The Balkanisation of Europe: Neo-Prometheism and Neo-Ottomanism

Coercive Engineered Migration: Zionism's War on Europe (Part 5 of an 11 Part Series)

Prometheism was a political project initiated by Polish dictator Josef Pilsudski in the early 20th century. The project aimed to promote separatist and nationalist movements in the non-Russian peoples of the Russian Empire. The breakup of the Russian Federation is a key strategic ambition of NATO. In this sense, the encirclement and destabilization of Russia could be described as neo-prometheism.

In a talk for the Chicago Council on Global Affairs in February 4th, 2015 entitled ‘Europe: Destined for Conflict?’, George Friedman of Stratfor argued that US geopolitics in Europe is based on the objective of keeping Russia divided from the European peninsula by creating a US occupied corridor or ‘intermarium’ (a term coined by Pilsudski) from the Baltic to the Black Sea.

It has been understood by US military planners for over a century that it is in Germany’s geopolitical interest to integrate with Russia in the form of an Eurasian Union while it is in America’s geopolitical interests to stop this unification. The goal of US/Israeli foreign policy is to control Eurasia’s heartland. In Halford Mackinder’s, the father of geopolitical science, famous words:

Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; who rules the World-Island commands the world.

Friedman has said that the ‘German Question’ is the key issue of our time. That is, no doubt, the reason why Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban refers to the refugee/migrant crisis as “Germany’s problem”. Orban understands that NATO’s destruction of Ukraine is likely to spread into Mitteleuropa, and that Germany’s geopolitical integration away from the Atlantic powers and towards the Eurasian Union, will be opposed by an engineered demographic and social destabilization.

In Friedman’s own words:

It is not in the American interest to see German, European let’s say, European industrialism and technology united with Russian natural resources. This is not what US grand strategy really wants to see happen.

Here Friedman is clearly alluding to Nordstream, a gas pipeline linking Russia to Lubin in Germany inaugurated in 2011 and currently under expansion. The gas pipeline is the longest in the world and has the potential to supply all of Europe. This project is opposed by the United States.

Friedman advocates a similar US foreign policy to that which prevailed during the Iran-Iraq war during the 1980s when the US, having heavily armed both countries, ordered Saddam Hussein to invade the Islamic Republic of Iran. Is the US planning to foment a military confrontation between Europe and Russia?

While Poland, already overburdened with Ukrainian refugees, is reluctant to take in more, the Eastern European state is complying with EU requests to accept more immigration. Friedman has predicted that Poland will, under US patronage, become a major European regional power this century. A strong Polish client power hostile to Russia is vital to securing NATO’s sabotage of Eurasian integration. Therefore, US militarisation and US technological transfer could turn Poland into a major European power, keeping Russia in check by preventing its integration with Germany. If the current junta in Kiev is to survive, it will have to rely increasingly on Poland. Poland played a key role in the Ukraine coup of 2014.

The same reliance on Poland will apply to the Baltic States. In order to encourage Russophobia, the United States will flatter Polish chauvinism with references to the renaissance of the Polish Lithuanian Empire of the 16th and 17th centuries. In September 2014, a joint Poland, Lithuanian, Ukrainian military brigade finally became operative.

Meanwhile, US/Israel will continue to use Turkey as a bulwark against Russian ambitions in the Eastern Mediterranean. However, with one of Europe’s most powerful militaries, Turkey is also a rising power. While continuing to rely on Turkey in the destruction of Syria, the United States and Israel are also attempting to get control of the Kurdish PYG forces in Syria.

Sputnik’s geopolitical analyst Andrew Korybko writes:

The position of the US is in this conflict is Machiavellian to the max. It supports the Turks as they battle the PKK, but it’s also giving aid to the Syrian-based PYG Kurdish militia and the Kurdish Regional Government in Iraq, knowing full well that the training and weapons it provides will likely be funneled to their affiliated PKK partners in fighting Turkey. This circular logic isn’t incidental, as it’s all part of a larger plan by the US. One the one hand, it wants to see how far along Turkey can go in invading Syria, and when/if it hits a wall (be it with the Syrian Arab Army and/or the Kurds), it could then reverse its support for Ankara (ergo the semi-critical talk about a “proportionate response” in attacking the PKK) and try to turn all the Kurdish groups against it in order to begin the formal dismemberment of the Mideast and give birth to the ‘geopolitical Israel’ of Kurdistan.

While President Barzani of Iraqi Kurdistan has been a loyal servant of the United States and Israel, recent attacks by Israel’s Secret Intelligence Service, ISIS, against Erbil may force that leader to seek closer ties to Russia. Israel is now attempting to pull Kurdish fighters in alliance with the Syrian Arab Army into the Islamic State.

The recent ‘popular uprisings‘ of Kurdish separatists in Mahabad, Iran, is most likely the handiwork of US/Israeli regime changers and it could have serious implications for security of Iran, Turkey and Syria.

The long-term objectives of the US/Israel is to establish a Kurdish puppet state of Greater Israel, piping its oil from Mosul to Haifa in Israel.

Erdogan, by waging war on Syria, is playing into Israel’s hands, unwittingly sabotaging his country’s reemergence as a world power as Turkey risks losing vast territories to a Zionist Kurdistan state.

Meanwhile, the US has for a long time been encouraging Turkish Pan-Turanism to gain a foothold in Central Asia and Western China. It is hoped that Turkey can be used to check Russian and Chinese influence in the Turkic speaking nations of Central Asia. Turkey can also be used to destabilise the North Caucasus by fomenting islamist terrorism while an Iran brought under US control can check Turkey’s ambitions in Central Asia. Similarly, India, which is still a US/Israeli client, can be used to keep Iran in check, provided the BRICS integration is sabotaged. However, this may prove difficult to achieve given recent moves by both countries to ‘ditch the dollar‘ in their oil transactions.

The US is also aware of Turkey’s key geopolitical relationship with Japan. Both countries are maritime powers being used by the United States to check Russian and Chinese hegemony. The key to US imperialism is to prevent those powers from escaping vassalisation to the United States, by using them to weaken Russia and China, while maintaining US control of that process.

Turkey’s loss of Kurdistan could force it to seek further influence in the Turkic speaking Central Asia, while rising Turkish hegemony over the Black and Caspian Seas would bring it into conflict with the US, who ‘rule the oceans’.

While Pan-turanism is currently being encouraged by the US, it could present a strategic threat in the future if Turkey was to become a major maritime power. The encouragement by Washington to Turkey’s rise as a maritme power will not be without complications.

The Greek Turkologist Dmitry Kitsikis’s geopolitical theory of the Intermediate Region which sees North Africa, the Middle East and parts of Eastern Europe as forming a civilisational zone unique in world culture and history, has had a major influence on current Turkish and Greek geopolitical thought. Kitsikis’s conception of a Hellenic-Turk confederation in a new Ottoman Empire could eventually run counter to US interests.

The US intends to use Poland as its terrestrial power base in Eastern Europe to prevent Russian expansion. If both Poland and Turkey can be used to destroy Russia, then US foreign policy interests will involve getting Poland and Turkey to destroy themselves in a future war, where the US would back both sides. That is why Friedman has predicted that Poland and Turkey will be at war with each other this century, as Eastern European demography and geography begin to resemble the landscape of the 17th century. In contrast to Germany and other European nations, Poland’s borders are operating normally. There have been no illegal mass migrations into Poland.

Currently, NATO’s war in Ukraine is likely to extend southward towards Turkey, with Moldova, Transnistria, Macedonia and the Balkans being engulfed in ethnic violence. The destablisation of Macedonia has already begun and although a US sponsored colour revolution was defeated there last year, NATO’s plans for a ‘Greater Albania’, have not been abandoned. Islamist terrorists trained by the CIA in Afghanistan played an integral part in the destruction of Yugoslavia during the 1990s and provided the pretext for NATO’s ‘humanitarian’ bombing of Serbia in 1999.

Azerbaijan is also on NATO’s list for destabilization. The important oil-rich country has been moving closer to Russia and is facing conflict from both an Armenia moving closer to the United States who are also backing Karabakh independence and colour revolutionary activity inside Azerbaijan. The destabilization of Azerbaijan would have enormous consequences for the security of Russia and Iran. Northern Iran has an ethnic minority of 22 million Azeris. A colour revolution in Azerbaijan could bring ultra-nationalists to power, who are advocating an annexation of ‘Southern Azerbaijan’. Meanwhile tensions inside Iran between Kurds and Azeris are running high over the Iranian government’s attempts to create a new Kurdistan province that would include part of Iran’s Western Azerbaijan province.

Given the incessant media war currently being waged against Azerbaijan, a colour revolution attempt by NATO against that country is not unlikely.

This would mean that the entire region from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea and from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Caspian Sea would be engulfed in internecine warfare. Furthermore, the constant influx of migrants towards Western Europe from these war zones will be managed by Zionist Coercive Engineered Migration with a view to maximizing ethnic and inter-religious tension in Europe, thereby reinforcing the ideology of the ‘war on terror’ and the ‘clash of civilisations’. Here again, the key to Fourth Generation Warfare is to use the consequences of imperialism to further imperialism. But one should not overlook the fact that Fourth Generation Warfare was invented by Chinese communists fighting Japanese fascism during the Second World War. If we are to have a future as peoples, nations, cultures, ethnicities, races, in short, as human beings, we must retrieve the concepts and vocabulary of human emancipation which have been callously usurped by tyrants to enslave us.

• Read Part One here; Part Two here; Part Three here; Part Four here;

Gearóid Ó Colmáin is a journalist and political analyst based in Paris. His work focuses on globalization, geopolitics and class struggle. He is a regular contributor to Dissident Voice, Global Research, Russia Today International, Press TV, Sputnik Radio France, Sputnik English, Al Etijah TV, Sahar TV, and has also appeared on Al Jazeera and Al Mayadeen. He writes in English, Gaelic, and French.

Read other articles by Gearóid, or visit Gearóid's website.