Reviews

Joseph M. van Brabant, Remaking Eastern Europe—On the Political Economy of Transition. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990, xiv+223 pp., £57.00 h/b.

Ronald J. Hill, Communist Politics under the Knife: Surgery or Autopsy? London and New York: Pinter Publishers, 1990, 224 pp., £30.00 h/b; £9.95 p/b.

Andrei Akatovich Belykh, Istoriya sovetskikh ekonomiko‐matematicheskikh issledovanii. Leningrad University Press, 1990, 141 pp., 2 rubles.

Gregory Gleason, Federalism and Nationalism: The Struggle for Republican Rights in the USSR. Foreword by John N. Hazard. Boulder, CO: Westview Press: Westview Special Studies on the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, 1990, xiv+170 pp., £17.50 p/b.

James Hughes, Stalin, Siberia and the Crisis of the New Economic Policy. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1991, xiii+260 pp., £30.00

Joan Sokolovsky, Peasants and Power: State Autonomy and the Collectivization of Agriculture in Eastern Europe. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1990, 181 pp., £18.95.

Louis Guy Michael, More Corn for Bessarabia: Russian Experience, 1910–1917. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 1983, 245 pp., $18.95.

P. Pomper, Lenin, Trostsky and Stalin: The Intelligentsia and Power. New York: Columbia University Press, 1990, xiii+446 pp., $19.00 p/b.

Tony Cliff, Trotsky, 1923–27. Fighting the Rising Stalinist Bureaucracy. London: Bookmarks, 1991, 306 pp., £6.95 p/b.     

East German Intelligence and Ireland, 1949–90: Espionage,Terrorism and Diplomacy

This article analyses the writings of a prominent German social and political theorist ‐ Jürgen Habermas ‐ on the process of (reunification in Germany and examines responses to his interventions by right‐wing thinkers opposed to his views. (Re)unification is a setting of rapidly developing and changing events which present a challenge to Habermas’ thinking. Put simply, Habermas is highly critical of the ‘rush towards (re)unification’ and the process which has followed it. In particular, he objects to attempts by right‐wing thinkers, predominantly historians, to rewrite German history and which elude German responsibility in respect of the horrors of the Holocaust. Equally, he has explicitly shown the links between questions of German identity and the rewriting of German history and argues that the only viable identity for Germany post‐(re)Unification is that of ‘constitutional identity’ and not national identity. His writings have, however, been the subject of sometimes vehement and vitriolic critiques and this article seeks not only to engage with these but also to examine the interventions of Habermas in relation to his earlier more theoretical writings.