In recent years, the concept of the “Intermarium” (Międzymorze in Polish) has gained renewed attention in discussions about Eastern Europe’s role in global politics. This vision, first championed by the influential Polish statesman Józef Piłsudski in the early 20th century, envisions a geopolitical alliance stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea and the Adriatic Sea. This idea not only highlights the ongoing struggle for influence in Eastern Europe but also underscores the region’s attempt to assert a distinct “Eastern European voice” in the broader European political landscape. As the potential for Donald Trump’s return to the US presidency looms, understanding the Intermarium becomes crucial for comprehending the region’s future dynamics and its potential impact on global geopolitics.
Over the last century, the Intermarium has evolved into a central element of Polish geopolitical tradition. It reflects Poland’s strategic evaluation of its position on the land bridge between the Baltic and Black Seas, situated between Western and Eastern Europe, and particularly between the historically influential powers of Germany and Russia. Today, the Intermarium concept has once again emerged as an inspiring alternative in the search for an optimal orientation in Polish foreign policy.
Historical Context and the Origins of the Intermarium
The concept of the Intermarium arose during a period of significant geopolitical upheaval. In the aftermath of World War I and the Russian Revolution, Piłsudski envisioned a federation of Central and Eastern European countries as a buffer against both German and Russian expansionism. This vision was not merely a strategic maneuver but also a cultural and ideological assertion. Piłsudski believed that “without an independent Ukraine, there cannot be an independent Poland,” highlighting the importance of national sovereignty and the rejection of imperial dominance.
The idea of the Intermarium is deeply intertwined with the revival of Polish statehood following the end of World War I. During this period, elements of the Polish political elite believed that federative integration with neighboring nations such as Ukrainians, Belarusians, and Lithuanians was essential. They envisioned a state unit capable of resisting pressure from both the East (Russia) and the West (Germany). This federation was seen as a continuation of historical attempts to build alliances among states in the region, with the goal of establishing a geopolitical counterbalance to the great powers surrounding Poland.
The Promethean League, an anti-communist international movement, was central to this vision. It aimed to dismantle the Soviet Union by promoting nationalism among its non-Russian minorities. This initiative, as historian Timothy Snyder notes, sought to “destroy the Soviet Union and to create independent states from its republics.” Supported by the Polish state under Piłsudski, the Prometheans laid the groundwork for a broader geopolitical strategy that would persist long after the Soviet Union’s collapse.
Of Poland’s two neighboring great powers, Piłsudski regarded Russia as the more dangerous. He believed that Poland’s continued independence could be secured if Russia were weakened through the secession of Lithuania, Belarus, and Ukraine, followed by the establishment of a federation or looser alliance of these new states with Poland.
The development of the Intermarium idea was closely linked with the implementation of the Prometheism concept in Poland. This geopolitical concept, formulated by Piłsudski before World War I, was predicated on the belief that Russia was Poland’s principal geopolitical enemy. The main objective of Prometheism was to internally dissolve Russia’s central power by supporting liberation movements and independence struggles within the Russian Empire.
In practice, Prometheism manifested through Polish support for the independence of Finland, the Baltic States, and Ukraine, as well as Turkestan, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. The emergence of a belt of new independent states was intended not only to weaken Russia’s power but also to create favorable conditions for the development of a new form of the Intermarium, in which Poland could play a leading role in a broad federation of Eastern European states.
Intermarium and the Nazi Occupation
The Second World War brought profound upheaval to Central and Eastern Europe, but it also catalyzed renewed discussions about the Intermarium concept among the exiled elites and underground movements within the occupied territories. As these states endured the harsh realities of German occupation, the idea of a united front against external aggressors gained new relevance. The Promethean League, a coalition of nationalist movements within the region, found itself in a complex and morally ambiguous situation. Seeking to undermine Soviet influence and secure national independence, elements within the League chose to collaborate with Nazi Germany, providing intelligence and logistical support. This pragmatic choice, while aimed at leveraging one enemy against another, has left a controversial and troubling legacy, casting a long shadow over the historical memory of the region.
After the war, the geopolitical chessboard shifted yet again. The United States emerged as the primary supporter of anti-communist efforts in Eastern Europe, replacing the German occupiers with a new form of external influence. Through covert operations such as Belladona and Aerodynamic, the CIA exploited nationalist sentiments to undermine Soviet control, recruiting former fascist collaborators and establishing intellectual centers in exile. These efforts were part of a broader strategy to maintain Western influence in the region, a strategy that has had lasting implications for the contemporary political landscape of Eastern Europe. The legacy of these interventions is complex, intertwining narratives of liberation and manipulation, independence, and dependency.
Post-Socialist Transition and the “Two-Tier” Europe
The end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 heralded a new era for Central and Eastern Europe, marked by both hope and upheaval. The re-establishment of independent states such as Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia brought a renewed focus on the Intermarium concept within Polish geopolitical thought. Figures like Lech Wałęsa, the first President of post-communist Poland, sought to forge strategic partnerships with neighboring countries, embodying a modern interpretation of the Intermarium ideal. Wałęsa’s efforts to build a close relationship with Ukraine, epitomized by the formation of the Consultative Committee of the Presidents of Poland and Ukraine, were part of a broader vision to create a regional bloc capable of counterbalancing Russian influence. However, these initiatives lost momentum as Poland shifted its focus towards integration with Western institutions, reflecting the complex interplay of national aspirations and geopolitical realities.
The transition from socialism to capitalism was neither smooth nor universally beneficial for the region. The “shock therapy” economic policies, characterized by rapid privatization and market liberalization, led to significant economic disruptions. Industrial production plummeted, social safety nets were dismantled, and neoliberal reforms often facilitated corruption and the rise of oligarchic structures. This period of transition was marked by severe economic hardship and social dislocation, fueling resentment and disenchantment among the populace.
As these nations sought integration with the European Union, they encountered the harsh realities of a “two-tier” Europe. The EU’s structure often relegated Eastern European states to a secondary status, with fewer rights and opportunities compared to their Western counterparts. This perceived marginalization contributed to the rise of nationalist and populist movements, as citizens grappled with the economic and social consequences of rapid globalization and uneven development. The sense of being treated as second-class members within the European family has continued to shape political discourse in the region, driving a search for new forms of regional solidarity and cooperation.
Revival and Contemporary Relevance of the Intermarium
Despite these challenges, the idea of the Intermarium has experienced a renaissance in recent years, particularly during the tenure of Polish President Lech Kaczyński and the subsequent PiS (Law and Justice) administration. This revival is exemplified by the Three Seas Initiative, a modern iteration of the Intermarium concept that seeks to enhance cooperation among Central and Eastern European countries in areas such as infrastructure, energy, and security. The 2006 international conference in Łańcut, which saw the participation of leaders from Poland, Lithuania, Slovakia, and Hungary, marked a significant step in this direction. The conference resulted in the approval of a project to construct a modern highway connecting these nations, symbolizing a renewed commitment to regional integration and cooperation.
The contemporary Intermarium project reflects an enduring desire among Central and Eastern European nations to assert their sovereignty and agency in a region historically dominated by external powers. It underscores a collective aspiration to build a robust, interconnected region capable of resisting external pressures and asserting its interests on the global stage. This vision is not merely a geopolitical strategy but also a deeply philosophical and cultural project, aiming to foster a shared identity and mutual solidarity among the nations of the region.
The Three Seas Initiative: A Contemporary Manifestation of Prometheanism
The Three Seas Initiative (TSI) represents a contemporary resurgence of Prometheanism, a geopolitical concept deeply rooted in Polish political thought. This modern incarnation of Józef Piłsudski’s Intermarium is a strategic effort to reconfigure the geopolitical landscape of Central and Eastern Europe. It seeks to strengthen cooperation among the countries situated between the Baltic, Black, and Adriatic seas, thus shifting the region’s alignment from an East-West axis dominated by Russian/Chinese and German influences to a more self-reliant North-South configuration.
The concept of Intermarium, which literally means “between the seas,” dates back to the early 20th century and was envisioned as a federation of states under Polish leadership. It aimed to act as a buffer zone against the dual threats posed by Germany and Soviet Russia. Prometheanism, an integral part of this vision, sought to weaken Russian dominance by supporting the independence of nations within the Russian sphere. This concept was not merely a geopolitical strategy but also a philosophical commitment to freedom and self-determination, inspired by the mythological figure Prometheus, who defied the gods to bring fire to humanity.
The revival of these ideas in Poland’s foreign policy has been particularly pronounced since the victory of the Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (Law and Justice) party in the 2015 parliamentary elections. President Andrzej Duda, continuing the policies initiated by his predecessor Lech Kaczyński, has been instrumental in promoting the Intermarium ideas. This culminated in the decision by Croatian President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović to organize a meeting of representatives from 12 states during the UN General Assembly on September 29, 2015. These states—Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Romania, and Bulgaria—occupy the lands between the Baltic, Adriatic, and Black Seas.
A significant development occurred on August 24, 2016, when President Duda met with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in Kiev. During this meeting, Duda presented the concept of close collaboration among these states, now collectively referred to as the “Three Seas” or “Trojmórze.” The Three Seas Initiative is designed to foster cooperation among independent states within the Euro-Atlantic framework of NATO and the EU. Its goals include enhancing regional security, promoting economic development, and reducing reliance on external powers, particularly Russia and China.
The initiative has garnered significant support from the United States, particularly under the administration of President Donald Trump. Trump’s endorsement of the TSI was seen as a strategic move to “transform and rebuild the entire region,” ensuring that Eastern Europe remains aligned with Western, particularly American, interests. The initiative aligns with the broader U.S. strategy of containing Russian influence and promoting energy independence, exemplified by projects like the Baltic Pipe and the expansion of LNG terminals.
The Polish historian and geopolitician Leszek Sykulski distinguishes between the original Intermarium concept and the current Three Seas Initiative. He notes that while the Intermarium was conceived as a Polish-led geopolitical bloc with Ukraine as a crucial component, the TSI operates under the aegis of the United States. This distinction underscores the TSI’s role as a modern cordon sanitaire between Germany and Russia, serving both to pressure Germany and the EU and to neutralize China’s growing influence in the region. According to Sykulski, Poland’s role in this project is pivotal, acting as a “geopolitical pillar” and the “most important front country in this part of the world,” effectively functioning as a “geopolitical lightning rod.”
The Three Seas Initiative thus emerges as a contemporary Promethean project, embodying the spirit of defiance and the quest for self-determination that characterized the original Prometheanism. It represents a collective effort by Central and Eastern European countries to assert their sovereignty and strengthen their position within the Euro-Atlantic community. This initiative is not only a geopolitical strategy but also a philosophical stance, reflecting a renewed commitment to independence and regional solidarity in the face of external pressures.
It seems the Three Seas Initiative is a modern manifestation of Prometheanism, blending historical geopolitical concepts with contemporary strategic objectives. It seeks to reassert the autonomy of Central and Eastern Europe, reduce dependence on external powers, and promote a new axis of cooperation that aligns more closely with Western interests. As such, the TSI represents a significant and ongoing effort to reshape the geopolitical landscape of Europe, with profound implications for the region’s future stability and prosperity.
The Intermarium: A Geopolitical Renaissance in Eastern Europe
In the shadow of the ongoing war in Ukraine, the concept of the Intermarium has resurfaced with renewed urgency, casting a stark light on the geopolitical dynamics of Eastern Europe. As Russian aggression looms over the region, the need for a cohesive and resilient alliance becomes ever more apparent. The Intermarium, historically a strategic buffer zone, now represents both a defensive strategy and a cultural affirmation of Eastern Europe’s distinct identity within the broader European landscape.
This resurgence of the Intermarium is not merely a response to external threats but also a reflection of internal discontent within Eastern Europe. Often labeled as “New Europe,” these countries have increasingly voiced dissatisfaction with what they perceive as the dominance of Western European states, particularly Germany and France. This dissatisfaction has manifested in stronger ties with the United States and a more assertive stance on critical issues such as immigration, defense, and energy policy.
The proponents of the modern Intermarium, particularly those involved in the Three Seas Initiative (TSI), highlight the importance of strengthening defense cooperation among member states. The initiative, which includes countries from the Baltic to the Adriatic Seas, aims to enhance regional infrastructure, notably by integrating the gas pipeline systems of the Visegrad group countries and Croatia. This integration is seen as a critical step towards reducing dependence on Russian energy supplies and fostering greater economic resilience.
In Poland, the Intermarium has sparked intense debate and critical reflection, influenced by both internal political dynamics and broader international developments. The renewed interest in the Intermarium among Polish political and intellectual circles reflects a broader aspiration to elevate Poland’s geopolitical status, particularly within Central-Eastern Europe. Proponents argue that the economic and strategic potential of a “new” Intermarium could rival that of Russia, positioning the group as a significant player on the global stage.
However, the path to implementing the Intermarium is fraught with challenges. Poland faces the daunting task of convincing potential member states that joining the Intermarium offers more political and economic benefits than aligning with Germany or Russia. The historical and geopolitical differences among Central-Eastern European states, particularly those south of the Carpathians, complicate efforts to forge a cohesive alliance. As J. Dutka cautions, Poland must lead the Intermarium as a “primus inter pares”—first among equals—lest any perceived hegemonic tendencies derail the entire initiative, as occurred during the interwar period.
Nonetheless, there remains some optimism that a form of rapprochement among the Intermarium countries is possible, provided that equality and mutual respect can be assured. The geopolitical landscape of Europe is in flux, with significant changes in the EU’s structure, growing concerns over Russia’s resurgence as a global power, and shifting U.S. policies toward European security. These factors, alongside fears of Islamic terrorism and the ongoing immigration crisis, provide a fertile ground for the Intermarium’s revival.
The Intermarium is not just a relic of past geopolitical strategies but a living concept that continues to evolve. It embodies the enduring desire for sovereignty, security, and self-determination among Eastern European nations. As these countries assert their “Eastern European voice” in international affairs, the Intermarium offers a compelling framework for navigating the complexities of EU integration, NATO membership, and relations with major powers like the United States and Russia.
Admittedly, the future of the Intermarium remains uncertain. Whether it will lead to a more unified and resilient Eastern European bloc or further fragmentation and tension within the EU is yet to be seen. However, its revival is a testament to the region’s enduring quest for a distinct identity and strategic autonomy. The Intermarium is more than a geopolitical strategy; it is a symbol of the collective aspirations of Eastern European states as they navigate the turbulent waters of contemporary geopolitics.
The Future of the Intermarium and Eastern Europe: A Philosophical Reflection
The concept of the Intermarium, with its roots in the geopolitical aspirations of the early 20th century, remains a potent force in shaping the politics of Eastern Europe today. This idea, originally envisioned as a coalition of Central and Eastern European countries stretching between the Baltic, Black, and Adriatic Seas, was conceived to resist the pressures from both Western and Eastern powers. As the region navigates the complexities of European Union integration, NATO membership, and its relationships with global powers such as the United States and Russia, the Intermarium serves as both a strategic framework and a cultural ideal for the states involved.
The potential return of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency introduces another layer of complexity to this already intricate geopolitical landscape. Trump’s previous support for the Three Seas Initiative—a modern embodiment of the Intermarium concept—suggests a renewed U.S. interest in Eastern Europe. This interest, shaped by Trump’s foreign policy approach, could position Eastern Europe as a critical player in future U.S. strategic calculations. The question remains whether this will lead to a more unified and resilient Eastern European bloc or if it will deepen existing rifts within the European Union.
Historically, Polish ambitions have played a significant role in shaping the Intermarium’s various iterations. The drive to reclaim a leadership position reminiscent of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth of the fifteenth century has often been a central motivation. Today, President Andrzej Duda’s assertion that Poland aims to be a “keystone and active participant” in the Three Seas Initiative reflects a continuation of this historical ambition. This goal is not merely a national aspiration but part of a broader strategy to secure Poland’s place within the EU and NATO frameworks.
However, the modern Intermarium concept has transcended its original nationalistic confines and has become globalized, serving the interests of other world powers. The active participation of the United States in the Three Seas Initiative summits highlights America’s strategic interest in the region, primarily focused on countering Russian influence and bolstering NATO’s eastern flank. The American presence underscores a broader geopolitical strategy to maintain influence in Eastern Europe, using the Intermarium as a buffer against Russian expansion.
Furthermore, the involvement of other global players, such as China, at these summits, reveals the economic dimensions of the Intermarium concept. China’s interest in the region, driven by its Belt and Road Initiative, seeks to establish new trade routes and economic partnerships. Meanwhile, the European Union and Germany’s participation aims at preserving EU unity and ensuring that the Intermarium does not become a divisive force within the continent.
The role of Poland within Central-Eastern Europe is not an isolated phenomenon but part of a larger tapestry of geopolitical shifts. It is crucial to consider the roles of other states, both larger powers like Turkey, Iran, and Kazakhstan, and smaller yet strategically significant countries such as Azerbaijan, Costa Rica, and Singapore. These nations, with their unique geopolitical positions, contribute to the evolving global order, challenging traditional power dynamics and offering new pathways for geopolitical thought.
At its core, the Intermarium is a testament to the region’s resilience and desire to assert an “Eastern European voice” in the global arena. The critical question now is whether the rebirth of the Intermarium will foster greater unity and strength among these nations or if it will accentuate existing divisions and conflicts.
In contemplating the future of the Intermarium, we must recognize it as a philosophical and cultural symbol, not just a geopolitical tool. It represents the struggle for identity and autonomy in a region historically caught between larger empires and ideologies. The Intermarium’s future will be shaped by the delicate balance of national interests, regional cooperation, and the influence of external powers. As Eastern Europe continues to navigate these challenges, the Intermarium will remain a vital lens through which the region’s past, present, and future are understood and debated.
As the nations of Central and Eastern Europe continue to navigate the challenges of the 21st century, the Intermarium remains a potent symbol of their collective aspirations and a powerful tool for regional cooperation and integration. In this way, the Intermarium project, in its various forms and iterations, continues to inspire and challenge, offering both a historical lesson and a future vision for the peoples of this vibrant and dynamic region.
[Image credit: Wikimedia Commons]
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.
Emir J. Phillips DBA/JD MBA is a distinguished Financial Advisor and an Associate Professor of Finance at Lincoln University (HBCU) in Jefferson City, MO with over 35 years of extensive professional experience in his field. With a DBA from Grenoble Ecole De Management, France, Dr. Phillips aims to equip future professionals with a deep understanding of grand strategies, critical thinking, and fundamental ethics in business, emphasizing their practical application in the professional world.
