Article 11 of the “Don’t Repeat History” Series
Preventing External Overreach: Spanish Civil War Warnings for Liberland’s Sovereignty
The Free Republic of Liberland, founded in 2015 on a 7 km² patch of disputed Danube land between Croatia and Serbia, embodies libertarian ideals: minimal government, voluntary contributions, property rights, and blockchain transparency. By 2025, Liberland has stabilized governance with blockchain elections, launched a $30 million Danube revitalization plan, and has attracted over 700,000 citizenship applicants, poised for global reach from 1,400 citizens. Yet, its unrecognized status invites external overreach, as Croatian disruptions and regional powers like the EU, NATO et al loom overhead. The Spanish Civil War (1936–1939) illustrates how foreign intervention—Soviet support for Republicans, fascist aid to Nationalists—turned internal strife into dictatorship, warning Liberland against entangling alliances. To safeguard sovereignty, Liberland must pursue voluntary, blockchain-based diplomacy, ensuring partnerships without compromise. This approach, rooted in non-aggression, supports 2025’s infrastructure and diaspora goals while preserving the “To Live and Let Live” ethos.
The Spanish Civil War erupted in 1936 when General Francisco Franco’s Nationalists rebelled against the Republican government, fracturing Spain along ideological lines. The Republicans, a coalition of socialists, communists, and anarchists, sought to defend democracy, while Nationalists, backed by monarchists and fascists, aimed for authoritarian rule. What began as a domestic conflict quickly became a proxy war, drawing foreign powers and prolonging bloodshed. The Soviet Union provided Republicans with $500 million in arms, tanks, and advisors, but at the cost of ideological control—Stalin’s purges infiltrated the government, suppressing anarchists and fostering internal paranoia. On the Nationalist side, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy supplied aircraft, troops (e.g., the Condor Legion’s bombing of Guernica, killing 1,600 civilians), and $1 billion in aid, enabling Franco’s advance. This intervention extended the war from months to three years, killing 500,000 and displacing 450,000. Franco’s victory in 1939 installed a dictatorship lasting until 1975, betraying the Republicans’ libertarian elements (e.g., anarchist collectives). The war’s lesson warns Liberland: entangling alliances invite external overreach, eroding sovereignty and internal unity, especially in a disputed territory vulnerable to regional powers.
Liberland’s 2025 context—blockchain elections, the Danube plan, and a potential e-residency surge—demands vigilance against similar overreach. Croatian disruptions, viewing Liberland as a provocation, mirror Spain’s border frictions, while Justin Sun’s U.S. outreach and MOUs with countries like El Salvador risk ideological strings, as Soviet aid did to the Republicans. Wealth-driven voting, where citizens with more Liberland Merits (LLM) influence decisions, could push for risky alliances favoring elites, echoing Nationalist fascist ties. Membership in the EU and NATO CANNOT HAPPEN in anyway form. Without voluntary safeguards, external powers (e.g., EU sanctions or NATO interventions) could exploit divisions, fracturing or even completely dismantling diaspora villages like ARK in Serbia or any proposed diaspora hubs to be created in Croatia. Blockchain-based diplomacy offers a solution: binding treaties codified as smart contracts, ensuring partnerships without legal entanglements. These treaties, timestamped on Liberland’s blockchain, symbolize mutual respect—like wampum belts in the Iroquois Confederacy (Article 6)—without coercive enforcement. The issue though in the treaty component is that binding treaties are to be seen as a last resort in diplomacy for Liberland, MOU’s, non-binding treaties, or other diplomatic instruments should be considered first, but all such contractual documents must be in the blockchain.
Blockchain treaties automate the terms (e.g., cultural exchanges, trade access) with transparency, allowing citizens to opt in via LLM voting, with equal access to prevent elite sway. For example, a treaty with Montenegro regarding Montelibero could facilitate a diaspora outpost, with DAOs managing shared resources voluntarily. Civics modules (Article 9), teaching the Spanish Civil War’s intervention pitfalls, ensure e-residents and citizens prioritize sovereignty, maintaining cohesion. This mirrors my series’ voluntary systems: DAO trusts (Article 3) for inheritance, blockchain registries (Article 4) for IP, and DAO-CLTs (Article 5) for land, all using social incentives to unify without force.
In practice, blockchain diplomacy supports Liberland’s 2025 goals. The $30 million Danube plan can fund cross-border eco-projects with Serbia, and treaties to de-escalate Croatian tensions, unlike the Republicans’ Soviet entanglements. As e-residency scales to potentially hundreds of thousands, treaties with crypto-friendly nations like El Salvador can secure trade hubs, bypassing physical blockades. Informal outposts, managed by DAO-CLTs (Article 5), can host treaty negotiations, ensuring community-driven diplomacy. Sunset clauses on treaty terms—expiring after 5–10 years unless renewed—keep alliances adaptable, avoiding the Nationalists’ fascist overreach. Blockchain automation reduces negotiation costs, unlike bureaucratic treaties, scaling for a global e-citizenry.
Critics may argue non-binding treaties lack teeth, but they can enhance freedom by prioritizing consent over force. Unlike coercive alliances, they prevent overreach, as in Spain’s proxy war. Without them, Liberland risks the Republicans’ fate: internal unity shattered by external strings. By encouraging voluntary blockchain treaties, Liberland builds principled partners, supporting its crypto-economy and diaspora growth.
By learning from the Spanish Civil War’s foreign overreach, Liberland can build a voluntary diplomatic system. Blockchain treaties, backed by social incentives and transparency, ensure sovereignty, supporting 2025’s elections, Danube plan, and a potential e-residency surge. This makes Liberland a beacon of principled alliances, not a cautionary tale of subjugation.