Written by Ioannis Kon. Neonakis
In a recent article of ours (1), we referred to the Great Vision of the Rebirth of the Romeiko World and to the four strategic pillars and axes that constitute the sine qua non conditions for its realization. These four pillars are: (a) the fermenting of the Greek people with the idea of Romeosyne, (b) the fermenting of the successor states of historical Romanía toward unity and integration, (c) assisting the Asia Minor populations to rediscover their ancestry, and (d) reconnecting with the millions of Romeoi of the Middle East and their Diaspora.
Our conviction is this: we are not a small country, not a small “Greece,” not a minor entity. We are an entire world — the Romeiko World, the Romeike Patrida (Romeike Homeland) — awaiting the recovery of its multifaceted, God-bearing identity in freedom, for the sake of the universal human person.
We also believe that the current geostrategic framework, and the geostrategic conditions of the coming years, grant us a unique window of opportunity: an opportunity to realize our vision and to avert the substantive historical disappearance toward which we are being driven — the disappearance of a collective body with a definite identity. We have entered irreversibly into an era of global upheavals, in which forces not only state and political, but to a large extent also economic and corporate, are so powerful that any collective without vision and direction will be crushed beyond repair. Yet within this rapidly changing world, the window of opportunity — historically speaking — is singular. Let us briefly examine its basic parameters:
- The United States Is Withdrawing from Europe
The gradual withdrawal of the United States from the European theater is neither a passing phenomenon nor a tactical choice; it is a deep strategic shift on the global chessboard. The United States — as we noted above, not only at the level of state and politics, but in parallel at the economic and corporate level — faced with the rise of China (and other planetary poles: India, Russia, etc.), is focusing ever more intensely on the Indo–Pacific. The old continent is gradually becoming a managed periphery, compelled to shoulder on its own the cost of security, cohesion, and historical continuity.
This development strips Europe of its postwar illusions of protection and exposes its existential void — a void that may well lead to decomposition and fragmentation. Without a unified political will, without a common strategic identity, and without a spiritual foundation, the European Union proves unable to transform itself into a genuine geopolitical subject. At the same time, the space of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans — the pre-eminently historical space of Romanía — returns to the foreground as a zone of instability, but also of multiple possibilities.
For the Romeiko World, the American retrenchment must be read as a historical opportunity. Within this vacuum of security and meaning, a path opens not merely for the rise of new “managers,” but above all for the reappearance of historical identities possessing depth, continuity, and a universal horizon.
- All Global Powers Seek a Counterweight to Turkey
Over-ambitious Turkey has become an unstable, revisionist, and potentially destabilizing factor for the entire geostrategic system. Seeking to become a planetary power, it aims simultaneously at: (a) the consolidation and unification of the Turkic states, (b) the consolidation and worldwide representation of Sunni Islam, and (c) the revival of its Ottoman framework of domination. Within this scheme, if it controls the Aegean, the Eastern Mediterranean, and key energy resources, it becomes a de facto planetary actor.
In Turkey’s trajectory toward planetary status, two primary weaknesses stand out: (a) the Kurdish question and, above all, (b) the refusal of the other planetary poles to allow its transformation into a global power. Thus, neither the United States (chiefly because of Israel), nor China (chiefly because of the Uyghurs), nor Russia (for multiple long-standing geopolitical reasons), nor India (chiefly because of Pakistan) desires Turkey’s evolution into a planetary power.
All are therefore seeking a barrier — a strong stabilizing pole capable of balancing, if not reducing, Turkish power. It is precisely here that the historical opportunity appears, and the possibility for the Romeiko World to assume such a geostrategic role. Not as a “small forward outpost-state,” but as a broad and resilient regional politico-economic formation able to withstand pressures of any magnitude. And indeed, as a formation of deep cultural cohesion, metaphysical and eschatological horizon, dynamic vitality, and profound knowledge of the terrain.
The Romeiko World knows Turkey not theoretically, but existentially: it knows its limits, its internal contradictions, and its identity weaknesses. If there is consciousness, a plan, and unity, the counterweight sought by global powers need not be an artificial construct of balances, but rather the re-emergence of a historical reality that for many centuries bore and guaranteed stability in the space between East and West.
- The West Will Prefer a Romeike System of Power in Southeastern Europe Rather Than Leaving This Entire Space to Russian Claims
Southeastern Europe has, through time, been a zone of critical geostrategic significance — especially in our day (valuable resources, energy pipelines, NATO perimeter, Israel’s security belt, etc.). For the West — and above all for the United States — this region cannot be left in a state of fluid indeterminacy, nor can it be allowed to become a field of German influence, and much less a sphere of privileged influence for the Russian pole.
From this perspective, a Romeike system of power in Southeastern Europe becomes the most realistic and stable solution: a natural and historically tested regulator of a space it knows from within. Romanía, as a weave of peoples sharing a common spiritual origin and a common administrative tradition, functioned for centuries with continuity and balance — even through the most difficult centuries of Ottoman domination.
By contrast, the strengthening of Russia’s claim in the region, even indirectly, would create for the West a permanent strategic headache: an arc of instability and uncertainty stretching from the Balkans to the Eastern Mediterranean. A Romeike system of power, rooted in the shared local identity foundations, can offer the West precisely what it seeks in the present conjuncture: stability, predictability, and a strong ally with historical depth.
It is worth noting that one factor the West evaluates positively is that Romanía, historically, was never an imperialist, colonial, or expansionist power. It always defended its borders or liberated its own regions conquered by others, yet it never sought expansion beyond them. This reassures the West and enables cooperation with the Romeiko World, knowing that systems of power grounded in millennial identities, geographic continuity, and common cultural reference points tend to prove far more resilient over time.
- If We Remain Merely “Greece,” Sooner or Later We Will Regress into a Small State within the Limits of Proper Graecia (Athens–Sparta)
If we insist on perceiving ourselves exclusively as “Greece,” in the narrow nation-state sense forged in the nineteenth century — and as an entity severed from its historical continuity and its natural geopolitical space — then our future is ominous. Greece must urgently adopt a powerful vision, one capable of reaching directly even populations beyond its borders. A vision of such magnitude is the Resurrection of our Genos (sic) with Romeosyne as its axis, and the political reconnection with populations of the Middle East, Asia Minor, and the Balkans. This alone can grant Greece strategic viability within the global restructurings now underway.
By contrast, a restrictive focus on Hellenism (even with strong alliances, for example with France) will, sooner or later, lead to regression — because there will be no great vision, no metaphysical dimension, and, naturally, no large civilizational magnitudes capable of founding genuine autonomy. Regression into a small state within the very limits that many foreign centers have long held — and still hold — in mind for us: within the limits of Proper Graecia, within the limits of Athens–Sparta. A small state south of a “Greater Albania” (sic) and a “Greater Macedonia” (sic), stripped of demographic cohesion — a multicultural slurry under tutelage. In other words: a geopolitical disappearance.
- As “Greece” We Are Not Historically “Legitimated” to Long for Any Completion of the Palingenesis. As Romanía and Romeosyne, However, This Is a Natural Expectation and Horizon.
As “Greece,” as historically constituted and interpreted as a modern nation-state whose principal leap of connection is toward classical antiquity, whatever “Palingenesis” exists has been completed — and we are not legitimated to speak of anything beyond that. In this framework, 1821 is treated as a finished event, a closed chapter completed with the creation of the state; and any reference to continuation, fulfillment, or restoration is perceived as historically illegitimate and politically dangerous.
By contrast, as Romanía — from the standpoint of Romeosyne and of an eschatological horizon — the Palingenesis is received as a long historical process, not as a momentary event. The fall of the political hypostasis of Romanía, violent and involuntary as it was (and we owe much to Constantine Palaiologos), abolished neither Romeosyne, nor the people, nor their historical rights, nor their historical horizon, nor the natural demand for continuity and completion.
The completion of the Palingenesis, under the Romeike perspective, does not constitute empty territorial expansionism or revisionism. Yet at the same time, memory is neither lost nor altered, but strengthened; and historical rights are neither erased by time nor surrendered. All is left in the hands of God, as He judges. Yet spiritual and material preparedness and vigilance remain continuous and unceasing, for whatever developments may arise.
Epilogue
What has preceded is an attempt at a sober reading of history and of the contemporary geostrategic framework. The world as we knew it is dissolving, and old certainties are withdrawing. A world which, in modern history, moved from bipolarity to a brief unipolar moment and now proceeds toward a multipolar configuration — not only in the classic state-centric sense, but also in economic and corporate terms, in the allocation of resources, and in productive specialization.
Within this fluid, insecure, and rapidly changing global environment, particular ontological identities are once again being sought and brought to the fore. In this transitional period, the collectives that will survive are those that recover consciousness of who they are and where they belong.
For the Romeiko World, the dilemma is stark: either it remains fragmented, in a formation discordant with what it holds sacred and as a plaything of alien forces, or it dares to return to its historical stature — not by terms of domination, but by terms of meaning, continuity, and mission.
The Renaissance of the Romeiko World presupposes consciousness, will, and great labor. Yet the circumstances are favorable, the windows of opportunity remain open, and Romeosyne lives — advancing along its radiant course through the ages.
Ioannis Kon. Neonakis
Notes: (a) The term “Romanía” (with an accent on the í to distinguish it from the modern state of Romania) is the correct designation for the Roman Empire after the transfer of its capital, instead of the erroneous and deliberately employed term “Byzantium”.
(b) For reasons of more accurate phonological rendering and simplification, the term “Romeoi” was preferred over “Rhomaioi”.
(c) The term “Romeosyne” was preferred over “Romanitas”, as it better expresses the culture of the Roman Empire after the prevalence of Christianity.
(d) romeike (adjective): of the Romeoi.
(e) Romeiko (noun): the romeike world, the romeike body.
Reference:
(1) https://www.antibaro.gr/article/40003