For most of the European continent, the end of the Cold War has ushered a period of stability and prosperity. True, there was the persistent violence in the Balkans. But Germany was unified peacefully, and with the blessing of all its neighbours - a novelty in the continent's long history.
The huge concentration of armed forces on Germany's plains has largely disappeared. And the end of the ideological division has forced both parts of the continent to redefine themselves. The East's troubles have become our problems, but the West's way of life, with its emphasis on toleration, individualism and co-operation has been successfully absorbed in the East.
And yet, for much of the wider world, the end of the Cold War was a blessing in disguise. The old ideological stalemate was highly dangerous. But it was also predictable and, on the whole, rather stable. That stability is unlikely to return and the country which towers above everyone else as the sole remaining superpower - the United States - is unwilling to provide it.
Nobody should mourn the end of the Cold War. This confrontation, which fed a massive arms race and created such obscene concepts as "mutually assured destruction" should rightfully be consigned to history's dustbin. Millions of people perished in various local wars, all of which were aided by either West or East and sometimes by both at the same time. And humanity itself was on the verge of extinction at least three times in the last few decades.
But, in a curious way, most of these conflicts were of the probing variety: proxy wars in which one side pin-pricked the other, yet always knew how to draw back from the brink. And, despite the madness of the nuclear confrontation, there were a few rules which both sides observed. The proxies in various conflicts were kept in check: they were not allowed to destroy their opponents totally, and were saved themselves from total destruction.
In the process, borders were usually respected, national sovereignty became the bedrock of international relations and the United Nations carved a niche for itself.
None of the conflicts which the UN policed with its peacekeeping troops were ever solved. But the organisation managed to freeze these conflicts at their lowest common denominator, and that during the Cold War was an achievement in itself.
The biggest loser from the end of the Cold War is unquestionably Africa. During the period of ideological confrontation African leaders were actively courted by both sides; their commodities sold well and their geo-strategic importance was undeniable. Violence in the Congo during the early 1960s threatened a world war, and the country was kept together by a UN presence.
A similar bout of violence in the same country today hardly merits a newspaper headline. When Nigeria broke up three decades ago few governments dared recognise an independent Biafra, fearing the precedents this may create. But when Eritrea declared its independence from Ethiopia recently, few governments had any reservations about accepting the new state. Wholesale slaughter in Rwanda and Burundi merits a wriggling of hands; smaller-scale violence in Yugoslavia triggered off NATO's intervention. Independent Africa has now returned to its status as the world's "lost continent".
The end of the Cold War had a profound impact on other continents as well. In Latin America it spelt the end of the dictators which the US propped up out of fear of communism. In Asia, however, the consequence was less beneficial. To all intents and purposes, Asia now resembles Europe at the beginning of the century. It has countries which are experiencing a gradual decline, and states which are determined to translate their newly-acquired economic growth into military might. It is riddled with territorial disputes and, as in Europe a century ago, the absence of serious regional co-operation structures has led to a furious arms race and a growing competition for spheres of influence.
But the most enduring impact of the death of communism is the emergence of the US as the world's only superpower. At first sight, this should present few practical problems. The US is a complete power in a way which the Soviet Union never was: its military might is matched by its economic superiority. Washington will never be plagued by the schizophrenic mixture of a sense of superiority and inferiority at the same time, which was so much the hallmark of the old Soviet regime. Furthermore, the US is a democracy. Democracies can go to war and can commit horrible deeds, but they are periodically checked by their own public opinion in the way the Soviets never were.
The problem for the world today is less one of American dominance but, rather, that of a superpower which remains reluctant to either exercise its responsibilities on its own, or share them with international organisations.
When communism collapsed, the US was briefly seized by the fervour of a "new world order". As seen from Washington, this was an arrangement by which America would encourage regional co-operation but maintain influence in every region, while the United Nations was galvanised to deal with the problems which Washington considered important.
Matters turned out quite differently. Americans encouraged Asia to develop its own security structures. But they also operated a separate policy towards Korea and China, and upgraded their bilateral military relationship with Japan. Washington promoted the enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to the countries of Central Europe. But they also retained their separate policy towards Russia and were keen to maintain their special relationship with both Germany and Britain.
Yet, even if the US pursued a better strategy, the American political system was never designed to sustain the kind of coherent foreign policy expected from the world's only superpower. The country spends a mere 1 per cent of its budget on foreign aid, with only a tiny amount allocated to Africa and even this is now conditioned on ridiculous antiabortion policies.
Most of the problems left unsolved from the end of the second World War and the period of decolonisation which followed are coming back to haunt us today. But, perhaps it is the fate of each generation to believe that it has reinvented the universe only to discover that the world still retains some of its old features.
Jonathan Eyal is Director of Studies at the Royal United Services Institute in London