Intermarium: A Model

In this election season, it’s easy to miss news in other countries.  Some things do stick out, such as the Armenia and Azerbaijan conflict, which Big Business unsurprisingly took the wrong side in.  In addition to this war, another war has been waged in Europe for some time.  A battle between sovereignty and safety. This is the war of dominion over Europe by Brussels. 

The sovereignty question is something many political parties within European are displeased with.  It’s one thing to be part of an international commercial union, but to lose the ability to determine foreign policy is a different matter.  This becomes an even harder pill to swallow when the safety supposedly gained by the EU is shown categorically to be false.  The recent terror attacks in France and Austria being another reminder of this fact.  It is the suicidal policies of the EU which lead to such attacks.  Welcoming people who hate you into your country is never a good strategy.  So, what can be done?

Leaving is an option, as the UK officially demonstrated on January 31^st of this year.  Admittedly, this is a long, drawn out withdrawal and may be prolonged because of COVID (as some MPs have urged that outcome) but it is coming.     

Many of the countries in Europe are quite small and probably couldn’t stand on their own in the same way the UK could.  A country of a couple million, neighboring a country of almost 150 million, needs friends.  One strategy which has been talked about off and on for many years has been Intermarium.  Ruuben Kaalep gave a good speech on it earlier this year and how it would lead to the survival of Estonia’s ethnicity, language, culture, and sovereignty.

This idea was first popularized by Marshall Józef Piłsudski in the years between the World Wars, it was meant to resist threats from Russia or Germany.  There were several main reasons why it didn’t gain traction.  One was the concern that small nations would lose their sovereignty to it, a concern which the EU project has certainly shown as a valid concern.  The other concern was that it would undermine nationalism and instead create a pan-national identity which would replace it.  While that latter concern may not make sense to people who identify as “white nationalists,” it’s something that any Southern Nationalist can certainly sympathize with.

So, who would make up this group?  There are 18 tentative countries in what would be Intermarium: Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Romania, Finland, Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro, Moldova, Ukraine, and Belarus.  Of these countries, some are Slavic, some are Uralic, and some (Romania and Moldova) are neither. 

One could argue it should instead be a purely Slavic confederation because they have deeper cultural ties, but a purely Slavic group may be more likely to impose a supranational identity than this more pragmatic pairing.  Additionally, a large reason why the term “Intermarium” has even gained any sort of resurgence in interest is because of the Visegrád group of Czechia, Poland, Slovakia, and the Uralic Hungary.  So, let’s do the largest tent and include all those countries that would logically fit within it.  Additionally, Belarus and Ukraine are interesting cases as they vacillate between wanting to be closer with Russia or closer with the EU, but we’ll include them, as well.

Of these 18 countries, the dominant religion in 9 of them is Orthodoxy, 7 Catholicism, and 2 Lutheran.  These nations make up over 170 million people who speak somewhere between 12 and 18 different languages (many of them are mutually intelligible).  There are two main issues with Intermarium today.  The first is that it would be militarily weaker than the EU, and the second is that it would be economically less powerful than the EU.  Regarding the military weakness, it’s important to note that Russia only has an estimated 146.7 million people and the main reason Russia previously dominated them was because they were disunified.

Of course, there could be a military threat from the European Union and their planned EU Army.  The EU 2020 Population estimate is roughly 448 million people, but when you subtract the populations that would leave for Intermarium (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia: roughly 108 million total), that leaves the remaining EU with 340 million people.  That’s still a pretty big force and is certainly a concern, but there is no EU army yet and the existence of one doesn’t necessitate a war.

This also begs the question of whether the EU could form an army in reaction to Intermarium.  There was a big hoopla over the UK doing Brexit, so if 12 more countries left, there’s no telling how the remaining states would react.  It could certainly lead to greater centralization in the face of a “threat” from the East.  Undoubtedly, the cosmopolitan globalists of Brussels would say it was all a Russian plot.  However, it would also lead to more politicians advocating for their own exit from the EU.  It’s important to note that one Italian Senator launched an Italexit campaign this year, at least in part due to momentum from Brexit.  Other politicians like the Le Pen family and Geert Wilders of the Netherlands have long spoken about limiting the power of the EU over the constituent states.  Should more states leave the EU and create viable alternatives, it seems more than likely that while some Europeans will call for a stronger EU, more will also call for weakening it or dissolution.

The economic issues are what would more likely cause opposition by citizens of potential Intermarium countries.  The countries that would be leaving the EU experienced massive economic growth due to their relationship with the EU.  If countries leave the EU to join Intermarium, the average resident of the country will certainly lose purchasing power and the country will have lower GDP with a dip in quality of life indexes.  It is important to acknowledge these realities.  However, a reasonable person should ask “do you care more about GDP or national sovereignty and a future for your people?”  It’s also important to point out that as Western Europe begins to get more multicultural, economic decline is inevitable. 

By joining, you form a bulwark against a rebirth of imperialism against Russians, Germans, or any other foreign force.  By forming a confederation, you resist the ever-encroaching threat to national sovereignty demonstrated by the EU impositions.  You can defend your faith, people, and your culture successfully together. Unfortunately, apart, these countries are too weak to stand alone and we’ve seen that joining the EU leads to a loss of sovereignty, safety, and identity.  Fears of hypotheticals should not dissuade you, particularly compared to the absolute certainty of EU policies destroying countries with mass immigration and dysgenic policies. 

Some of these reasons also explain why a single U.S. state breaking away from the Empire makes little sense.  Instead, some regional confederation would be best implemented to balance sovereignty and strength.