From Prague to Ulan Bator, the decade since 1989 has witnessed a revolution both deep and broad. It was simultaneously a national revolution that created new nation-states, a political revolution that sundered the most fully institutionalized authoritarian regimes of the twentieth century, and an economic revolution that replaced administered systems of production and distribution with markets. Separate national, democratic, and capitalist revolutions that had rocked western European countries in the eighteenth, nineteenth, and early twentieth centuries swept almost in an instant across nine countries that quickly became twenty-eight.

There were two good reasons to expect that developments after socialism, whether in the former Soviet Union or in east central Europe, would follow a roughly similar course. The first was the homogenizing effects of the socialist experience. In contrast to other regions of the world, such as Latin America and southern Europe, where dictatorships had also given way to more liberalized orders, the socialist regimes of eastern Europe and the Soviet Union were remarkably alike in their form and functioning.

Systemic transition in the former USSR is an inherently spatial process. In the most general sense, marketization, privatization, and internationalization involve a reordering of the political space and the restructuring of the economic and social landscapes of the former Soviet Union (FSU). In a number of more specific ways, geography also provides a structure within which individuals and institutions operate, and it provides a series of opportunities and constraints. Geographers, then, should be able to make an important contribution to debates concerning systemic change in the FSU.

Since 1989, the question of public values has been one of the most critical and the most controversial in the study of postcommunist politics. While there seems to be a consensus that people should accept democratic and market-based norms, there is little agreement on how much they actually do so—or on how much they need to, if markets and democracy are to survive.

As communism was collapsing, both the discipline of political science and American foreign policy were becoming captivated by two concepts—the third wave of democratization and the democratic peace. The third wave of democratization is the "worldwide movement to democracy" that occurred in more than thirty countries during the decade and a half that began with the Portuguese coup of 1974. The democratic peace is the special peace that develops among liberal states "because they exercise democratic caution and are capable of appreciating the international rights of foreign republics."

As communism was collapsing, both the discipline of political science and American foreign policy were becoming captivated by two concepts—the third wave of democratization and the democratic peace. The third wave of democratization is the "worldwide movement to democracy" that occurred in more than thirty countries during the decade and a half that began with the Portuguese coup of 1974. The democratic peace is the special peace that develops among liberal states "because they exercise democratic caution and are capable of appreciating the international rights of foreign republics."