Since writing Balkan Ghosts — which was reputedly very influential in the Clinton White House during the Balkan conflict — Robert Kaplan has become famous for writing travel literature that is part travelogue and part foreign policy briefing. Most of his books are about parts of the world most Americans couldn’t pick out on a map, let alone say anything intelligent about. Even the supposed educated elite would be hard pressed to name a single factoid about places like Azerbaijan. The same can’t be said for someone who has read Eastward to Tartary.

In Eastward to Tartary, Kaplan starts off in what is often euphemistically called “New Europe,” otherwise known as “Eastern” or, perhaps more accurately, “Central” Europe. In Budapest he meets an eccentric man who posits the idea that the amount of democracy and “civilization” present in a country today is directly related to how close the country was geographically, socially and politically to Europe during the enlightenment. This theme, amended to include the influence of the Ottoman and Soviet Empires, is woven throughout Kaplan’s travels through Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Armenia.

Another touchstone of the book is the impermanence of the socio-political systems of a country at any given point in history. While it is more common for people to analyze the stability of a country while looking through a macro lens, Kaplan zooms way out and notices that the borders, ethnicities, leadership and prosperity of a country are almost always in constant flux. With this in mind, Kaplan looks at the present situation in the Balkans, Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asian regions with an eye towards what the future might hold for these areas. In this regard, Kaplan is at his best in the Caucasus and Central Asia, where even an observer with a macro lens realizes that what we see today is almost certainly going to be different in the near future.

One part of the Eastward to Tartary that I thought was not up to par with the others was the chapter on Armenia. Kaplan admits that it was written as an afterthought and the quality of writing and depth of analysis confirms Kaplan’s admission. That particular chapter lacks the depth of historical analysis Kaplan provides about the other countries he traveled to in the book. It reads more like sketches and quick observations instead of a thoughtful critique of the people he spoke to and events witnessed while there.

The only regret I have after reading this book is that Kaplan wrote it in early 2000 about his travels in the late 1990s. As we all know, in 2001 and 2003, the 9/11 attacks and the sebsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq changed the focus in the area substantially. It would have been interesting to have a more in-depth discussion of Islamic fundamentalism in the region, and to have his pre-Afghan War impressions on Afghanistan (which he didn’t travel to for this book).

I highly recommend Eastward to Tartary. It was easy to read while still being stuffed to the brim with useful information and impressions of a region that is still at the forefront of the West’s attention.

All Posts on Eastward to Tartary:

• Bulgarian Monkey Out in the Cold Thanks to Russia’s Gazprom
• What was True Then, Is True Now
• The Strange Names English Speakers Call Other Countries
• Trust But Verify: Using Hindsight to Read Eastward to Tartary
• Robert Kaplan on Hugh Hewitt Radio Show
• Provocative Quote on Traveling Alone
• Book One: Robert Kaplan’s Eastward to Tartary