Intermarium region as a geopolitical subject certainly has its own political, cultural and ideological characteristics. The term “geopolitics” itself includes the idea that geographic placement of a country affects their actions. Geopolitics has even more influence on the real (!) ideology of the specific country, than official, declared ideologies. For example, Russian imperialism resulting from its geography has been more important and permanent factor than official Communism or Democracy that has been declared in Russia in certain times. Geopolitics can help us predict the actions of any country – more accurately than any theoretical speculations, because geographic is a natural and objective force.
So, what does the geopolitics of Interarium tells us about the ideology of Intermarium?
First, placement of Baltic-Black-Adriatic Sea countries means a certain attitude towards their neighbours. Much could be said about the unity of Europe, but political fragmentation of our continent is a historical fact for a thousand years. Moreover, Mr. Junker for sure is no Napoleon. This political fragmentation is only becoming stronger after aggression of Russia in Ukraine and Brexit – Eastern part of Europe and Western part have completely different directions in foreign policy. Although, ideologically Western Europe might be against Putin as a “homophobe” and “tyrant”, geopolitically France and Germany are always looking at the possibilities of such a cooperation. Better relations with China for Intermarium in this situation would be important in order to find a powerful ally on the Eastern flank of Russia. This creates a checkerboards situation where the military, economic and political power in the Intermarium countries has to be integrated to create a real geopolitical subject of Intermarium. This perfectly coincides with the general rise of nationalist movements in the region.
Being located in the East European Plain Intermarium has always been vulnerable to the hordes of invaders from East and powerful imperialistic tendencies from the Western European countries. It has no natural borders. A region that is a geopolitical highway has to be the one with initiative in foreign policy in order to survive. Similarly to the principles of German Prussian country, this means that Intermairum has always be the one that is creating situations for the neighbouring powers, no other way around. A great imagination, autonomy for each member involved and rapidity is necessary.
Secondly, the rise and fall of regional hegemons is not anything new. Before the Cold war era and Concert of Europe there was a period of fragmented Germany and Russia, while Poland together with Lithuania was biggest country not only in region, but also in Europe. Historical memory of Rzeczpospolita, that both Westerners and Russians would like to ignore, is still alive. This memory of hegemony gives a powerful link to the past that could be projected and realized in the future in case when demographic challenges (high numbers of Muslim immigrants and the ideology of Islamism) would damage the situation in both EU and Russia.
Third, in geopolitics division between land and sea powers is one of the main concepts. Land powers are seen as more conservative because of their relative isolation. Heartland of the land powers is considered a key to their strength. Coastal countries are considered bringers of progress and democracy. Their power is their connections through the sea. This division we see since the Peloponnesian war until the tensions between Russia and U.S. today. But what about Intermarium? Intermarium is a combination of both – land and sea. It has the possibility to combine the best elements of each system. To be in the middle is the most advantageous position – where there is tension, there is result. Russian “conservativism” of land power is conservativism of the worst meaning. It is just a slower implementation of the same values that Russia is officially resisting. The same cultural Marxism in an earlier stage and in different context. Even very isolated countries cannot resist the general changes around it – even Sparta degenerated with time, despite the ban on money, comfort and changes in technology. Other answer – to serve totally to progress is not an answer also. This was the choice of Athens – and it became the slave of its machinery of war, money and pleasure, until in the end it destroyed itself. Intermarium offers a possibility for a third choice – its access to sea allows to subject the forces of technology, modern means in communications and economics, and to make it serve some higher political and cultural goals.
The implementation of geopolitics is called geostrategy. Without a conscious geostrategy that corresponds to conditions set by geopolitics, countries lose their power and eventually – independence. It is therefore a simple choice for our leaders either to follow blindly feelings and the slogans of unrealistic ideals or to follow the facts and logical steps that the nature itself is offering us.