The destiny of Europe and Intermarium

  1. Two European Unions

The European Union was founded as a union of Christian European nations, according to a common identity of civilization. The fathers of the European Union, Konrad Adenauer, and Robert Schuman knew that Europe could not be united with power and imperialism, as tried by various European superpowers for centuries, but only by respecting the national differences and interests of each country, in addition linking these interests to a mutually beneficial mechanism. Europe would be created by “certain achievements, which (…) will create real solidarity”[1] – as said by the French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman, at the formation of the European Coal and Steel Community. “Political unity doesn’t mean the absorption of a nation. Political integration does not mean the abandonment of national sovereignty. The relationship that unites Europe will not lead to a denial of the fatherland.”[2] Could it be said more clearly? The European Union was meant to be a format for a mutual cooperation between European nations! This political realism was intertwined with the correct understanding of the nature of democracy, namely “either democracy will be Christian or it shall not exist. Anti-Christian democracy is a caricature that will sink into either tyranny or anarchy.”[3]

However, at the same time, there was a second way – the same old imperialism, although in a new form. It is Pan-Europe of Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, which would mean mixing of nations and the elimination of national differences on the name of utopia. This was the basis for the European federalist movement, which wants to transform the European Union (and to some extent has transformed it) into a centralized and a bureaucratized monster, that controls each country with its dictates. The Italian communist, Altiero Spinelli, was the official founder for the European federalist movement, who was the key figure in the transformation of Europe of Adenauer and Schuman into what the European Union has become today. The main building of the European Parliament is named by this communist. These European federalists, who descent from communists, talk not about the essence of Europe, or its identity as a civilization and preservation of this identity, but only about functions. For example, about that same “democracy”, which, as we see, has been detached from its Christian context, which in performance by the European Commission has really been transformed into tyranny and anarchy at the same time. The “solidarity” that is demanded by this commission is detached from the true values and shared achievements, which could encourage European nations to give away some of their independence for the sake of the common cause. Therefore, it is not solidarity, but a dictate based on ideological slogans of the leftist multiculturalism. This ideology is kind of a pseudo-religion used by pseudo-elite, who tries monopolize Europeanism, at the same time denying the foundations of European culture. Up until the 1990s, European leaders like Margaret Thatcher defended the European Union as a model of cooperation between nation-states against a federalist model that involves centralization of power in Brussels and a reduction in the importance of the role of nation-states. However, Juncker’s and Merkel’s fanatical handling of the immigration crisis disrupted this balance, which led to Britain exiting the union, as well as the alienation of Central and Eastern European countries from the union. The European Union has come to a deadlock. No one has discredited the idea of European unity more than these federalists. Many therefore turn away from the idea of the European Union as a whole.

However, Europe is not just in “Brussels”. Europe is where there are “roots in ancient Greece [giving] a certain common intellectual and artistic tradition, – a political, legal and militaristic [tradition] in Rome, but in Christianity – the conversion and transformation of a barbaric man in to one with a noble religion and ethics.”[4] Europe is our “wider fatherland” and “Europeanism is also a prerequisite for Latvianism – when we lose Europeanism, we inevitably also lose our Latvianism.”[5] We are Europeans and we bear responsibility not only for the preservation and development of national identity, but also for the fate of our common civilization.

2. The fundamental changes in the world

In the meantime, the whole world has fundamentally changed. The idea of the American political scientist Fukuyama that, with the collapse of the USSR, a total victory of Western liberalism has occurred worldwide, at the beginning of the 21st century increasingly proved its utopian character – the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, the 2008 Russian invasion of Georgia, the international financial crisis of the same year, and finally – 2014 as the start of the war between Russia and Ukraine, and the immigration crisis of 2015. The era of rearrangement for international relation has come – from a world that is based on the principles of Western-led liberalism and the free market to a world that is based on civilizations and their interests, just as the American political scientist Huntington had predicted. In the time of the rearrangement of international system, the European Union is the “sick man” of Western civilization. Economically and demographically stagnating, internally divided, without any unifying ideals, without strong leaders that can unify – that is the European Union today. In addition, there is the failure to deal with radical Islam and the dangers of Russia due to leftist multiculturalism ideology.

With Brussels losing its prestige and influence, the importance of nation-state positions and bilateral relations are becoming more important. Nationalism is returning as the leading force in all of Europe. It’s especially expressed among the younger nations of Europe, the so-called Intermarium (Baltic-Adriatic-Black sea) region, that view the renewal of Western civilization as their mission.[6] The idea of a union between these countries is returning, which is being interpreted in various forms – starting with pragmatic economical cooperation without a political goal or as a  political union – an alternative to the European Union.

The idea of the Intermarium has strong roots in European history; Poland-Lithuania was the first republic in Europe – the bastion of Western culture against the imperialism of the Russians and Ottomans. This union, which used to be the biggest country in Europe, ceased to exist at the end of the 18th century. At the start of the 20th century, the Polish leader Józef Piłsudski tried to renew a regional alliance. The leader of the Latvian War of Independence, General Pēteris Voldemārs Radziņš, also saw the strategical importance of this alliance: “Every new country has to form a close union, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Black Sea. Nothing has been fully dealt and established yet, it is too soon to lie on laurels – it is necessary to keep on working with such patriotism as it was in the beginning. Otherwise, all of the conquests and gains can slip out of our hands.”[7] Sadly, it is just what happened. The inability to grasp the regional context of the newly independent countries gave the chance for Germany and the USSR to isolate the new countries one by one, then divide and destroy them. However, the idea of an Intermarium, after the start of the Ukrainian war and the immigration crisis, is being reborn in various formats – The Visegrad group, Three Sea initiative, 16+1 format of cooperation. Even though there are still some inner disputes between a few countries of this region, the overall trend cannot be denied – the integration of countries in the direction of north-south is intensifying.

But there are obstacles as well. Among those, there is a lack of political will and institutions, that could strengthen the cooperation and the lack of contacts between the regional nations political and social elites. To strengthen the Intermarium block during this threatening geopolitical situation, it has been pointed out on what institutional measures need to be taken: creation of regional departments in every foreign ministry , the institutionalization of meetings about security issues, regular diplomacy for economy, paving the way for a railway infrastructure (TEN-T) and energy infrastructure (“Trans-European Energy Network”) closer linkage between the countries of the region, the creation of  a Central European Technological Insitute and University of Central Europe for the education of the political elite in the spirit of Intermarium, as well as the inclusion of Central European history, culture and identity courses in the regions education institutions programs. In this way, a new player, within the European Union, would be created, which in terms of economic influence and the population would be similar to Germany or France.[8]

There is potential for the integrated Central European or Intermarium region to serve as the new core of the European Union. Countries of this region possess an unbreakable national self-awareness and spirit of resistance. Every political and social process that has happened in Western Europe, had happened in the Intermarium region with an offset of a few decades, sometimes centuries, that is why these countries are “young”. The communist regime behind the “Iron curtain” repressed these nations, but strengthened their national resistance spirit at the same time. That is why the Intermarium can do more than Western European countries. To those that hold dear the preservance of the nation-state and Christian Western European culture, have only one solution – the Intermarium!

3. Europe, Intermarium and Ukraine

The destiny of the Intermarium will be settled mainly by two countries. One of them is Ukraine; regardless if it’s in the European Union. Without a free Ukraine, without Ukraine as a geopolitical player – there won’t be an Intermarium, there won’t be a hope for a European future either. The idea of many Western nationalists, that a rebirth of Europe can be achieved over the corpse of Ukraine with the help of Russia is absolute stupidity and close sightedness! We must remember the words of General Radziņš – “Destiny of Ukraine will settle the destiny of the Baltic countries as well.”[9] The geopolitical location of Ukraine, the size of its territory, population and resources make it a fundamental element in our region. By controlling Ukraine, Russia is an empire that prevails over our part of Europe. By losing it, Russia also loses its imperial status, but we maintain our freedom.

Equally important is the Polish factor, and particularly Poland’s role as the new European powerhouse and its ability to cooperate with Ukraine. Poland and Ukraine together form the essential part of Intermarium, with an estimated 80 million inhabitants and a minimum connection between the Baltic and the Black Sea. The dismantlement of such a union is one of Russia’s main objectives in our region, on which it does not spare any resources.

In 2019, similarly as in 1919, there is but a single question – will, during the next years, Central and Eastern Europe be included in the Bolshevistic Russian Empire, or will it manage to unite into a confederation with the leadership of Poland? Any other intermediate status is just a temporary phase – a geopolitical anomaly. One has to remember that the faith of Intermarium is decided by the rise or fall of the power of Germany and Russia. For 20 years, between the First and Second World War, the fall of both of these European great powers allowed new nation-states to form. The great power of the West at the time – Great Britain – realized that one of the biggest threats for the West is the alliance between Germany and Russia – Eurasia. That is why between both of the wars its geostrategic plan was to strengthen the “buffer states” of the Intermarium region, to separate Germany from Soviet Russia. That is the geopolitical context of our first phase of independence. The failed attempts of Pilsudski to unite these countries into a single union and also the negative attitude of the British to allow such a tighter union between these countries made it only a short term solution.

What do we see today? In a “Multi-speed” Europe, Germany, which is historically orientated towards Russia and dependent from its gas, is strengthening its positions. The “Nord Stream 2” project will allow Russia to bypass Ukraine and directly supply Germany with gas, this way it will free itself of the last obstacles that hold it from a large-scale attack on Ukraine. Essentially this is another “Molotov-Ribbentrop” pact. The idea of a European army just makes things even worse, which would be in fact be extension up of Russian military influence in Europe. A federal Europe with Germany in charge is a risk to the West. A geopolitical realism requires that we return to the idea of Pilsudkys Intermarium by strengthening the bilateral relations in the north-south line of the regions countries and strengthening relations between the region and the leading Western great power – the USA, in which interests is to not allow the creation of the Eurasian project.

I forecast the following sequence of events in the near future of Europe. The first phase is the process of regionalization of Europe and the consolidation of the Intermarium, which has already begun. BREXIT, the “two speed Europe”, individual cooperation between countries bypassing Brussels – all of this promotes the dissolution of the European Union into multiple blocks, while the formal unity is unchanged. If we’re to look at the global context, the priority of the USA increasingly becomes the Pacific Ocean region – the main arena of the world geopolitical activities in future. That is why the USA supports a bigger autonomy of the Intermarium. Poland, the economically strongest country in the region, will most likely become the key nation of Europe, by creating a new balance of power between Germany and Russia to prevent the creation of Eurasia. This means for Poland to take on leadership over the whole region by promoting mutual military cooperation, energetic independence and a united voice in foreign relations. During the second phase, there will be a reformation of Europe in to union with Intermarium as the center. It will start with the disintegration of Russia and Western Europe, the main reason being mostly demographics. During the next phases of Europes Islamization, the Muslim migrants will end their play on being a passive electorate for the leftists and turn into the next policy makers for Western Europe. Together with new migrant waves from Africa, Western European countries will change so far that they’ll become unrecognizable. The works of the outstanding French writers Jean Raspail (“The Camp of the Saints”) and Michel Houellebecq (“Submission”) are prophetic in nature, anticipating the surrender of the materialistic and hedonistic Europe to a much stronger Islamic civilization. In this context, the European nations will be forced to a return to traditional European ideals to survive – the European Union will become a Europe of Nations once more! The British historian Toynbee found out that for a civilization, which is in its phase of downfall, its former borders become the new center for expansion to both sides of a later civilization. The borders of the former Roman Empire on the Rhine river became the center for the new Western civilization.[10] It seems that it is inevitable, that the Intermarium, as the border region of the Western civilization will become a center for the European Union of Nations. The American political scientist George Friedman anticipates that such a union lead by Poland could expand to the East at the moment of disintegration of Russia.[11] The task of this new European Union could be the preservation and development of the difference and uniqueness of European nations as well as the common identity of the European civilization. The basis of this union will be equal cooperation between nations – as envisioned by the founders of the European Union Robert Schuman and Konrad Adenauer.

In the meantime, communication between the nationalists and conservatives of the Intermarium countries must be strenghtened, bypassing the myths created by both ultraliberal and Russian propaganda. The new nationalism means to recognize the European context of our national identity and interdependence between countries in the Intermarium region. A policy of cooperation and national reconciliation is required between the countries of this region and the peoples, which are divided down by past resentments and the short-term selfish interests of the countries.

[1] Ležēns, Renē. Robērs Šūmanis, Eiropas Tēvs (1886-1963). Politika kā svētuma ceļš. Riga: KALA raksti, 2017., pages 30-31

[2] Ležēns…. page 237

[3] Ležēns…. page 183

[4] Jurevičs, Pauls. Dzīve un liktenis. Refleksijas par latvisko eksistenci. Copenhagen: Imanta, 1955., page 129

[5] Jurevičs…. page 134

[6] This idea is expressed by the prime minister of Hungary Victor Orban:

[7] Radziņš, Pēteris Voldemārs. Baltic countries and Ukraine. From: Pētera Voldemāra Radziņa rakstu krājums. Composed by Purviņš, Agris. Ģenerāļa Radziņa biedrība, 2016, P. 545


[9] Radziņš… P. 544

[10] Toynbee, Arnold J., A Study of History. Abridgement of volumes I-VI by D.C. Somervell, Oxford University Press, 1961, page 9-15.

[11]  Frīdmans, Džordžs. Valstu un tautu likteņi. Analīze un prognozes nākamajiem 100 gadiem. Rīga, Avots, 2012., page 148-149.

Leave a Reply