The Limits of Partnership: U.S.-Russian Relations in the Twenty-First Century - Updated Edition Paperback – March 29, 2015

The Limits of Partnership by Angela Stent describes the history of US-Russian relations from the demise of the USSR in 1991 to the present. It provides a useful sequel, with a bit of overlap, to Jack Matlock’s Autopsy on an Empire which covers US-Soviet relations from 1985 to 1992.I was fortunate to have read The Limits of Partnership just before the Ukrainian situation heated up in late February 2014. Dr Stent describes US-Russian relations as having undergone four "resets", none of which worked for very long:1. 1992: GHW Bush attempts to adjust to the demise of the USSR and to Boris Yeltsin’s leadership of Russia but is voted out of office before making much progress.2. 1993: Clinton tries to team up with Yeltsin. Yeltsin's erratic policy changes and declining health doom this effort.3. 2001: Putin calls GW Bush immediately after 9/11 and offers his support. Putin seeks to make Russia an equal partner with the US, but ends up feeling that his offer was not taken seriously.4. 2009: Obama seeks another reset in the aftermath of Russia's war with Georgia.From a Russian perspective, the most significant aspect of US-Russian relations has been the expansion of NATO. Since the demise of the Soviet Union, NATO's eastern border has moved ever closer to Moscow. Following the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the Soviet Union and Russia had the strong impression (promise may be too strong a word) that NATO would not expand eastward.1. Having just escaped from Soviet control, the Poles, Czechs, and other former members of the Warsaw Pact desperately wanted US assurance that they would not be re-occupied by Russia. NATO membership was really the only tangible way of providing that assurance.2. Next came NATO membership for the three Baltic states, all former Soviet Republics. Here again, membership could be justified since the US had always refused to recognize the Soviet occupation of these countries in 1939 under the Ribbentrop-Molotov Non-Aggression Treaty.3. Finally, the US supported the color revolutions in Georgia and Ukraine, and spoke encouragingly of NATO membership for these historically Russian-controlled areas. Russia has pushed back with its war with Georgia and occupation of Crimea.My point in describing NATO’s progressive expansion is to demonstrate that there are profound geopolitical conflicts between the national interests of Russia and the US. Partnership can go only as far as a congruence of national interests allows. Beyond that point, diplomacy, conflict management, and compromise must come into play.

Phenomenal overview of relations between the two countries since the Cold War has ended. Professor Stent carefully draws the major shifts in the relations between the two countries and spells out what can be done to improve them. One of the major themes that the book spells out is the difference in mentalities of the leaders from the generations that they came from. She describes Bush (both of them) and Clinton as having a Cold War mentality even though the era is over, while Obama and Medvedev were of a new generation. Professor Stent poses the question, although not explicitly, is do the conflicting mentalities of Obama and Putin have anything to do with the struggles of today? Big Questions to ask considering who is coming in to the White House. Good book to reference anytime Russia comes into question in the news.

The book explains the history well with a redundancy to it that may just be the way history is repeating itself. The myriad of names is flooring. It shows us in no uncertain terms the thread of our own errors and the dogged determination of post-Russia-breakup-politicians to hang on to what was once a great country in their eyes. I am not finished with the book as the Ukraine erupts once more but can pretty much sadly predict what is going to go down unless the Russia of the 21st century emerges.

Since the Olympics I have read two books on Vladimir Putin."The Man Without a Face" I suspect was biased but it might be accurate. . "Vladimir Putin and Russian Statecraft" seemed to me to provide a more balanced approach. "The Limits of Partnership: US-Russia Relations in the Twenty-First Century". I found the book to present a detailed explanation of the US-Russia relations from the fall of the Soviet Union through the two Bush administrations, the Clinton administration, and the Obama administration. The book is fairly current, I believe released in 2013. This is an excellent book on the subject.

This Book was selected for a current perspective of factors influencing US - Russian relations. There are good summaries of discussions, disagreements and a few areas of common concerns. This is good for anyone who seeks a more complete understanding of Putan and some ideas how to approach him. Teachers would appreciate the background for themselves and their students for greater depth than they usually have inWorld Studies courses.

The events in Ukraine sress the limits but lest we lapse into Cold War(kholodnaia voina) nostalgia as a Cold War veteran literally" Berlin crisis mobilization,Cuban missile crisis we still have interests in common. Both are threatened by al Qaeda and its offshoots and wannabes) as the events in the Boston marathon remind us We have a very DIFFERENT history, geography,geopolitics, etc.

not just a recounting of how the relationship between the US and Russia has evolved since the end of the Cold War but why each side has acted as it has. a fascinating account of history in the making.

Fantastic look at the intricate details of post Cold War US-Russian relations, which really looks at both sides and describes the details of all the progress and problems. Would recommend for anyone looking to learn more about US-Russian relations

Es un libro muy completo para entender la relación entre Rusia y Estados Unidos desde la desaparición de la Unión Soviética hasta nuestros días. Recomendado para los que estén interesados en política internacional y relaciones internacionales en general.

This is an important book. Stent writes clearly and concisely about the post-soviet relationship between the United States and Russia, and makes it obvious that both countries are equally to blame for the problems that have led to the present crisis over Ukraine. There was no way that Russia was going to accept a subservient relationship with the United States in NATO, and equally no possibility that the US would grant them any kind of equal leadership over that institution. Cold War legacies and asymmetrical power, internal domestic politics, lack of economic and cultural stakeholders, fundamental ideological differences, sheer ignorance, and especially the fact that both countries are in competition with each other, create severe limitations on any future partnership between them.Stent's publication is a breath of fresh air after all the rhetoric of Putin apologists such as Stephen Cohen and John Mearsheimer, who have put the blame for the present confrontation squarely on the backs of the United States. She makes it clear that such analysis is biased and simplistic.One senses from the book that future resets in the relationship would be unproductive, but at the same time that aggressive confrontation should be avoided. This would only play into Putin's hands. Instead of appeasement or confrontation, there should be a policy that offers a very delicate balance between the two alternatives, and somehow supports the interests of both nations. It will be a very difficult task to undertake. Stent has made that clear.

Very objective and a thorough and eye-opening read. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in learning about US and Russian relationships from the 90s through December 2014.

This is also very important book if you truly understand the Russia- West (maily the US) relations since the end of the Cold War. It is carefully and adequitely described about important facts in the Russo -Western relations and the Russian perceptions of them. You must read it!