Norman Naimark recasts the post-World War II division of Europe in "Stalin and the Fate of Europe"
In his new book Stalin and the Fate of Europe, Stanford historian Norman Naimark develops an assessment of the geopolitical struggle for sovereignty through a series of in-depth case studies. Rather than developing a singular grand narrative, the book highlights specific episodes, ranging from Denmark to Albania, in which Naimark suggests that Stalin was more open to a post-war settlement than initially anticipated. Naimark also stresses the role and agency of the European people in defining the post-war landscape and their future in the nascent stages of the Cold War.
Naimark’s study focuses on the immediate post-war period – 1945-1948 – when countries ravaged by the conflict began to rebuild and question their role in a new Europe. While the Red Army lingered in the European theater and the Soviet Union’s ideological influence was strong at this time, the “Iron Curtain” had not yet dropped. Indeed, Naimark posits that Stalin had little intention of dividing Europe at the time, and proceeds to investigate the actions and post-war goals of European leaders including Juho Kusti Paasikivi of Finland, Wladyslaw Gomulka of Poland, and Karl Renner of Austria.
By 1948, the Czech coup and the Berlin Blockade had entrenched the emergent division in Europe, and led to the eventual splitting that is so widely associated with the Cold War era. Naimark’s Stalin and the Fate of Europe provides a useful look at the aftermath of the war, and considers the oft-overlooked potential of an alternative post-war arrangement in Europe.