A-Infos (en) Bulgaria, FA: The Ukrainian crisis and the "lefts": clarifications needed (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

We are publishing a translation of an article by the Confederation of 
Revolutionary Anarcho-Syndicalists (KRAS, Russian Section of the 
International Workers' Association), uploaded to their website on 
09.28.2014 (https://aitrus.info/node/3948) in connection with what was 
then happening along the Maidan events. We decided that it would be 
useful to us today due to the similarities and correspondences in the 
international situation (Russia-NATO standoff), in popular sentiments 
(Proputinism and Euro-Atlanticism) and above all in the response of some 
of the left who are quick to declare support for one of warring state 
authorities and to declare its armed forces "more democratic" or 
"anti-fascist". However, as we know, all this is not a struggle for 
freedom and democracy, but a clash of competing geopolitical interests, 
where the pursuit of the "lesser evil" is disastrous or at least 
pointless and a betrayal of our ideals. There is no war for peace, nor 
can we look for revolution in power structures. Thus, the publisher 
agrees with the opinion of KRAS regarding internationalism as a firm and 
tested principle of anarchists and condemns the support for any 
political power, regardless of what it presents itself as.

The Ukrainian civil war dealt another heavy blow to those social forces 
in Russia that call themselves the "left," "anti-fascist," or 
"anarchist" movement. Having failed the test of the notorious "national 
question", or more precisely - the test of internationalism, these 
groups split into supporters of one of the bourgeois camps, which fought 
each other in the struggle for power in Ukraine.

The logic of support for the Maidan coup and the regime it created in 
Kiev, on the one hand, or pro-Russian regimes in Donetsk and Luhansk, 
which declared secession from Kiev, on the other, inexorably led their 
apologists to justify either the imperialist interests of the NATO 
countries, or the predatory expansionism of the Kremlin - that is, of 
those countries that clarify the relations of the Ukrainian land through 
the hands of their puppets and satellites.

The collapse of the " left"

Many "leftists" and "anarchists" in the spaces of the former Soviet 
Union were not distinguished by an internationalist position for a long 
time, and in pursuit of popularity among the "masses" they were ready to 
compromise with various forms of nationalism. The Ukrainian war was the 
impetus that helped complete this "rightward" evolution. The leftist 
camp of Ukraine split into two main groups. Borotba Leninists, faced 
with the openly anti-left, Ukrainian-nationalist rhetoric and practice 
of the Maidan, essentially supported the opposing Anti-Maidan and 
declared the pro-Russian demonstrations in the eastern part of the 
country "anti-fascist", unfazed by the active presence of the far-right 
in them , and in the main role. At the same time, the leaders of the 
"Autonomous Union of Workers" (AST) not only welcomed the Maidan as an 
"anti-dictatorship" protest, regardless of the avant-garde role of 
far-right "fighters", but then sided with the Ukrainian centralized 
bourgeois state, denying any dissatisfaction with the Kiev coup in the 
eastern part of the country and reducing the whole problem only and 
exclusively to the aggressive actions of the Kremlin. Some groups 
suffered a violent schism. Thus, part of the members of the platformist 
RKAS went to the Maidan, others condemned the struggle for power in 
Kiev, but then announced their intention to protect the "motherland from 
the aggressor" - Russia; others, according to rumors, entered the 
military formations of the DPR...

No less confusion reigns among the Russian "left". Some (including most 
"anarchists") sympathized with the Maidan from the beginning as a 
supposedly "people's" and "self-organized" movement, ready to justify a 
tactical alliance with Ukrainian nationalists and the far-right. Others 
support Kiev in its conflict with the East and the Kremlin, guided by 
"anti-Putin" motives and the unprincipled motto "the enemy of my enemy 
is my friend". Still others, as before, are captive to the idea of 
"progressiveness" of the national-"liberation" movements and saw in the 
Maidan course towards NATO a manifestation of an advanced struggle 
against the age-old yoke of the "Russian Empire". A fourth, on the 
contrary, leaned in favor of the Donbas republics or even began to 
express more or less strong support for the Kremlin's policy, declaring 
Russian imperialism as a counterweight to the "more terrible" enemy - 
the imperialism of the West. Petty continues to present the rebellion in 
the east as an anti-fascist act, arguing that "anti-fascism" must unite 
the entire spectrum of political forces, from far-left to far-right. Six 
interpret the annexation of Crimea to Russia and the secession of the 
Ukrainian East in the spirit of the "right to self-determination"...

The inability of the majority of the "left" (in the broadest sense of 
the word) movement in Ukraine and Russia to consistently take an 
internationalist position in this conflict is of course no accident and 
unfortunately no surprise. Its roots are still the same that once, with 
the outbreak of the First World War, split the Second International - 
these are nationalism, patriotism, statesmanship and the political logic 
of opportunism ("the lesser evil" and "graduality").

Position of KRAS

The Russian anarcho-syndicalists from the very beginning took a stand 
against all the opposing bourgeois groups in Ukraine and against the 
imperialist forces behind them - Russia and the NATO countries. In the 
statement "War of War" signed by the Russian section of the MRA in early 
March, our anti-nationalism was formulated quite clearly. We condemned 
the struggle for power between the oligarchic clans of Ukraine, 
manifested in the streets in the form of opposition between Maidan and 
Anti-Maidan, and emphasized the expansionist character of the states' 
policy towards Ukraine, which became a bone of contention between the 
emerging military-political blocks. Even before the annexation of 
Crimea, we warned: "Russian capitalism intends to take advantage of the 
redistribution of Ukrainian state power to realize its long-standing 
imperial and expansionist aspirations in Crimea and in eastern Ukraine, 
where it has strong economic, financial and political interests. Against 
the background of the upcoming stage of economic crisis in Russia, the 
ruling regime is trying, by inflaming Russian nationalism, to divert the 
attention of the working people from the growing socio-economic 
problems, the miserable wages and pensions, the dismantling of 
affordable health care, education and others social services. Under the 
thunder of nationalist and militant rhetoric, it is easier to complete 
the formation of a corporate authoritarian state based on 
reactionary-conservative values and repressive politics . We also warned 
of the interests and aspirations of Western powers whose "intervention 
in the conflict could lead to World War III."

We understood very well that with the present weakness of the labor 
movement and the social-revolutionary forces, the workers in Ukraine and 
Russia would hardly be able to put up organized resistance to the war at 
this stage. But this does not mean that they should succumb to 
nationalistic hysteria and go and shed blood for the interests of their 
masters, whoever they may be. We called for a broad anti-nationalist, 
anti-war, anti-capitalist and anti-state agitation, seeing this as a 
necessary step towards a future social-revolutionary upsurge.

This internationalist position was confirmed once again in the extensive 
interview one of our comrades gave to the German libertarian 
anti-militarist newspaper Grasswürtzelrevolution. Although he did it 
personally, his words reflected the point of view of our entire 
organization on this matter. Here's what he noted: "The pro-Russian 
movement in the East and in Crimea is as diverse as the Maidan." And 
equally nationalistic and reactionary in its predominant orientation. 
The leaders of the pro-Russian groups in Crimea are prominent 
representatives of the local Russian-speaking bourgeoisie. Regarding the 
participation of the Russian (Russian-speaking) far-right in the current 
anti-Kiev protests in eastern, southern Ukraine and Crimea - these are 
primarily Cossacks, who are today something like the KKK in the USA, and 
also members of various pro-fascist groups .

Of course, special attention in the interview was devoted to the plans 
and actions of the imperialist powers. "It is obvious that Putin's 
regime is taking advantage of the chaotic situation in Ukraine to 
implement its own hegemonic plans," our comrade noted, "The interests of 
the Russian state and capital in Crimea are diverse. In geopolitical 
terms, Russia is considered a regional superpower that claims at least 
hegemony in the former Soviet Union space. Ukraine has become a conflict 
zone of imperialist contradictions between Russia and the EU. In 
contrast to the projects for association of Ukraine with the EU, Moscow 
offered its southern neighbor membership in the bloc under its 
domination - the Customs Union. It is logical that Russia would not want 
to tolerate an anti-Russian government in Kiev. (...) Putin's regime 
prefers to even take the risk of finding a permanent and long-term enemy 
in Kiev with future revenge aspirations, if only to seize the Crimea 
region. Crimea is of great military importance to the Russian state. The 
main bases of the Russian Black Sea Fleet are located there , and the 
term of this deployment expires in 2017. From a strategic point of view, 
the peninsula jutting into the sea is the key to the Black Sea. And the 
possible perspective of Ukraine's membership in NATO scares the Russian 
government. Economic interests also matter. Russian capitalists run 
their businesses in Crimea and have real estate there. New profitable 
projects are planned. (...) Additional excitement is caused by the 
information about the presence of rich oil and gas resources in the sea 
in the vicinity of Crimea" . Finally, for the intervention "there are 
clear domestic political motives. The Russian government is increasingly 
strengthening its neoliberal economic policy against the background of 
already very low wages . Many analysts assume that the economic crisis 
in the country will worsen this year. So inciting nationalist and 
military hysteria is a suitable means of diverting the discontent of the 
population, which is being pushed towards a patriotic unification around 
the government .

"(...) We are dealing with competing imperialisms, with another round of 
the struggle for the redistribution of the world." - stressed the 
comrade - "At the same time, there are many players operating in the 
world - the imperial aspirations of the USA, China, etc. Every country 
would like to expand its sphere of influence and lead an imperial 
policy. Not everyone can, but everyone wants to. Hence the hypocrisy on 
all sides. Each country allows itself such a policy, but denies it to 
all others. I think that the first and most urgent task of 
anti-nationalists is to expose such a situation and explain it as much 
as possible to broad sections of the population. We must always - and as 
systematically as possible - explain that imperial politics and 
militarism are an integral part of the system . If we cannot contribute 
to a change of consciousness, we will never be able to break through the 
moral dominance of the capitalist-statist system."

The dogs are barking - the caravan is on its way

Since then, our position has not changed. We continue to oppose NATO and 
the Kremlin, Kiev and Donetsk-Luhansk, Maidan and Anti-Maidan. Our 
slogan is still the same: "A plague on both your houses, gentlemen 
bourgeois!".

But the principle irritates the Russian and Ukrainian leftists who are 
raging in the chaos. Forgetting what it is, they are ready to denounce 
any allegiance to the ideals of internationalism and class resistance 
(to which they are committed) as something naive, marginal and 
sectarian, and if that doesn't work - simply slander them.

It is clear that today we are causing burning hatred among the 
supporters of the Maidan/Kyiv and the supporters of the DPR/LPR/Kremlin. 
Some sincerely do not understand how it is possible not to support 
either of the opposing sides: after all, politics is "the art of the 
possible". It is useful for such heroes to be reminded that 
anarcho-syndicalists are not concerned with "politics" in this sense at 
all: they need no effort to explain it to themselves. We are not 
interested in the names and secrets of politicians, but in the struggle 
for the socio-economic interests of working people.

Some live by the logic of Stalin's prosecutor Vyshinsky: "whoever is not 
with us is against us." Schizophrenicly dividing the surrounding world, 
these individuals believe that anyone who does not support the 
"liberation struggle of the Ukrainian people" (under the leadership, of 
course, of the patriotic oligarchs) is a direct or indirect agent of the 
Kremlin. Without being psychiatrists, we do not know how to cure their 
political schizophrenia.

Finally, there are those who simply prefer outright lies and slander. 
So, there were liars who began to claim that KRAS refused to criticize 
the pro-Russian republics in eastern Ukraine and even supported them.

Anyone who understands the logic of our position and who has read the 
above quotations will easily notice that this is of course not the case. 
In fact, our site has so far featured more material on the social 
problems and anti-war protests in the zone controlled by the Kyiv 
regime. But this is primarily because there is no consistent information 
on these topics from the areas ruled by the separatists. We don't know 
anything about whether strikes are happening there, whether protests 
against the war, price rises and mobilization have broken out in those 
areas... As soon as we get the relevant data, we intend to publish and 
distribute it in the same way as we do with the strike material in 
Crimea, annexed to Russia.

However, in order to avoid any misunderstanding (since we consider it 
unnecessary to refute the open slander of the enemies), we can only 
confirm openly that we do not consider the regimes of the DPR/LPR in any 
way "better" than the Kiev one mode. Even with all the scatteredness and 
schematicity of objective information, there are enough grounds for such 
an opinion:

- The regimes of the DPR and LPR are bourgeois (as well as the regime in 
Kyiv). At their head are representatives of the local middle or small 
bourgeoisie and power structures, and behind them are quite clearly the 
interests of large Russian concerns, which have repeatedly sent their 
trusted people to the governing structures of the republics.

- The regimes in eastern Ukraine are extremely nationalistic, but, 
unlike Kiev, this nationalism is not Ukrainian, but Russian. In order to 
be convinced of this, it is enough not only to get acquainted with the 
constitution of the DPR, riddled with Black Hundred exclamations about 
"Russian world" and "Russian civilization", about the primacy of 
Orthodoxy and traditional values, but also to listen to or read the 
relevant statements of state and military officials of the two 
republics. Proof of this is the direct references of the leaders of the 
regime to the traditions of the Russian White Guard.

- The regimes in eastern Ukraine (as well as Kiev) are ready to receive 
support from their own and foreign neo-fascists. It can hardly be 
assumed that the activists of RNE, NBP, Cossacks and the successors of 
the White Guards are at least somewhat "better" than the Azov Battalion 
- the openly neo-Nazi unit of the Ukrainian National Guard.

- The regimes in eastern Ukraine are extremely repressive (as well as 
Kiev). International human rights organizations register numerous 
violations of human rights in both areas of the country. Similar to the 
territory controlled by the Kyiv authorities, censorship is established 
and practiced in the DPR and LPR, and political opponents are 
persecuted; people are arrested, kidnapped and beaten. From both parts 
of Ukraine there are reports of forced mobilization into military 
formations or "reinforcement work". In August, the DPR passed a law 
establishing military courts and reinstating the death penalty. We have 
no verified information about who was executed and when, but the very 
fact of such laws is extremely disturbing.

- The regimes in eastern Ukraine are anti-social (although, unlike the 
government in Kiev, they are not yet following the dictates of the IMF 
and the EU on "austerity"). None of the leaders of the republics will 
encroach on the property of the capitalists; no attempt is known to 
freeze prices, raise wages or proclaim additional social guarantees...

Enough said. Those "leftists" who declare their support for such regimes 
are simply out of their minds... Or they are nothing more than the 
"left" fig leaf of the bourgeoisie.

The anarcho-syndicalists remain on their principled positions. We have 
never supported, do not support and will never support any state, any 
ruling class, any bourgeois or national movement. Our course towards 
social revolution and anarchy is unchanged. This is what we insist on 
and cannot do otherwise.

https://www.anarchy.bg
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en