it's also useful in the sense that it really draws the connection between modern russia and historical rome. this foreign policy is quintessentially byzantine, and so are the consequences - perpetual suspicion of imperial treachery.
i think that, in the broader historical perspective, "western civilization" has yet to truly break it's way out of the division of the roman empire. i know this is very abstract, but it's something i've drawn attention to before and i really think there's a lot of truth to it.
it's tied into the american historical psyche, and to the foundations of the nation itself - this idea of america as the new rome. but, it's sort of typically american in it's lack of scope. london was the actual new rome. washington is in many ways the new constantinople.
but, it's recursive. as much as the american revolution was a civil war within the british empire rather than a revolution, one that ended with washington as the new center of the british empire, the new roman empire, this is only the western half of the story.
the eastern half of the story sees moscow as the new constantinople, the continuation of the eastern sphere of roman civilization. and, it sees the russian empire as the continuation of the byzantine sphere.
so, then what was the cold war, really?
as history unfolds, conflicts localized in space and time open themselves up to these broader interpretations. the details fade. what's left is the broader narrative.
when this story is told to children on distant planets, it seems unlikely to me that any meaningful separation will occur over what we call the modern era. the whole thing will coalesce. moscow vs. washington, constantinople vs. rome, pope vs patriarch - this will all become intertwined into a single, epic struggle for control over roman civilization.