Alaska Puts the Intermarium at Risk
Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero
The vision of the Intermarium, the age-old idea of a federation of countries between the Baltic, Black, and Adriatic Seas, has been proposed as one of the historic solutions to Eastern Europe's vulnerability; however, this region has historically been the epicenter of conflicts dating back centuries. The fundamental problem with the Intermarium is that it has never achieved true cohesion. Historically, each country in the region has prioritized its own interests in the face of a common threat, be it Russian, Ottoman, or German imperialism. The scars of ethnic, religious, and territorial divisions run deep.
Only with the end of the Cold War has Eastern Europe achieved an autonomous and consensual existence in the face of the hegemonies that threaten it. Atlanticism and Zbigniew Brzezinski's model, with its concept of a "lock on the Heartland," became the United States' strategy to contain Russia. This lock was built on NATO and the US military presence in Europe. The results of the US-Russia summit in Alaska suggest that Donald Trump, playing the role of Russian Doll, has called into question Russia's isolation. Trump's questioning of NATO funding and his ambiguity regarding Western collective defense were shattering the lock that keeps Eastern Europe secure; now, after the meeting with Vladimir Putin, the failure of Atlanticism can be taken for granted. The Russian bear is on the loose and can advance wherever it wants.
This has direct consequences. The Intermarium countries, which depend on North American support to resist Russian pressure, feel vulnerable. Trump's empathy toward Russia could encourage Vladimir Putin to act more boldly, knowing that the guarantor of regional security might not intervene. The risk is not only an invasion of other Eastern European countries, but also an intensification of Russia's "hybrid warfare" (cyberattacks, disinformation) to destabilize its neighbors. The lack of internal cohesion in the Intermarium, combined with a less engaged United States, creates the perfect breeding ground for a new round of conflicts.
In this context, the old wounds of Eastern Europe could reopen. The theses of thinkers like Vivianne Forrester, although controversial, demonstrate how geopolitical ideas, even the most speculative, can ignite the space into an inferno, as happened with the fires of antisemitism and other forms of exclusionary nationalism.
