so in 1956, 13 years later, khrushchev decided to go after stalin and deannounce stalin. what we have here is a family story, individual story, as an explanation of a grand formula. by book was written before crimea but surprisingly president putin gave me a hand being able to talk about my book more because he accused khrushchev personally of blinding russia, raping mother russia, of crimea. so it is all stout, 5-4, nikita khrushchev's fault. he kept crimea from stalin and many other great things. he put khrushchev at the middlef of it. and in 1954 crimea was transferred from the russian republic within the soviet unionian to the ukrainian union. it was more economic and administrative because crimea is connected to ukraine but not russia. that is why there is new offense in the areas on the border precisely because the russian's need some connection to crimea otherwise it becomes an economic issue. my books that geled the past issues and new issues together. the book isn't so much about nikita khrushchev. people keep asking me him and when i say he is my grandfather --

refusal to support the polish uprising in 1944 went very anti-stalin. so that's where current administration is at this point, in my opinion. thanks, thanks for your question. >> phillip -- [inaudible] i have two questions. number one, i wanted to know why anyone would want to go into an alliance with belarus which i understand is still a stalinist dictatorship. and the other question is what is khrushchev -- gorbachev now thought of in russia? >> well, for gorbachev that was maybe a moment of triumph maybe with the crimea. and he went public saying i told you so, i told you. you didn't listen to me 23 years ago. that what happened maybe didn't happen in 1991, it's happening now, and the reason it is happening is because of the dissolution of the soviet union happened in such awful way, and the people were put in the situation where they had to face the facts. because gorbachev was advocating the old union referendum at that time. so that was his last kind of position. so that is on gorbachev. in terms of belarus and belarus being possibly a last europe

we don't -- you know, somehow -- nobody would say, ok, we're in this country because josef stalin sent us right here, and he just occupied, you know. these three baltic countries, lithuania, latvia, estonia. but on the streets, it was -- everything was very evident when my father -- i was walking with my father and mother, and he was wearing military garb. the way latvian people look at us, what the hell are you doing here? why you are here? i didn't have any answers, but i knew something is wrong here. it's later on, now i am looking at -- i'm actually flood that stalin send us there because i look into the politics and russian politics from a childhood eyes. i really understand already certain things, what anti-semitism is, what's the situation between latvians and the russians. what our army is doing there. there's a statue of freedom which actually proudly was facing west. just interesting dichotomy. you know, but art, you know, my mother passed away when i was like 10, 11. and i discovered theater, and it was my home. my father remarried. and those last few years when i was 14, 15

we chose instead to depict stalin's soviet union as democrats and obscured the nature of that regime. when the accounting came over the deaths of over 20,000 polish that we knew the soviets had killed we chose to cover it up. at the very outset of our participation in world war ii, we have made this very important fundamental moral choice about you ho we'w we're going to depi our actions and allies. then you see the long slide from there from a series of events that leads to the bombing of cities and the use of atomic weapons and other moral choices that truman faced. this is all part of the production and residuals of making atomic weapons. it's even bigger than atomic weapons, it's a whole moral universe that we have to recognize that people were living in in the 19th and mid-20th century and we we are living in today. we should give consideration about what we there dealing with at the time before making judgments. >> just a couple of points. when we sit in our location today we often wished things had sort of worked out differently and occurred differently, et cetera. of course, w

president was quite clear exactly what stalin was up to and what was in his mind, and the future. point,come back to your the british public wanted somebody who would talk about the future of society, of democratic society in britain, . a new deal, if you would like, for britain. been writing, had people like my dad, they felt they deserved better from the country they had served and fought for. and so the opposing party, the labour party, offered a much more visionary idea of british society with a safety net, social security and medical care. and churchill was simply blind to it. it is a complex question. the simplest answer is they did not think they could do it united the states was so economically powerful. they had gone through years of , and the armed forces were ranked 17th in the world at that time. a lot of the equipment was very outdated. struck quicklyey and efficiently, just as hitler and theoland in 1939 holland, 1940 in belgium, france, that they could wrap it up very quickly. and they did. that shows the extent of japan's spring of 1942. blitzkrieg and rampage in t

almost no emotional reaction from stalin at all.bly their espionage had already undcovered it and knew what we were doing. no doubt they were also developing or trying to develop their own bomb, which they did a few years later. but do we know to what extent japan and germany, how far along they were in their program? was there any cooperation or collusion between germany or the axis powers to develop a bomb? and do we know how and where and when they would have used this weapon? >> well, there's been an extensive investigation of this question of the german bomb and how far along they were. this was an obsession of general groves. of course, this was an early recruiting method. many of the scientists had worked for key german scientists and had fled to the united states and were concerned about what was going on back in germany. it appears after looking at just about everything that the the german program was halted just as the american program really got under way in a major way in probably the spring of '42. albert schpear would

-- chavez union and favored stalin. and when he went on vacations he went to vote very a to the promised land and he really liked to discuss politics and my mother did not. i was not interested in politics at all from boring and uninteresting and. stalin and bus brescia have seed so serious all the time -- pic they have the portraits in the house. >> my father was a member of the organization like the friends of the ussr. so whenever they make the new general secretary of the communist party. he was touched by this. then he started talking with my mother. and it's where the rationale should be. [inaudible] hanging out at the seller smoking. of course my father affected me like a father does in many ways, and so when i became a teenager and i discovered punk music, especially what fascinated me was the anarchists and and that seemed to be like the positive alternative. i can't say i like the music. [laughter] it was more of the movement and philosophy of the movement and the idea behind the punk movement and the class wi

so stalin, pol pot. he does not care about the people. killed his own people. that is the way. so we have to have sanctions. he is going to think, oh, my god, my poor people. he does not think that. he wants the power. he wants to rebuild the soviet union. i have to say the words again, i believe. i don't know that with certainty it seems to be that way. the way that he talks. at one point president obama do you realize, the majority of people who voted, but we all saw a videotape when the microphone was on and he did not know what. he was saying to the president, talking about missile defense and the czech republic of poland , missile defense. and he said, tell vladimir that this is my last election. and after the election i can be more flexible. and he said, i understand. i'm sure he told him. i would think he would want to give that message to our allies. he could be more flexible. not those people who are opposed to los. number one, he should give that message of the voter. he would have lost, of course. the majority. but the majority of people heard it. they voted for him

when collin powell commented he was running out of enemies but neither came close to stalin in terms of the horror they can impose. we are looking at a world of chronic conflicts as opposed to accute and they will be us in a number of ways. if you look around the world, there is a world full of messes out there. we see the israeli-palestinian peace process for the 400th time. you look at egypt and you get to chee chose between a dictatorship or a muslim brotherhood. we look at syria which is driven by a civil war where there is a government no one likes and the other side includes folks that one around crucifying christians and the people they don't like and shooting school children if they are thought to be blasphemy. iraq we see is falling apart. and one of the main forces against the government we supported are the opposition in syria. so it is this odd situation of opposing the government in syria that is fighting the bad guy but in favor of the government in iraq that is fighting the same bad guys assuming our friends in washington get this straight which is a lot of competence.

no emotional reaction from stalin at all. probably their espionage had already uncovered and knew what we were doing, and there was no doubt they were also developing their own bomb, which they did a .ew years later do we know to what extent japan and germany, how far along they were in their programs? was there any cooperation between germany and the axis powers to develop the bomb, and do we know how and where and when they would have used this weapon? >> there's been an extensive investigation of this question of the german bomb and how far along they were. this was an obsession of general groves. this was an early recruiting method. had of the scientists worked for key german scientists and had fled to the united states. they were concerned about what was going on back in germany. it appears, after looking at just about everything, that the justn program was halted as the american program really got under way, probably the spring of 1942. elton schreier would have been in charge. heisenberg, one of the greatest scientists

we chose instead to depict stalin's soviet union as democrats and obscured the nature of that regime.e accounting came over the deaths of over 20,000 polish that we knew the soviets had killed we chose to cover it up. at the very outset of our participation in world war ii, we have made this very important fundamental moral choice about you ho we'w we're going to depi our actions and allies. then you see the long slide from there from a series of events that leads to the bombing of cities and the use of atomic weapons and other moral choices that truman faced. this is all part of the production and residuals of making atomic weapons. it's even bigger than atomic weapons, it's a whole moral universe that we have to recognize that people were living in in the 19th and mid-20th century and we we are living in today. we should give consideration about what we there dealing with at the time before making judgments. >> just a couple of points. when we sit in our location today we often wished things had sort of worked out differently and occurred differently, et cetera. of course, what drov

stalin did. >> if they try to put missles back into cuba we are talking about a cold war. otherwise ports and pipeline deals, that is commercialism in the 21st century. >> i think putin enjoys the cold. he is a kgb officer who never left the kgb. if you look at western europe and the perception of weakness and vulnerability there is a clear statement on the russian government to insert its interest, as they see it around the world. i would argue that the things we are saying here are concerning movement towards a new cold war. they do affect the u.s. in strategic ways. >> he cut a very big deal in argentina. he is going to make nuclear reactors. >> there is no idea logical content. he is not going to put interimmediate range ballistic missles in cuba. >> russia had a relationship with the cubans going back decades. i knew fidel well. i have been to that country eight or nine times. i spent a lot of time with fidel castro. >> i attended a lunch with fidel. >> castro is a remarkable man. he is a charismatic man. his brother is a different kind of person. his brother is an op

-- yalta, this is the place where stalin and roosevelt met. they are sending the convoy to the east. separatists want to be part of russia. he is helping those people in the eastern ukraine who are suffering as a result of the ukrainian army's block aid. he is helping crimea after having annexed the territory. this is mainly about the message that he is sending out. >> all at the time when the u.s. is focused on sanctions giving us revisions to the sanctions they previously put in place. are things going to get a bit tougher? >> yeah. this most recent change comes to the so-called 50% rule. the rule was if an individual or entity is sanctioned, if they own more than 50% in something it too is sanctioned. there is an insurance exeand at one point last year, three months ago we thought they might be sanctioned because its majority stake holder appeared be a bank whose biggest shareholder is a guy named yuri. one of the shareholders close to the russian president. they took it to just beneath 50% just before the sanctions were introduced. it look

we join sides with stalin. stalin, because we thought hitler was a more immediately and frightening threat to the world at that point. >> i understand that -- look, i'm not exactly a friend of the assad regime. i think what they've done to the syrian people is horrific. awful. but i think at a certain point u.s. foreign policy has to focus on certain priorities. one of those priorities is u.s. national security. who is clear and present danger. hezbollah is not a clear and present danger to the politics of the united states or homeland to the united states. it is not an active terrorist threat us to. al-assad is not. his defense network is done. he is not a let it to anyone in the region right now. i'm not suggesting we should back the regime of bashar al-assad, but i think we have to understand that in terms of the actors in this area of the world that are actually a threat us to, the one that is a threat to us is isis. no doubt about that. >> no doubt. >> can i tell you, chris, how i think this sort of plays

months during world war ii with the man who up until then was history's greatest murderer, joseph stalin. and after the war when russians rolled in eastern europe, they rolled in on wheels that in detroit. but we needed him in order to defeat hitler. sometimes you have to link up with uncertain or even awful people in order to accomplish something else in this crazy business. especially the mideast. >> ambassador, appreciate your insights. thank you. >>> coming up after the break, we'll talk to a seismologist about the strength of that massive earthquake that hit california this morning. i'm m-a-r-y and i have copd. i'm j-e-f-f and i have copd. i'm l-i-s-a and i have copd, but i don't want my breathing problems to get in the way of hosting my book club. that's why i asked my doctor about b-r-e-o. once-daily breo ellipta helps increase airflow from the lungs for a full 24 hours. and breo helps reduce symptom flare-ups that last several days and require oral steroids, antibiotics, or hospital stay. breo is not for asthma. breo contains a type of medicine that increases risk of death in peo

we worked closely stalin for three years and eight months of world war ii. sometimes you have to cooperate with and share information with bad guys but we should not get distracted. bashar al assad's regime is one that creates major problems in the middle east including sanctioning and helping isis. if it weren't for syria, i ice would not be nearly as far along as it is. >> you've been advocating for more intervention in syria for quite some time, going back to 2006, even. it is a necessary evil of undertaking that kind of an intervention to work with assad? >> sometimes you have to have discussions with or go beyond that even with bad guys. i use the example of our alliance with stalin in world war ii. it's a tactical decision. we couldn't get tied up in any philosophical justification of the syrian regime. it's a terrible, murderous regime and whether early or late we should try to have a hand in ending it as well as ie zblis former director of central intelligence james woolsey. very interesting take in the operations we are looking at as a country right

(laughter) >> stephen: this speech was the most skillful political deflection since stalin's infamousyes, i have work camps, but they're filled with kittens." (laughter) a tender message. nixon's lost the 1960 election to john f. kennedy. in part due to a poor performance in the first televised presidential debate. kennedy chose to wear makeup, while nixon chose to be in black and white. (laughter) a rookie mistake. but eight years later, nixon pulled off the greatest political comeback in history, when he swept into the oval office. as president, his achievements were many. he founded the e.p.a., ended school segregation, lowered the voting age to 18 and endorsed the equal rights amendment. but his greatest achievement was restoring diplomatic relations with china. for which we owe nixon a lasting debt -- and china $1.3 trillion. (laughter) but this good man was forced -- (applause) yes. yes. but this good man was forced from office by his bloodthirsty enemies who, according to a partial list prepared by nixon, were everyone. (laughter) it was called watergate, a scandal so explosive

stalin that is the only thing you need to know about the leader. that does not mean that the picture was always clear cut from the beginning. it is important to recognize we can create narratives for ourselves that don't match up with real priorities are. when it comes to ukraine, vladimir putin does not see that in the context of foreign policy. he sees that about maintaining itselfp inside russia and the context of internal policies. he is not equally foreign-policy president in american terms. that is where we can sometimes be accused of focusing too much on the elimination of democratic institutions inside of russia. that is why it really matters. i am eager to get on with the conversation. i was thinking about carnegie today. at 10th anniversary of the carnegie moscow center. eraof the early yeltsin democrats successfully marginalized by putin in his first term. it was pretty clear what direction russia was going. somebody asked him what the 10th anniversary meant, what the prospects are for russian democracy and he said, well, let me put it t

it is a depression era that stalin was able to use to build up the russian army.ou would not have had a hitler if it had not been for the depression. >> government for about one more question. anyone have a question? >> we are one more. >> does too much focus on the western front distort the history are goofy of the first world war? if so, how can -- compensate for this? >> it took me under no how long to convince -- to convince people that there was an eastern front, which i write about. a lot of people don't understand the caucasian front, -- the caucasus front. there are academic books out there that have this information. the western front, this is the key, if you don't understand it. the winning powers write what they want. since the british speak english, we get what they say. i will tell you little secret. look at any book written before 1990 and you will see no picture of a french soldier any british history of the first world war. the british only had 25 miles of the front. >> at the remember him for one more question. -- i think we have room for one more

estonia, libya, and lithuania were forcibly integrated into the soviet union through the hitler-stalin pact in 1940. mikhail gorbachev introduced a certain amount of liberalization, which allowed people to hold her tests without being arrested. people in estonia, latvia, and lithuania seized the opportunity to set a joint world record, forming the longest human chain in history -- 600 kilometers of people holding hands. >> from above, it looked like a traffic jam, but on the ground, it was the largest demonstration in the history of the soviet union. august 23, 1989 -- never before had so many people turned out. some dressed up for the occasion. others came straight from work. they formed a human chain six hundred kilometers long across the three soviet baltic republics -- estonia, latvia, lithuania -- signaling the beginning of the end of the soviet union. a quarter of a century later, a quickstart is a stroke of luck -- a quick start is a stroke of luck for this vehicle. jonas had no second thoughts about taking his family to the original demonstration. their granddaughter was two ye

truman didn't start the cold war, stalin did. >> if they try to put missiles back into cuba, then we are talking about a cold war. otherwise, some porting and pipeline deals, that is commercialism in the 21st century. >> do you share this happy talk? >> i don't. putin enjoys the cold. he never left the kgb. if you look at what is happening in eastern ewe, not simply with ukraine, poland. what is happening in central and latin america, there is a clear statement on behalf of the russian government to try to assert its interests as they see it around the world and i would argue in deference to pat, that the things we are sering here are very concerning in terms of a cold war because they affect the u.s. in strategic ways. >> he is going to make nuclear rectors. >> he does not want to take over the world. he is not going to put interimmediate range missiles in cuba. if he does, i'm wrong. >> what do you think mort? >> less go back with cuba. russia has had a relationship with cuba going back decades. >> which you know very well because you knew fidel very well. >> i do. i have been to t

his grandmother fought for stalin during the second world war.blames the region's dark history for what is happening now. >> at one point, we were one country with 14 republics. politicians divided these republics, planted a seed of war between us. i think what's happening now is absolutely, because the ancestors had the same believes as each other. >> the separatists' beliefs are more murky. some see ukraine as part of an old imperial russia. others embrace the power of the soviet union. when you ask pro-russian separatists what it is they want, some say they want freedom from kiev's rule. others incest they are fighting fascism. but most people here just want to get on with their lives and don't understand why ukrainians are taking up arms against each other. >> kiev recently proposed a peace plan in the southeastern region, which includes more political and economic autonomy and protection of the russian language. >> the separatists say this is not enough. and they have local people's support. >> within one suburb of donetsk, we meet arina. sh

out of this rushing of our you the soviet union and joseph stalin to out of germany you go and get nazi germany and adolf hitler. out of the italian republic, mussolini. one decrepit empire you get all of the low countries in the middle east that are not at war and falling apart and lines being redrawn. i was a world war i is a catastrophe. world war ii can out of world war i, and there was no cause for america to get involved. world war ii was a different creature. >> you might not have world war ii out for world war i. and i don't think there can be any question that the u.s. involvement in world war i, and the fact that the u.s., first of all, actually did in the war, put the force in there and think of the armistice on the basis of crazy promises from woodrow wilson that the germans and the middle east and ugland house excepted. and the result was nation states that are not nations. the result was that germany was so upset at the unfairness of the way it ended, that we got nazis and. way to communism, all these things as result of that war which was the signal, foreign policy mistak

hand, these terrorists, and look, every regime in history was built on propaganda from hitler to stalinuba to everything else, and are we giving them the twitter a free ultimate propaganda machine to help them recruit, or would all of the regimes have gone down if we had seen what was going on in the gu lag with cuba and what fill dedel or other ho chambers. so you don't want to give them free propaganda, but it is too early -- >> and in is like, put up pictures of rape so you can see how bad it is. this is a crime scene. >> well, if we had pictures of hitler ande:j the camps, that would have had something done sooner. >> and twitter is not a corporation, and it can do whatever it wants to, because it is not a government. twitter can decide not to put up child porn and they can decide that isis should go, and they are using it as a recruiting tool here in the united states key words to block anybody who posts stuff like this, and we don't want this stuff world spread and them impressioning our kids' minds here in the united states. i say block as much as you can. >> chuck, weigh in her

has to and kim il-sung, both of who are nasty characters and neither of them came close to joseph stalin or mao tse tung in terms of the worst they could impose. we're looking at a world in future of a lot of chronic conflict as a post-acute once. that is in terms of islamic threats that will be there, to raise him, they will be with us and they will threaten is not extensively but they will be with us any number of other ways. if you look around the world we have a world full of a lot of messes. we have missiles falling in israel, bombings in the gaza strip, we see the israeli-palestinian peace process one of which every time they make a go at the bit i wrote my eyes, the 300 or 400th time they been trying. you look at egypt which basically has a regression of the mubarak dictatorship so get to choose between a vicious muslim brotherhood. we look at syria which is riven by a civil war where we have a government that i think none of us like on the other hand, the of cyclists such wonderful folks that run around crucifying christians and people they don't like and shooting schoolchildren

it, his deeply ambivalent relationship with the soviet state and the strange bond between him and stalin each though they only spoke once and on the phone. his messy private life. he had, essentially, two families, and the state never imprisoned pasternak, but they did strike at him indirectly by putting his mistress in the gulag twice. the early hostile reaction to the novel from the state publisher and literary -- [inaudible] pasternak's decision to give the manuscript to a young italian, sergio deangelo who worked at radio moscow and who also worked as a scout for new books. the efforts of the kremlin in con junction with the italian communist party to intimidate both the author and the publisher stopped publication in milan and get the book back. the extraordinary correspondence between a few cher knellly and pasternak. he broke with the italian communist party of which he was a leading member and financier and was the first publisher of dr. zhivago which appeared in translation in italy in november 1957. it was a commercial and critical success helped in part by the fact that the so

would be aght it picture of stalin gdp growth. stalling gdp growth. >> i was in bangkok to were three days ago. the expectation was for a shy decline in gdp for the end of the year and a recovery in the second half of the year starting to see that coming through. it wasn't really a massive impact of the coup had. brought a measure of stability that has perhaps improved some of the business environment. , in thecompanies said first half of the year, they did not see the slowdown. but it means that maybe the picture is a little bit more broad-based in terms of growth in thailand and not just bangkok. the index is up .4% since the coup. is it time to investor have we missed the boat? >> we are overweight on taiwan. if you look at valuations, it is key. >> 25% up year to date. >> very strong, yeah. so valuations are not strapped yet. >> the baht is strengthening as well. that might be a bit of a headwind going ahead. >> going forward, we are looking for dollar strength. i know you are familiar with that part of the world. how does tha

how long has it been since we heard those words, joseph stalin? you have to prepare for the 5% of him that may not be totally rational and that means when you reinforce nato you do it in a really serious away. we do not need forces in italy. let's put them in the baltic states and poland in large enough numbers to manage. he may indeed be a megalomaniac but he is not going to attack a country in which there are american forces deployed. i would make a much bigger move to make nato a real bulwark in case he has some notions he might do some of the things he did in ukraine in the baltic states of which we have an article five guarantee. you do not want the president of the united states to have to make a choice of refusing to act on our article five guarantee or fighting russia. deter it now. >> thank you. madeleine? >> i think all of us here in our little humility in terms of our soviet expertise. i want to tell a story. in october 1964, i was a student at columbia at the russian institute where nobody predicted the ouster. nobody predicted the dis

and this was certainly a traditional area of russian interest long long proceeding communism and stalin. and the united states in particular said no this is going to become an area of western influence of nato influence european influence or american influence and i can understand. russia being greatly disturbed about this and you just mentioned a moment ago that gorbachev may how gorbachev was promised by nato officials that after the collapse of the berlin wall nato expansion would essentially stop on the us we all know that that didn't happen why do you think the west and they didn't particular have been so persistent in the wing is toward big because we have almost like three generations all western policy makers who have never questioned the wisdom or indeed potential ramifications of such moves there are many people i think you have questioned the move west of. the live eastward of. president clinton was determined that it should happen he believed that putting eastern european states in. within nato would be a democratizing move i can see. arrives at that particular logic. that y

stalin's old powerful foreign minister, and once considered almost as ruthless and terrible as staline inspired the infamous cocktails a makeshift bomb, i'd always imagined his voice to be gruff, sinister. instead, it was surprisingly subdued. though beneath it i detected something sharp and ominous like the point of a double-play. don't worry, he added, it's rubbish. everyone knows he died in a plane crash in 1943. if it was such he died, why mention it at all? growing up in the ussr i didn't have to read george orwell to know all about doublespeak. so that was the beginning of my journey was many, many years ago, any decades ago, and that's how i was introduced to my birth grandfather, nikita khrushchev's son, and it was mentioned that it was an investigation the it was indeed because i grew up knowing that khrushchev's son was always hero. my birth grandfather was always a hero, but, in fact, as it turned out in recent years more and more accounts have come out to convince the public that he was a traitor to the nazis. he was a benedict arnold of the russian state, of the soviet st

his grandmother fought to stalin during the second world war.blames the region's dark history for what is happening now. >> translator: at one point we were one country with 14 republics. politicians divided these connection i cans and planted the seed of war between us. i think what's happening now is absolutely wrong because or sen cesc tours took parts in a war where they had the same ideals, values and beliefs as each other. >> reporter: the separatists beliefs are more america i. some see ukraine as part of an old imperial russia. others e embrace the power of te soviet union. when you and pro-russian separatist what is they want in "sportsnet central" say they want freedom of kiev's rule. others say they are just fighting mashism. but most just want to get on with their lives and don't understand why ukrainians are taking up arms against each other. kiev recently propose aid peace plan in the south region, which includes more political and economic i ca autonomy and protn of the russian lang. but separatists say this is not in you have and

and this was certainly a traditional area of russian interest long long proceeding to communism and stalin. and the united states in particular said no this is going to become an area of western influence of nato influence european influence or american influence and i can understand. russia being greatly disturbed about this and you just mentioned a moment ago that gorbachev may how gorbachev was promised by nato officials that after the collapse of the berlin wall nato expansion would essentially stop on the us we all know that bad didn't happen why do you think the west and eighteen particular have been so persistent in the wing is for big because we have almost like three generations of western policy makers who have never questioned the wisdom or indeed potential ramifications of such moves there are many people i think you have questioned the move west of. the live eastward of. president clinton was determined that it should happen he believed that putting eastern european states in. within nato would be a democratizing move i can see how. we arrived at that particular logic. that yo