Paneuropa-Union-Präsident Karl von Habsburg fordert den Zerfall Russlands als neues politisches Ziel der EU

That’s dumb on quite a few levels

Israel: 2 state solution

UK: 4 state solution

Russia: Multi state solution

I am seeing a trend here

Karl von Habsburg argues for a more offensive security strategy against Russia as leaders in Europe weigh a forceful response to Moscow’s increasingly belligerent actions against Europe. Russia’s own activities include major actions to break up the European Union and full-on hybrid war. 

One of the options would be to
return the favor in terms of kinetic action but also to support the independence groups. The EU’s Institute for Security recently said that Europe must be prepared to [conduct covert actions](https://www.rtl.nl/nieuws/buitenland/artikel/5647552/meer-hybride-aanvallen-op-europa-door-rusland-zeggen-experts) 
inside Russia. 

So Yugoslavia but with nukes? Seems risky.

Ok, quick search: This is [Dr. Pavo Barišić](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavo_Bari%C5%A1i%C4%87), currently president of the organization [International Pan-European Union](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paneuropean_Union). TIL

In other words, he is calling for World War III Nuclear Bugaloo

So instead of one giant corrupt evil Russia, there wokld be dozens? 

As in, *those* Hapsburgs?

NATO and Europe writing checks their butts can’t cash.

The Habsburg are playing the long game here

A Novgorod State and a Muscovite State would be amazing.

Yes, blatant ai-slop below, but a person can dream:

# Feasibility Assessment

|Dimension|Novgorod State|Muscovite State|Verdict|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Population/Territory|~15-20M (NW Russia: St. Petersburg region, Novgorod, Pskov, Karelia)|~110-130M (Moscow core + Urals + southern breadbasket)|Both viable; Muscovy much larger|
|Security/NATO|Could join NATO or EU orbit; geographically safer|Landlocked from west; faces China border; more vulnerable|Novgorod advantaged for Western integration|
|Resources|Timber, fish, ports (Baltic + Arctic); limited oil/gas|Oil, gas, minerals, fertile land; energy-rich|Muscovy resource-superior, but Novgorod viable|
|Trade Routes|Arctic passages, Baltic shipping, EU access; pan-European rail|Trans-Siberian rail, Central Asia, China, India|Both have distinct advantages|
|Climate Change|Arctic warming opens major new shipping lanes (Barents, Northern Route)|Access to melting ice, but southern advantage erodes|Novgorod gets a *major* boost|
|Economy Model|Tech hub (St. Pete already is), financial services, tourism, high-value exports|Agriculture, energy, manufacturing, heavy industry|Complementary specialization|
|GDP Per Capita Potential|Could rival Nordic countries (~$80-90K)|Could be upper-middle income (~$25-35K)|Novgorod more prosperous per capita|

# Why This Could Actually Work

# Geographic and Economic Complementarity

Novgorod would essentially be a Nordic/Baltic state — wealthy, trade-dependent, tech and service-oriented. St. Petersburg is already one of Russia’s most European cities. It has:

* Direct access to EU markets via Baltic Sea
* Arctic ports becoming viable year-round (Northern Sea Route)
* Skilled workforce already oriented toward Western business
* Tourism, finance, software, advanced manufacturing

Muscovy would be a continental Eurasian power — resource and agricultural-based, oriented toward Asia and Central Asia. It has:

* Trans-Siberian rail dominance
* Pan-Asia rail corridors (China, Kazakhstan, Mongolia)
* Oil, gas, minerals for export
* Vast agricultural land (southern regions especially fertile)

These aren’t competing — they’re complementary. Novgorod doesn’t need oil; Muscovy doesn’t need financial services as urgently.

# Modern Global Institutions Change the Game

UN, WTO, trade agreements, and multilateral institutions fundamentally alter the security calculus:

* No military threat to each other — Both are in a globalized order where major war is economically catastrophic. Neither can conquest the other without destroying themselves.
* NATO/EU for Novgorod — Could join Western institutions, gaining security guarantees. Poland, Baltics, and Finland would support a pro-Western Novgorod.
* SCO/BRI for Muscovy — Could integrate deeper into Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Belt and Road, ASEAN+. Less wealthy but secure via China, Central Asia partnerships.
* Interdependence creates stability — Trade ties, shared supply chains, and mutual economic interest replace military competition.

Would a hypothetical separated Russia produce better outcomes for ordinary people? Almost certainly yes in Novgorod (Nordic-level prosperity, democratic stability). Muscovy would be less wealthy per capita, but still middle-income secure and stable — better than current Russian trajectories.

But politically, it’s nearly impossible because:

* Russians don’t see themselves as two peoples
* The emotional/historical cost would be enormous
* Muscovy’s long-term trajectory (as a secondary power) would feel like a loss

It’s for the betterment of everyone, including opressed minorities of rf