Postwar, framework

Tony Judt introduces Postwar as a retelling of the period of European history after the end of WWII. He makes the claim that in 1989, he knew that how scholars perceived the preceding fifty years would now be drastically transformed, as old assumptions were “thrust” aside by the unceasing progression of history (2). He thus attempts throughout the piece to reorient conceived notions about the history of Europe following the end of the Second World War in light of the end of the Cold War with the fall of the Soviet Union. Though he claims this to be the fundamental premise of his analysis, the degree to which he still allows common historical trends and assumptions to color his account discredits this.
Specifically, his piece is tainted by its Western centrism and teleological framework. Granted it is a history of Europe; however, he brushes over worldwide forces that shaped the history of the latter half of the twentieth century—forces, such as the loss of global European influence and dominance that inevitably impacted the new European identity of which he writes. As such, he falls into the same pattern of Western centrism that has largely discredited other historical works.
Furthermore, he claims to disregard previous writings and histories of Europe as they were obscured by the policies of the Cold War; yet, in the next breath he establishes an entirely new, yet now, obviously fictitious endpoint. He simply attempts to establish historical trends that led to the European situation in 1989, as opposed to the European situation in 1988.
Finally, as has been discussed in other posts, Judt oversteps his historical bounds into the world of political theorization in making the claim that the nation-state should no longer be the primary unit of analysis, based on the rise of the European Union. However, in light of the weakened status of Europe and the rising dominance of other nations, it is illogical to rest one’s thesis with regards to global politics on one region.
Judt’s claims are thus questionable if not contradictory and in no way an attempt to truly rectify historical analysis of post-war Europe.