[Timo]

Simey among others has often referred to Robert Kagan's analysis of the differences between Europe and the United States, geopolitcally. Kagan has amplified his original piece into a larger book, here reviewed by the New York Times. For those wanting a little more depth in understanding the Atlantic fracture's existence (or lack thereof), this summation is of some use.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/05/books/05DAAL.html

As an American living in Brussels the past three years, Mr. Kagan is in an ideal position to dissect what is wrong in the United States-European relationship and why. He does so with a surgeon's skill, stripping away layer after layer to reveal what in the end is a remarkable conclusion: The West, which for so many decades defined the two sides of the Atlantic, has ceased to be the organizing principle of foreign policy in Europe and the United States. Whereas before Washington and its allies in Europe had to agree in order to keep the West united, now they are free to disagree and leave the West divided. Why this divergence? Mr. Kagan points to two mutually reinforcing factors...

[spacefreak]

I watched Kagan on Charlie Rose last night, and he has some impressive analysis. Many of the points he makes, as well as his message delivery, reminds me a lot of Dick Cheney - that calm, historical wherewithall of global events and practical management of societies.

I'm going to buy this book @ Amazon.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Kagan is fast becoming the George Kennan of the post 9/11 world. In my view, his analysis is insightful (if a bit depressing).

Edit: Whoops! I didn't see that Timo already said that I have said this before. In that case I am doubly repeating myself. Oh well.

BTW, it is interesting that Ivo Daalder reviews the book. Daalder wrote a very good account of the Kosovo war called Winning Ugly that I would also recommend. I think that incident puts a lot of the disagreements over how to approach Iraq and the UN into perspective.