Flashpoints: The Emerging Crisis in Europe
A summary of the book written by George Friedman (2015) - Article #8
I. Why this book, and what’s it about?
Flashpoints: The Emerging Crisis in Europe by George Friedman critically examines Europe's geopolitical dynamics, primarily focusing on the region's propensity for conflict. Friedman traces Europe's history from the Ottoman capture of Constantinople to the 20th century, highlighting the continent's transition from a pinnacle of civilization to a theater of extensive bloodshed and war. He discusses Europe's rebuilding post-World War II under U.S. influence and the optimistic yet fragile nature of the European Union, especially after the 2008 financial crisis. Friedman underscores the continuing instability in Europe, particularly in the borderlands and Russia’s resurgence, arguing that old passions and conflicts remain unresolved.
The book delves into Europe's patterns of unemployment, immigration, and racism, linking them to historical tensions. It portrays a Europe still grappling with the legacies of its past, challenging the notion that the European Union and its neighbors have transcended the threat of violent conflict. Through an analysis of cultural and geopolitical factors, Friedman shows how the same culture that produced the Enlightenment descended into barbarity during the world wars and how, despite efforts at unification and peace, the potential for conflict remains a significant concern in contemporary Europe.
Friedman wrote the book to answer this question: “Is the period of peace that followed 1945 what the future of Europe will look like, or will Europe return to its historical ways?” And before he can answer that question, he must first answer two other questions. “How did Europe achieve global domination politically, militarily, economically, and intellectually?” And then, “What was the flaw in Europe that caused it to throw away this domination between 1914 and 1945?”
II. Who is the author?
According to Wikipedia, George Friedman (Hungarian: Friedman György, born February 1, 1949) is a Hungarian-born U.S. geopolitical author on international affairs. He is the founder and chairman of Geopolitical Futures. Before founding Geopolitical Futures, he was chairman of the publishing company Stratfor, which was acquired by RANE in 2020. Flashpoints is one of nine books Friedman has authored.
III. How popular is the book?
Here are the book’s rankings on Amazon:
IV. What is one of the top takeaways from the book?
Europe Before Its Assault on the World
Friedman takes us back to before Europe began its assault on the world to uncover the origin of European exploration, and “a great deal of the story has to do with Islam… Christianity and Islam confronted each other almost from the beginning of Islam’s rise. Christianity dominated the northern shore of the Mediterranean; Islam dominated the Southern one.” In 711, Muslim armies went north into Spain and occupied the Iberian Peninsula until 1492, when the Spaniards captured Granada, the last Muslim city in Spain.
Meanwhile, in 1453, the Muslim Ottomans captured Constantinople, where all the Silk Road land and sea routes going East to Asia, India, and China terminated. The Ottomans became the dominant naval power in the Eastern Mediterranean and imposed extremely high tariffs on goods transiting the Silk Road.
This was a primary motivation for Prince Henry of Portugal (a.k.a. Henry the Navigator) to establish a school for navigators in Sagres, Portugal. Legend has it that his students included Vasco da Gama (who found a path to India), Ferdinand Magellan (who sailed around the world), and Christopher Columbus.
According to Friedman, the popular culture of the European peninsula before 1492 was based on three certainties: the world was the center of the universe, Europe was the center of the world, and the Catholic Church was the center of Europe.
V. What is another top takeaway from the book?
Three Shocks to European Culture
And then in fifty-one years, starting in 1492 there were three shocks: (1) Columbus discovered that not only was the Earth round, but that there were vast other continents and civilizations that never knew of Europe or the Catholic Church; (2) in 1517 Martin Luther initiated the Protestant Reformation with his Ninety-Five Theses, which challenged the idea that Rome was the center of Europe, and that suggested each person could approach God, read the bible and interpret it on his own without a priest; (3) and in 1543, Copernicus demonstrated that Earth was not at the center of the universe, but revolved around the sun which led to a sense of disorientation and reorientation in the European worldview.
So, let’s return to the first question Friedman set out to answer: “How did Europe achieve global domination politically, militarily, economically, and intellectually?”
In Friedman’s own words: “The three shocks to European culture—Copernicus, Columbus, and Luther—ultimately shattered the European order, freeing Europe and then mankind and creating a single global culture. The greatest change was placing man at the center of the universe. By elevating reason to the center of life, it elevated man, who embodied reason, and the sciences and technologies that flowed from reason. But in placing men at the center of the universe it created a fantasy. Men can be at the center, but they can’t be alone. In the end the triumph of the individual contradicted his need for community. Community had to be reinvented and men persuaded to participate. European man had become so unnatural and fragmented that his moral compass was broken. When he embraced the nation intellectually, based on art and myth, he was not quite whole. The moral compass was left out. Art did not know the difference between good and evil. And so the invented nationalisms that were so beautiful and seductive replaced the lonely individual. But neither knew right from wrong. What Columbus, Luther, and Bacon shattered had to be bound together in some way. This was accomplished partly through the technology that Bacon celebrated and the integrated economic life that followed. The other part was the nation and the integrated moral life that followed. Neither fit well with the other. It was a world of tensions.
It was magnificent to behold, contradictions and all. Triumphant over the earth, and triumphant over the mind—Europe revolutionized everything and by the beginning of the twentieth century stood astride the world in seemingly absolute dominion over nations and nature. In 1913 it seemed inconceivable that this could change. But it did. It had to. The vast array of nations had come to life, each knowing the beautiful and mistaking it for moral behavior. This paved the way for horror. And it all flowed logically from the unintended consequences of three shocks, each fully praiseworthy, each celebrating reason, but together taking the European mind to a place where it shattered.”
VI. What is the third top takeaway from the book?
Geography, Virtues and Interdependence
Regarding the second question, “What was the flaw in Europe that caused it to throw away this domination between 1914 and 1945?” Friedman does not answer directly by citing a “flaw” per se but offers a few explanations. Before we go there, though, it is essential to understand the shock of the thirty-one years that were book-ended by each World War. During this time, over 100 million people in Europe died. By 1945, the European peninsula was occupied territory. The empire that Europe amassed over the prior 400 years was slipping away if not mostly already gone, and Europe could not feed itself.
What were the causes of this destruction and devastation?
Starting with geography, Europe is the second smallest continent after Australia, yet Europe consists of fifty independent nations. Friedman claims that Europe’s population density is 72.5 people per kilometer vs. Asia’s 86 people per square kilometer, with the European Union at a much higher density of 112 people per kilometer. Europe is crowded with nations and people, making it very fragmented. Its geography is such that it can’t be easily united through conquest; therefore, the map of Europe in the year 1000 is pretty similar to the map of Europe today. Europe is divided into and filled with borderlands, areas much wider than the political border drawn as a thin line on a map where nations, religions, and cultures meet and mix. Borderlands can be the place where wars are fought, and these are the flashpoints for which the book is titled. “Nations exist next to other nations for a long time, with long memories that make trust and forgiveness impossible. As a result, Europe has been a place where wars repeated themselves endlessly.”
Regarding virtues, Friedman says, “As in all great tragedies, the virtues responsible for Europe’s greatness were precisely those that destroyed it. The principle of nationhood and the right to national self-determination celebrated by the Enlightenment evolved into rage at the stranger. The enormous intellectual advances in science were driven by a radical skepticism that challenged all moral limits. The technologies that transformed the world created systems of killing previously unimaginable. The domination of the world led to constant conflict with it and for it. Every act of greatness had the seeds of catastrophe within it.”
Lastly, the interdependence argument was put forth by Norman Angell in 1909 in his book The Great Illusion that war in Europe had become impossible due to the intense interdependence between European countries’ investments and trade. He argued that war would be economically devastating and, therefore, impossible. Of course, Angell was wrong. According to Friedman, Angell missed the point that while interdependence can create security, it can also create insecurity and war - especially if the interdependence becomes unbalanced. This precisely happened with Germany’s economic rise to power after its unification in 1871. Germany’s neighbors were frightened by its stunning growth, and ironically, Germany was just as frightened by its neighbors. The borderlands to the east and west of Germany became flashpoints despite the interdependence that helped fuel Germany’s growth and the fears and vulnerabilities that led those flashpoints to ignite and erupt into thirty-one years of hell.
VII. What is the fourth top takeaway from the book?
Europe’s Reintegration and the European Union
The war in Europe ended very suddenly after Hitler’s suicide on May 5, 1945. The following winter was one of the coldest on record. Despite the war being over and due to its devastation, the humanitarian crisis continued with the necessities of life scarce for the war’s survivors. The Soviet occupation united Eastern Europe, the Americans occupied the West without having given it much thought, and the Europeans were focused on survival and were not thinking about anything else. The Americans really wanted to leave, but since they were there amid the chaos and devastation, they initially stayed to help. This was not part of a strategic plan or Cold War strategy.
It wasn’t until the following year, in 1947, that it became clear that the Soviets were imposing their ideology in Eastern Europe and trying to spread their power. Therefore the Americans started making plans for countering the Soviet’s strategy. The first contours of the Marshall Plan (named after the then Secretary of State George C. Marshall) came into being when the Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs outlined a plan in a memo to Marshall arguing for “prompt and substantial” aid to prevent further economic, social, and political disintegration.
There are three points to this takeaway. First, the United States created the conceptual foundation of the European Union and pushed for it as part of the Marshall Plan. It began with Clayton’s memo: “Such plan should be based on a European Economic Federation on the order of the Belgium-Netherlands-Luxembourg Customs Union. Europe cannot recover from this war and again become independent if her economy continues to be divided into many small watertight compartments as it is today.” And then, the final legislation of the Marshall Plan included this passage: “Mindful of the advantages which the U.S. has enjoyed through the existence of a large domestic market with no internal trade barriers, and believing that similar advantages can accrue to the countries of Europe, it is declared to be the policy of the people of the U.S. to encourage these countries [receiving Marshall aid] through a joint organization to exert common efforts.… which will speedily achieve that economic cooperation in Europe which is essential for lasting peace and recovery.”
The second point is that Europe was not comfortable with the plan for economic integration, and Europe resisted it at first. Great Britain was still clinging to the idea that their empire would survive, and their historical tactic from behind the English Channel was to manage the balance of power on the European peninsula. The British viewed a united Europe that included France and a large part of Germany as a threat. The French were dubious of economic cooperation involving the Germans, given the devastation Germany inflicted on the French during the wars. Germany was not in a position to have an opinion. Still, based on the map at the time, the Americans insisted that West Germany be included for its manpower and army to be the first bulwark against the Soviets.
While this may seem like a simple reincarnation of Normal Angell’s theory of economic interdependence being able to prevent wars, embedded in American thinking was the idea of formal structures to bind the countries of Europe - particularly Germany with France. Europe, starting with France, came around to embrace and move its integration forward starting with the Treaty of Rome in 1957 to eventually become the formal European Union in 1992 with the signing of the Maastricht Treaty.
The third point is that the European Union came together based on the contradiction of national and sovereign self-interest to avoid war and promote peace and prosperity. However, to do so required “an ever closer union between the peoples of Europe,” as the Treaty of Rome stated. The problem with the EU is that the Europeans had nothing more to offer than peace and prosperity. What happens if either peace or prosperity disappears?
VIII: What is the fifth top takeaway from the book?
Flashpoints and Wars
Friedman points out that the Soviet Union collapsed the same month that the draft of the Maastricht Treaty was completed, that for the first time in centuries, all the European peninsula countries were free from the Russian mainland. Every language had its own nation, and for the first time in almost exactly five hundred years, no European power was a global power.
Friedman also points out the irony that two major European wars started in the Balkans and Caucasus the same year that the Maastricht Treaty was signed. Friedman claims that in the Bosnian War, there were about a quarter million casualties. And in the Armenia-Azerbaijani war, there were about 115,000 casualties. Many people don’t think of the Balkans and the Caucasus as Europe, but Friedman argues that these historical European borderlands prove his point that flashpoints such as these can ignite wars.
Since most people don’t think of the Balkans or Caucasus as European, and especially because the countries involved in the wars of the 1990s were not members of the EU, most people view the EU as having successfully flourished from its founding until 2008. By then, NATO and the EU had expanded eastward dramatically, from the original twelve countries that signed the Maastricht Treaty to a total of twenty-seven countries. The goal was to integrate the newly liberated states of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union into the West. But then two things happened in 2008.
First, Russia went to war with Georgia, which was a shock given the support Georgia was receiving from Britain and the United States. The shock really reverberated when France negotiated a cease-fire, and then Russia violated it to demonstrate it could with no response from NATO or the EU. This was a shock because there was an assumption that Russia was shattered, unwilling, and unable to take risks. It was also a shock because NATO proved ineffective in deterring Russia’s surprising aggression. This helped set up the Ukrainian crisis of 2014, which we’ll get to in a moment.
The second thing that happened in 2008 was the financial crisis. The global financial system went into disarray when Lehman Brothers went bankrupt and could not honor its financial obligations. This was the first financial crisis since Maastricht, exposing the imbalances in the EU and the four different European Unions that have emerged from within the “crumbling” EU. First, there is Germany and Austria. Germany has risen to become the largest economy in Europe and the fourth largest in the world. Then there are the northern European states, which are doing better than the rest but not as well as the Germans. Next are the states in the borderlands with Russia, which after its war with Georgia, is signaling an assertiveness to (attempt to) retake the lost Soviet territories. And the fourth group is the Mediterranean Europeans who face massive unemployment. Friedman hints that these massive imbalances within the EU are no different from those that had emerged just before WWI.
Regarding the borderland states, none is more important than Ukraine. This book was published in late 2014 after Russia invaded Crimea in early 2014. While Friedman does not specifically mention the 2014 invasion, he discusses Ukraine at length, throughout the book, and more than any other borderland. He points out that the word Ukraine means “on the edge” or borderland. Of all the borderlands, Ukraine is perhaps the most significant flashpoint from the perspective of both Russia and the West, and Friedman makes clear (without stating directly) it is also the most volatile and likely to erupt into war.
IX. Why Should You Care?
Why should you care about Flashpoints? Well, we need to answer Friedman’s third question - is the period of peace that followed 1945 what the future of Europe will look like, or will Europe return to its historical ways? After explaining the Bosnian-Serbian War (1992-1995), the Armenia-Azerbaijani War (a.k.a. the First Nagorno-Karabakh; 1988-1992), The Georgian-Russian War (2008), Friedman describes some of the “active” flashpoints.
First is the borderland between Germany and Russia and the eminent ignition of the Ukrainian flashpoint. (He alludes to the Russian invasion of Crimea: In 2014, Russia reemerged, the flashpoint between it and the European Union came alive, and history began again. It is striking how short-lived were Europe’s fantasies about what was possible. It is also striking that the return of Europe’s most dangerous flashpoint occurred in 2014, one hundred years after the First World War began, one hundred years since Europe began its descent into hell.)
The Caucasus remains an active flashpoint, with Russia’s support of and signing a long-term treaty with Armenia - which threatens Azerbaijan, the major alternative energy source besides Russia for Europe. This activates Turkey, which is also interested in the future of the Black Sea, the Arabian Peninsula, and the Balkans and is surrounded by all those flashpoints. The energy flow and immigrants from North Africa to Turkey and Europe create additional Mediterranean flashpoints. And then there is the rising Franco-German tensions that are far from a boiling point as of the time of writing.
Friedman does not expect anything like the devastation of the thirty-one years encompassing both World Wars or even a general European war. But, Friedman argues compellingly that Europe is doomed to return to its historical ways. Of course, 9 years later, we know what has become of the Ukrainian flashpoint.
So, if you wish to travel to Europe - especially Eastern Europe, the sooner, the better; the Europe we know of from 1992 to 2008 (or 2014) is a historical anomaly that is already changing, will continue to change, and it won’t likely be for the better.
X. What does The X Project Guy have to say?
The X Project is the intersection of knowledge and learning between commodities, debt, deficits, demographics, economics, energy, geopolitics, interest rates, markets, and money. History is not listed among those ten topics because a list of ten is better than a list of eleven. At this point, I am committed to The X Project’s brand and leveraging the interplay between a Generation X perspective and the Roman numeral ten. History is profoundly relevant and integrated into this effort. However, aside from demographics, which is history and destiny rolled into one, I am most interested in the history or perspective from each of the nine other topics.
This is the second George Friedman book I have summarized, and Flashpoints differs significantly from The Next 100 Years. The book Flashpoints has a lot of history of geopolitics with a good amount of analysis and interpretation. The Next 100 Years also has a good amount of study and understanding, but instead of history, it has prophecy, often with detailed fictionalized scenarios to help illustrate potential outcomes.
Of the other three books I have summarized thus far, The Fourth Turning: An American Prophecy has a lot of demographic history of generational archetypes and how the constellation of those archetypes shapes and drives events and history. Obviously, the title of This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly indicates a lot of history of debt and deficits, but also economics, interest rates, and money.
Roughly half the other fifteen books listed as The X Project’s most influential are focused on the history of one or more of The X Project’s topics of knowledge and learning. The reason that history is so dominant among The X Project’s primary influences is the recognition that recency bias is a cause of myopia or short-sightedness and an assertion that much of our recent history related to these topics is abnormal, extraordinary and therefore not likely to persist.
Please help ensure The X Project continues its mission:
Please click on the heart icon at the bottom of this article, indicating you like this (and previous) article(s).
If you have not already done so, please subscribe.
Please consider a paid subscription. Until the end of the year, all paid subscriptions come with a free 60-day trial, and you can cancel any time. For the cost of 2 cups of coffee and 1-2 hours of your time per month, The X Project will deliver 10 articles per month, helping you know what you need to know about our changing world at the intersection of commodities, debt, deficits, demographics, economics, energy, geopolitics, interest rates, markets, and money.
If you see value in the articles published so far and you see value in the mission of The X Project, please be generous and aggressive in referring friends. Click the link to see the rewards as well as the link to use for making referrals
Please let me know how The X Project can better serve you. Please send me recommendations, suggestions, critiques, or feedback at theXprojectGuy@gmail.com.