere aia i or mai fi spus ceva este posibil.
    Poate l au refuzat si de suparare isi da si asta demisia.

  5. Citeva afirmatii despre noi:
    – „Guvernul Romaniei este pro-rus”.
    – ” Romania este intotdeauna o tara greu de citit”.
    – „Romanii se adapteaza la vinturile dominante”

    Cred ca in loc de „adapteaza” ar trebui inteles „se pleaca usor vinturilor dominante”.

    • @Victor
      Eu astora de la Stratfor le as cere banii inapoi.
      Pai ca sa stii ce au afirmat ei este suficient sa citesti un manual de istorie de nu stiu ce clasa si sa asculti varza politica debitata de Ponta.

      • @ tucu2,
        e drept, prima parte este doar o Istorie a locurilor in vremi trecute.
        Dar e bine sa nu te increzi in presa si sa vizitezi locurile sa te convingi.
        De vremile de azi.
        Desi chiar si atunci poti gresi.

  6. O alta varianta de traducere:
    https://translate.google.ro/?hl=ro

  7. Sa parafram arta: si bogatii se sinucid.
    „Ilie Vonica, patronul clinicii Polisano, cel mai bogat om de afaceri din Sibiu, a murit dupa ce s-a aruncat de la unul din etajele superioare ale casei sale din Sibiu, transmite Digi 24.”
    Sau a facut pe Icarul modern, caci unii scriu ca s-a aruncat de pe casa 😛

  8. ms fil… foarte misto text

  9. salve copaceni 🙂 ar merita un efort de traducere ..dar vorba lui@victor nu toti au timp ca pensionarii 😆 analiza lui friedman este pertinenta..aduce in discutie ideia mai veche a polonezilor cu ,,grupul de la vishegrad,,…stim din istoria noastra ca Ro ca si moldova,ucraina,polonia,cehia,slovacia,ungaria si bulgaria au fost moneda de schimb in disputele pentru putere dintre rusia si germania-franta…chiar daca Ro este greu de ,,citit,,cum spune friedman in sensul ca noi de-a lungul istoriei am facut aliante,,dupa cum bate vantul,, cred ca in situatia geopolitica de astazi nu ne mai putem permite sa repetam greselile facute in trecut cand de fiecare data am pierdut teritorii si am avut de platit ,,biruri,…ideia polonezilor ca noi perdantii victime de pana acum ar fi mai bine sa facem o alianta separata chiar in interiorul nato-ue care sa ne serveasca intereselor nationale ale grupului ,,intermarum,, cum l-au denumit polonezii in care noi cei de la rascruce de imperii sa ne aparam si singuri eventual cu sprijin usa..asta pentru ca rusia-germania sunt predispuse la targuri in interesul lor propriu iar ue si nato pot sa nu functioneze ca umbrela pentru restul europenilor …marginasi…de meditat si de gandit si in acest contest viata noastra…a trai cu capul in punga damboviteana ne poate duce la dezastru…cam despre asta povesteste friedman si nu numai el

  10. Nu cred ca astazi mai este posibila ignorarea rolului Chinei in acest joc. Nu, nu e vorba de abureala lui Ponta, ci de echilibrul SUA intre NATO/Pacific si de rolul Chinei in viitoarea Uniune (a carei baza economica isi dezvaluie acum fundatia) Euro-Asiatica. Cimentul fundatiei se face la cele mai inalte standarde de calitate, cu tehnologie occidentala si dupa reguli capitaliste. Pentru unii Nash, pentru altii naspa. Jocul asta nu e pentru copyi, ca nu e cu galetuse.

  11. Revin cu o stire care-l contrazice pe amicul meu: se pare ca miine PNL va fi primit in PPE (b1)

  12. Tocmai pentru asta se intilnesc maharii mari:
    http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-esential-17413715-video-aparut-primele-imagini-intalnirea-lui-traian-basescu-barack-obama.htm
    Primul comentariu:
    ” stiu pe cineva…..

    translativus [utilizator]
    ….care, la vederea acestei poze, va da in hepatita mecanica. Cineva care minte cum respira ! ”
    Si ultimul:
    ” … (Marţi, 3 iunie 2014, 18:51)

    omidius [utilizator] i-a raspuns lui Lovercraft
    Ponta, tu esti? „

    • As fi curios sa vad ce comenteaza partenerul de alianta MRU.

    • Johannis mi se pare ca a vorbit ca sa nu taca:
      „„Explorarea, da. Exploatarea, părerea mea că putem să o lăsăm un pic mai încet. Explorarea mi se face că face sens, că până la urmă trebuie să ştii ce ai. Exploatarea după părerea mea este încă discutabilă. Urmările nu sunt suficient de bine studiate”, a spus Iohannis”
      Dar cine face explorarea ori ti-o face pe bani, si nu putini, ori cu conditia sa faca si exploatarea.
      Declaratie populista si proasta.

  13. @ ion,
    despre MRU numai de bine.
    A intrat in mariajul buldogului cu neamtul din Bundesliga saseasca?

    • Da, dar va primi un post executiv, nu ales.

    • MJMarinescu e candidat pt pozitia de vicepresedinte grup PPE din PE
      Stolo si Valean co-conduc delegatia deputatilor PPE romani (care il sustine pe MJM)
      „Delegația deputaților PPE din România – formată din 6 membri PNL, 5 membri PDL, 2 membri UDMR și 2 membri PMP – a decis să adopte o formulă de co-președinție, care va fi asigurată de Adina Vălean (PNL) și Theodor Stolojan (PDL).”

  14. Am auzit si eu cum se tot impart posturile prin PPE ul ala.Am auzit si de Marie Jan Marinescu si de Stolo si de Valean .
    Mai astept.
    Daca nu ma inseala memoria cel mai bun europarlamentar roman avea fusta si se numea altfel.

    • Tucu2 asa cum Cristi Preda scrie in linkul mai sus, pe unul din cele 10 posturi de vicepresedinti va candida Mari Jean Marinescu. Valean nu putea candida din partea PPE, atata timp cat procedurile de aderare nu sunt finalizate.
      Cat despre Doamna in fusta, cred ca e bine sa o lasam in pace. A avut si aici dreptate Piratul.

      • @Ion
        Nestiute s caile marii.
        Tu te descurci mai usor pentru ca ai alaturi cititorul in stele.
        Eu ma las dus de val si zic -ce e val ca valul trece.

  15. OMG,
    Zgonea şi republicanul Michael Turner au agreat textul unei declaraţii privind Ucraina şi Republica Moldova. Mai lipsea KKR.

    • Zgonea are tot dreptul, coleg fiind cu Stefan cel Mare… 🙄 😛 :mrgreen:

    • @ion: declaratiile date/semnate de un politician au valoare, in general, pentru ca politicianul a trecut filtrele credibilitatii si respectabilitatii, iar partidul sau este predictibil si de incredere. In cazul de fata – pentru ca Zgonea nu-si risca nici credibilitatea, nici respectabilitatea (pentru ca nu le are), iar PSD este condus prin inselatorie si minciuna – eu inca astept fapte din partea Parlamentului si a PSD. GIO588 nu poate deveni peste noapte AcZ (asta ca sa ramanem in ton cu topicul zilei cu parerea lui Friedman despre efectele brizei din Ro, sau cu parerea lui @victor despre vantul din pletele unor d-ALDE Crin). Semnatura republicanului, in schimb, este un legamant oficial. PS: am mai citit ceva azi despre legatura dintre astre si mona(r)hi, ai concurenti seriosi.

      • Judex,
        Total de acord cu tine. Mie mi s-a parut hazliu modul de exprimare a stirii. Auzi domnule, Zgonea si agreatul textului unei declaratii, avand in vedere ca e un fel de Grapini 2 la gramatica.

        • Asa e, achiesez. Cuvintele pe care le morfolesc intre dinti multi dintre parlamentarii nostri au aerul unor ca bolovani cazuti in cada.

    • Da am asistat la ”explicatiile stiintifice” ale profesorului de matematica, fost lider sindical si momentan senator Liviu Pop, referitoare la modul cum se va aplica legea. Prisacariu mai avea un pic si exploda. In final, atat am retinut: au votat pentru 205, contra 7 si 100 s-au abtinut.

      • Dap. Există o știință care este responsabilă cu drenajul banilor din buzunarele noastre către baronetul de tot felul (în special cel pesedist acum). Ea se numește tîlhărie și acum este lege. 😦

    • In timp ce: Verdictul Comisiei Europene: Guvernul nu a făcut ce a promis (RL)

  16. GUVERNUL NU A FÄCUT NIMIC

  17. „ALINUTZA ” ARE O VOCE DE BAR; DE TOATÄ FRUMUSETZEA.

  18. interesant, intanlirea presedintelui cu obama, nu prea a dat-o nimeni
    dar pe mitoman, il filmeazä si la clo:

  19. cu Uioreanu a jucat f. strans Dragnea, s-au ingropat in bani amandoi

  20. După 200 de ani castorii se întorc în Delta Dunării. Semn rău pentru cei care i-au alungat acum 200 de ani. 🙂 Și pentru Ponta.

    http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-mediu-17414662-video-castorul-intors-delta-dunarii-dupa-absenta-aproape-200-ani-din-romania.htm

  21. Salve Copaceni,
    Voi mai puteti accesa Politeia? Eu nu mai pot sa accesez site-ul de cateva ore, eroare 403. Pot sa-mi interzica accesul de a vizita pagina lor? Sau e doar o problema de server?
    Celelalte site-uri merg brici.

  22. 4 iunie 1989 – Masacrul din Piața Tienanmen

    Au trecut 25 de ani

    June 4: The Day That Defines, And Still Haunts China

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2014/06/03/318454674/june-4-the-day-that-defines-and-still-haunts-china

    PS
    Anul trecut, parca tot in iunie, cel care azi se erijeaza in unificator al dreptei, alaturi de pucistii liberali din 2012, spunea ca: ” Partidul Comunist Chinez împărtăşeşte aceleaşi valori cu democrat-liberalii în tot ceea ce înseamnă construcţia unui partid.

  23. Minusarii de serviciu sunt, précis, indivizi care au postat la Copac si care au fost refuzati la comentarii.
    Sunt frustrati iar frustrarea la astfel de indivizi le schimonoseste mintea.
    Astept minusuri fara numar, fara numar… 😀 😀 😀

  24. Referitor la spusele dlui Friedman:
    În partea asta de lume există expresia „a descoperi America”.
    Pentru reciprocitate, se pare că și acolo există ceva asemănător „a descoperi Europa”,
    Probabil, pentru clienți serioși cu cont bine garnisit dl Friedman livrează și alt soi de marfă decât acest articol de «Teleenciclopedia».

Lasă un răspuns

Completează mai jos detaliile tale sau dă clic pe un icon pentru a te autentifica:

Logo WordPress.com

Comentezi folosind contul tău WordPress.com. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Poză Twitter

Comentezi folosind contul tău Twitter. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Fotografie Facebook

Comentezi folosind contul tău Facebook. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Fotografie Google+

Comentezi folosind contul tău Google+. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Conectare la %s