The Lights That Failed: European International History, 1919-1933
This huge study of Europe after the end of World War I is an awesome achievement, thanks to the author's extraordinary immersion in diplomatic and economic history and expertise in the complex issues of debts and reparations, security and disarmament, and nationalism. One of the many virtues of the book is Steiner's awareness of the domestic pressures that statesmen of the time faced, thanks to the collapse of the walls between domestic and foreign affairs. The first part deals with the attempt to put together the pieces of a "shattered Europe"; the second covers the "hinge years," 1929-33, when world recession, the Japanese invasion of Manchuria, and the rise of Hitler undermined the global system and destroyed the hopes of internationalism. Many of Steiner's insights (for example, that if the League of Nations "was accepted as part of the international landscape, it was because it did not attempt too much," or that "the equivocal nature of Britain's commitment to Europe" undermined France's position) are familiar. But her exploration is so thorough and incisive that, to this reader at least, her story felt as new as it was tragic.
Related
U.S. troops on conquered territory, infrastructure in ruins, international squabbling over reconstruction: a window onto occupied Germany seven months after V-E Day, when progress was still unsteady and Europe's future hung in the balance.
Somehow the Americans went from claiming they did not have a dog in the Bosnia fight to redrawing the map of the Balkans over Scotch with the ruthless Slobodan Milosevi,c. But the Dayton Accord that ended Bosnia's war has been oversold. It is the product not of Wilsonian idealism but of a reluctant realpolitik. Had Washington intervened in 1993, as Bill Clinton promised to, 100,000 lives could have been saved. Dayton has strengthened the two nastiest dictators in the region, Serbia's Milosevi,c and Croatia's Franjo Tudjman, and edged toward accepting the de facto partition of Bosnia. The violence in Kosovo today is a reminder of the costs of appeasing aggressors.
The difference between the factions in Bosnia is not morality, as the Bosnian Muslims and Western press insist, but power and opportunity. All have the same goal: to avoid living as a minority. All have committed crimes against other ethnic groups. Despite its claims of neutrality and preaching against military solutions, the United States has favored the Bosnian Muslims, keeping silent as they launched offensives from U.N.-guarded safe areas. Since air strikes cannot resolve the conflict, the United States must discourage violence by all sides and let Russia--the one country Serbs trust--take the lead in negotiations.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.