From Baltic to the Black Sea

CEMIL KERIMOGLU

FEB 22, 2026

https://cemilk.substack.com/p/europes-manifest-destiny?r=17e8q4&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true

There are times in a person’s life, as well as life of a nation or of civilization, when you either become great or perish. There is no middle ground. Such a moment has long arrived for Europe.

Europe has a civilizational task before it, which is of world-historical significance. This is ensuring the collapse and disintegration of Russia, and reorganizing that large Eurasian expanse. Not only must the economy and the industry of the continent be mobilized for this task, but even more importantly – the hearts and minds of its people.

Thanks to Ukraine’s resistance and sacrifice, Europe has finally awakened to the Russian threat. European leaders now speak openly of the danger Russia poses and the need to strengthen Europe’s defense capabilities. That’s a good start, but it’s not nearly enough. Even the language they use is too soft, too cautious. The reality is far more dire.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is not an ordinary conflict for a chunk of territory, resources or “geopolitical interests”. It is an existential war that Russia wages not only against Ukraine, but against whole Europe. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is part of its holy war against Western Civilization. And under such a confrontation, there cannot be a peaceful settlement; one side must perish – that’s how such wars end. Moreover, since this is an existential struggle, Russia will always remain a bitter enemy of the West and aim at its destruction even if it doesn’t attack militarily.

The danger is not even primarily in what Russia does; it is in what Russia is. Its very existence – as a viscerally anti-European entity that hates European Civilization with every fiber of its being – is a standing act of terror. Even at rest, it is at war with the West. Its weapon is not just the tank or the missile, but the whisper, the doubt, the lie. Russia attacks not only through armies, but through narratives. It infects and rots the soul from within.

Ukraine knows this better than anyone. Since the Orange Revolution in 2004, Russia has tried to undermine Ukraine from the inside by seeding its agents into government, intelligence and media. Ukraine’s institutions were compromised; Russian narratives were spreading through Ukrainian society unabated.

After the 2014 Maidan Revolution, and even in the years leading to the full-scale invasion in 2022, Russian influence continued to operate like a virus in Ukraine’s body politic. Influence agents pushed Russian narratives. Key figures served Russian interests. But beyond the infiltration, the greater danger was psychological. Russia sought to plant self-doubt, to cloud judgment, to redirect anger away from the real enemy toward internal divisions, which are in reality of secondary or tertiary importance. It worked to make Ukrainians doubt the righteousness of their cause. It aimed to demoralize.

This strategy nearly succeeded. Though Ukraine fought back with resolve, the extent of Russian manipulation meant it wasn’t as prepared as it could have been. Putin’s delusion that Ukrainians would welcome his troops with flowers was absurd – but not baseless. It was grounded in years of subversion and the false sense that Ukraine had already been hollowed out. And in the south, at least initially, Russian forces met weaker resistance. The seeds of demoralization bore fruit.

What happened in Ukraine is now happening across the West. Russia doesn’t need to invade Europe to weaken it. It’s already inside. It corrodes the collective will, manipulates public discourse, exploits every fracture. Its disinformation spreads like rot – confusing, dividing, paralyzing.

This confrontation is not only geopolitical. It is primarily spiritual. First and foremost, Russian influence desecrates the West. Russian narratives and manipulation appeal to the worst in us. They elevate the worst character qualities: fear, cynicism, apathy and greed. And that’s basically the essence of evil – to corrupt, to rot from the inside. Russian influence boosts our worst instincts and helps elevate morally corrupt people to positions of power. It makes strong societies turn against themselves. In this sense, Russian influence is not just political or military – it is satanic. Because that’s exactly what Satan does – it corrupts the soul.

This is the danger Europe faces. Not just tanks and missiles, but the slow, strategic degradation of our moral core. That is why the task before Europe should not be only defense. It should be purification and renewal. The survival of Western Civilization depends on confronting Russia not just as an enemy state, but as a civilizational virus. And it must be destroyed – not managed, contained or tolerated, but destroyed – utterly and finally.

Although Europe has finally recognized the need to rearm and the need to prepare for open confrontation with Russia (better late than never), the dominant discourse remains centered on deterrence, defense, and security. But to frame the challenge this way is already to accept a position of weakness. You do not win wars by fortifying walls. You win by breaking the enemy. You win by attacking.

Europe must not merely be strong enough to discourage a Russian offensive. It must become strong enough to launch one. Its military doctrine, its arms industry, its national budgets, and above all its collective psyche must shift toward one goal: victory in a decisive, offensive war. That war should not end in ceasefires or frozen conflicts. It should end with Russia defeated and dismantled.

This same principle applies to the current war in Ukraine. Even when Ukraine reclaims every inch of its pre-2014 borders – and it will – that will not be the end of the war. Because this war is not truly about Crimea or Donbas. It is about the existence of Russia in its current form. The war ends only when Russia, as a unitary imperial entity, ceases to exist.

Where the final lines are drawn – whether at Belgorod, Kursk, or the outskirts of Moscow – is ultimately secondary. What matters is the outcome. Russia must be denuclearized and its military apparatus dismantled. It must pay reparations – not just to Ukraine, but to every nation and people it has brutalized. It must acknowledge and atone for its historical crimes. And the empire must fall – broken into dozens of independent states, each with its own unique national/regional identity that disavows its “Russian” past and stripped of the capacity to ever again threaten the world.

We don’t need “peace” or “security”. We need victory. We need glory. “Security” is a bureaucratic word. A word used by people who have already lost. For decades, the West has buried itself in the language of appeasement – talking of “security architecture”, of “lasting peace”, of “fair settlements”. Even Europe’s new militarism is cloaked in apologetic terms – “arming for peace”, “defending peace”. But this framing is pathetic. You don’t fight for peace. You fight for victory. Peace is simply the byproduct of total triumph. Real and lasting peace comes only when your deadly enemy is totally defeated and destroyed, not when it is pacified.

To be fair, the mood is shifting. The Russian invasion of Ukraine – and the growing realization that America under Trump may abandon Europe altogether – has shaken the continent awake. European leaders now speak more plainly. Rearmament is underway. For the first time in decades, there is serious talk of a European defense capacity independent of the United States. And there is, finally, a willingness to admit the unthinkable: that Europe must prepare for a direct, hot war with Russia.

But here is the real crux: weapons, budgets, and industrial output will matter, but they won’t be enough. What matters more is the animating spirit of a civilization. Its internal fire. Its sense of destiny.

Wars are not won by GDP alone. They are won by belief, by conviction. By how a people see themselves, what they believe they stand for, what future they are willing to suffer for, and what enemies they are willing to destroy to achieve it. It is vision, not just economic and technical capacity, that wins existential wars.

And this is where Europe still wavers. Everyone speaks of “European unity”, but few can define what it truly means. For too long, being “European” has meant little more than geography and bureaucracy: living within the EU, speaking a European language, subscribing to abstract values like freedom and democracy.

In the post–World War II era, European identity has been increasingly defined not by history or heritage, but by abstract values – freedom, democracy, human rights. The West’s confrontation with Russia is likewise framed as a clash between liberal democracy and tyranny. But this interpretation is both shallow and false. It misunderstands the deeper nature of the conflict and misrepresents what it truly means to be European.

Yes, liberal democracy is a uniquely European, and valuable, contribution to political life. But it is not what defines Europe. It is a product of European Civilization, not its essence. Europe existed for centuries before values of freedom and democracy emerged. To reduce Europe to an idea is a mistake. First and foremost, Europe is flesh-and-blood lineage of its people, the depth of their historical experience and the continuity of their memory.

Europe is not an ideology. It is a civilization rooted in ancestry and historical memory. Its roots go back to the rise of Ottonians and Capetians in the 10th century, rising from the ashes of Charlemagne’s empire. Europe was Europe long before it became liberal and democratic. In that early medieval world, no one spoke of “human rights”. No one could articulate “liberal values”. But this doesn’t make people of that era less European.

This matters. Because if Europe is defined solely by adherence to liberal democracy, then it becomes indistinguishable from any state that happens to hold elections or write rights into law. That’s not only false – it is dangerous. Being democratic doesn’t make a state European. Nor does it guarantee that a state will stand with the West.

Take a country like India, for example. It is a democracy, yet it stands openly aligned with the enemies of the West. It supports Russia diplomatically and economically. It leans toward those who seek to dismantle the Western-led world order. Many Western commentators, especially in the pro-Ukraine sphere, express disbelief at this. They assume that because India is democratic, it must be aligned with the West. But that assumption is based on a category error. The conflict we face is not about political systems. It is not a battle of ideas. It is not a battle of liberal democracy against authoritarianism. It is a war of civilizations.

One need not even look that far afield. Modern Russian history itself serves as stark evidence that adopting liberal democracy does not automatically transform a country into a friend of the West. The most revealing example is the Yeltsin era, when Russia embraced liberal democracy, held elections, and introduced Western-style institutions. At the time, the West naively assumed that because Russia had democratized, the overarching threat had vanished. The prevailing delusion was that Russia was now part of the Western family and could be seamlessly integrated into the Western world. It was even invited to join the G7 – transforming it into the G8 – with virtually no questions asked.

This was a catastrophic mistake, for which Ukraine first and foremost, but also the broader Western world, is now paying a terrible price. Merely adopting liberal democracy under Boris Yeltsin did not magically make Russia a part of the West. Beneath the surface, its society remained viscerally hostile toward Western Civilization. Even during the liberal Yeltsin years, Russia remained the West’s bitter adversary; the West was simply too shockingly oblivious, or willfully blind, to recognize it. Russia’s “liberalization” and “democratization” in the 1990s was a superficial, artificial aberration – a fleeting moment that was naturally and inevitably extinguished the moment Vladimir Putin came to power.

Russia and its allies – from Iran to China to India, through BRICS and beyond – do not share a common ideology. What they share is a visceral hatred of the West. What unites them is not communism, or autocracy, or any doctrine at all – but the animosity towards the Western Civilization as a whole. The confrontation is not simply ideological or political. It is civilizational and most importantly – visceral.

Therefore, European policymakers, intellectuals, and leaders must realize a basic fact: you cannot mobilize a people to defend their civilization if those same people feel dispossessed in their own ancestral homelands. A population told to be ashamed of its history, to despise its ancestors, and to yield its lands to newcomers with no loyalty to Europe will never march with conviction against Russia, nor will be ready to endure privation for the sake of that high civilizational goal. A people bombarded with guilt, taught that their very identity is evil, will not fight for their homeland. They will surrender by default.

This is why the first and most crucial task is for Europeans to recover pride in who they are. Pride in their history, their inheritance, their ancestors. Without this, there will be no will to resist the enemy. No army fights for abstractions alone. Soldiers risk their lives and physical health, civilians endure economic hardships only when they believe they are defending their own – blood, soil, family, heritage. That’s essentially why Ukraine has been successful in fending off Russian aggression. Because Ukrainians are fighting not for some abstract values, but for blood and soil. If Europeans are stripped of that belief, then no appeal to “democracy” or “values” will move them when the test comes.

Analysts often lament that Europeans are unwilling to fight, that they lack the spirit of mobilization in the face of Russia’s aggression. But the reason is simple: you cannot ask Europeans to die or endure hardships for a realm that disowns them. Why should they risk their lives for countries that treat them as strangers in the lands of their forefathers? Why should they sacrifice for leaders who sneer at their heritage and chastise them as “racists”? They will not fight for abstractions. They will not die for shame.

But if Europeans once again regain pride in their civilization, in their history and ancestors, if they see their governments and institutions standing for their identity rather than apologizing for it, then everything changes. Conviction will return. The willingness to sacrifice comfort for victory will return.

That last part is important. For decades, Europe has wallowed in philistinism. Even worse: European societies have elevated philistinism to the highest virtue. Europeans have treated comfort and prosperity as something permanent, and even more crucially, as an end in itself. This delusion must go away. The comfort that we got used to is not coming back. And this is good. Because that era of comfort was never normal to begin with. It was a grand aberration. It made our lives hollow, aimless and boring.

History now offers us a unique opportunity to rediscover passion, meaning, and purpose. Europe has frequently faced barbarian invasions and imperial threats from the outside, yet it has invariably emerged victorious. The last threat of this magnitude was the Ottoman Empire, which was defeated during the Wars of the Holy League in the latter half of the 17th century. Central and Eastern Europe stood united, dealing a decisive blow to the Ottomans. The Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699 marked the beginning of the Ottoman Empire’s long, slow decline.

Europeans of that era did not try to placate their adversaries. They did not “strive for peace”, nor were they content merely to survive the Siege of Vienna in 1683. Instead, they pressed forward and went on the offensive. They did not prioritize “diplomacy”, “deals”, or “caution” – words that belong to the pathetic lexicon of modern bureaucracy. They wanted victory. They wanted to crush the enemy. And ultimately, the enemy was crushed.

One can look even further back to antiquity. The Greek city-states were perpetually threatened by their long-time nemesis, the Persian Empire, yet they frequently wallowed in fratricidal wars despite this existential danger. In the end, however, they set aside their differences, joined forces, and obliterated their ancient abuser. In a remarkably short period, the vast territories of the Persian Empire were conquered by the united Greek armies under Alexander the Great.

Europeans must draw inspiration from this history. The past should not be viewed merely as a catalogue of events, but as a guide for future action – and European history is replete with such glorious guidance. Time and again, Europe has faced external invasions and imperial threats. Each time, despite initial division and fragmentation, Europeans have cast aside their differences, rediscovered their common destiny, and emerged triumphant. Centuries ago, the threat was the Ottomans; today, it is Russia. And Europe will triumph once more. Just as the failed Siege of Vienna in 1683 signaled the beginning of the end for the Ottoman Empire, Europe must ensure that Russia’s failed assault on Kyiv marks the beginning of its own demise. Kyiv 2022 must become Russia’s “Vienna 1683”.

Today, Europe’s world-historical task is the dismantling of the Russian state and the reorganization of that vast Eurasian expanse. Russia must be demilitarized, denuclearized, and disintegrated into dozens of independent states, each cultivating a unique national or regional identity that disavows its “Russian” imperial past. Only then will Europe achieve its Manifest Destiny.

To many Western observers, Russia appears far more homogenous and consolidated than it truly is. The reality, however, could not be further from the truth. What is known today as “Russia” is an artificial construct, cobbled together entirely by force. The vast and diverse territories stretching across northern Eurasia share very little with Moscow and often harbor deep-seated resentment toward the imperial center.

Europe must capitalize on this vulnerability by actively sowing discontent within Russia. It should support nascent secessionist movements across various regions and national republics – not only through coordinated information campaigns but also by providing material and military support. The unique regional and national identities already exist. The profound resentment toward Moscow already exists. The underlying currents of secession are already there; they are simply being suffocated beneath the weight of a brutal state security apparatus.

For far too long, Russia has operated with impunity, sowing discord and division across Europe. Now, the tables must turn. Europe must effectively mirror Russia’s own asymmetric tactics, weaponizing the currents of dissent and disenchantment that run far deeper within Russia than they do in Europe. Russia is, in reality, far more heterogenous and fractured, than it appears behind its façade of monolithic unity. Conversely, Europe is a far more unified and cohesive whole than it might appear given its different nation states and distinct national identities. Europeans must awaken to this reality and act decisively upon it.

Engaged in this existential struggle, Europe must serve as the vanguard of Russia’s disintegration. It must systematically amplify Russia’s natural internal fault lines and embrace the world-historical task of reorganizing that vast Eurasian expanse to secure its own civilizational future.

This, however, does not mean replacing one colonial overlord with another. Rather, it will necessitate deep European involvement – including stationed peacekeeping forces and institutional oversight – to ensure these new sovereign states survive their fragile infancy, do not drift into the orbit of Europe’s enemies, such as China, and to crush any localized revanchist movements attempting to “re-gather” the old empire. These newly independent post-Russian states, emerging from destitution and internal decay, will require European leadership during their transitional period to prevent internal chaos.

Over time, some of these newly independent states could be incorporated into the larger European family – specifically those in the west and northwest, such as the Republics of Smolensk, Novgorod, Pskov, and Ingria. These regions were already part of the European realm in the Middle Ages before being forcefully torn away from it and subjugated by Muscovy-Russia. Others – such as the Ural Republic, the Siberian Republic, the Russian Far East, Bashkortostan, Tatarstan, Yakutia, and the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria – should be cultivated as strong European allies as they forge their own independent paths.

Importantly, Europe should avoid half-measures and temporary solutions. The only goal should be the disintegration of Russia and destruction of its unitary imperial structure. Nothing less. Europe should not settle for a “democratized” and “liberalized” Russia. Yeltsin’s era and what followed afterwards serves as vivid reminder that Russia will always remain a bitter and dangerous enemy of Europe as long as it keeps its unitary imperial structure, regardless of its “democratization” and “liberalization”. The mistakes of the past must notbe repeated. The goal must not be a “free” Russia. It must be a non-existent Russia.

Moreover, on a profound level, the collapse of Russia and the subsequent restructuring of northern Eurasia will launch a new age of discovery. Shattering the Russian state will finally enable the peoples of these territories to uncover their true identities – to reclaim the histories, cultures, and ancestral traditions that were systematically smothered under the weight of Muscovite-Russian domination.

Despite its colossal geographic scale, this immense expanse has effectively functioned as an intellectual terra incognita. The Russian imperial apparatus never possessed any genuine interest in the distinct cultural and historical wealth of northern Eurasia. Meaningful archaeological and historical inquiry was limited, if it was carried out at all. Simultaneously, political blockade kept Western scholars from conducting sustained, rigorous research in these lands.

The birth of sovereign nations across this expanse will radically overturn this paradigm. These territories will be thrust open, achieving not just political emancipation but also an academic awakening. A vanguard of Western historians, archaeologists, anthropologists, and other researchers will pour into these newly independent states. In stark contrast to the former Russian overlords, Europeans will plunge deeply into the societal fabric of these post-Russian nations, elevating customs and histories that have long been relegated to the margins of global awareness. While the ultimate hope is for these fledgling states to foster their own academic traditions and homegrown experts, the initial, catalytic push will come from Europe. Guided by Western expertise, the populations of northern Eurasia will unearth their own suppressed heritage. They will reconnect with their deepest roots and, in a sense, rediscoverthemselves. And alongside them, the entire world will finally comprehend the true nature of northern Eurasia.

The horizon before us is exhilarating. The dismantling of Russia promises far more than mere geopolitical realignment; it guarantees a monumental intellectual renaissance. It will trigger breathtaking revelations, drawing back the curtain on a vast, intricate world that has been kept in the dark for centuries by the willful ignorance and neglect of imperial Moscow.

In conclusion, as long as Russia exists in its current unitary form, Europe, and Western Civilization at large, will always be under threat, no matter how many “agreements” or “deals” are made. Europe, and the whole Eurasia, can truly prosper, not only technologically and economically, but more importantly – spiritually, only when the Russian threat is completely annihilated. Only when Russia is disintegrated and that vast Eurasian expanse is reorganized under European leadership. True peace and prosperity will come only when Europe achieves its Manifest Destiny.