On the Ukraine War- K.Murali (Ajith)

Putin’s army has invaded Ukraine after much preparation. The United States and its allies have declared it as an outcome of Putin’s imperialist ambitions and a move to restore the boundaries of the former Soviet Union. On its part the Russian government has stated that they have no intention of occupying Ukraine. This ‘military operation’, it says, is intended to end the attacks by Ukraine on the republics of Luhansk and Donetsk. Along with that Russia says it wants to destroy the Nazi forces who are now politically dominant in Ukraine and demilitarise it. The Russian rulers claim that they have no goals beyond these.

While these are the stated positions, the acts of these powers are quite at variance. Though Putin claimed that he is sending in his military to protect the Republics in the Donbas region, the Russian army launched its attack all over Ukraine. Latest reports indicate its moves to capture the capital, Kiev. On the other hand, while the US and its allies have spoken a lot about defending Ukraine’s sovereignty, they haven’t matched it with their deeds. A few days before the invasion started Biden had expressly stated that the US would not send its troops in the event of a Russian attack. This was almost like waving a green flag for Russian invasion. Though economic sanctions have been enforced after the war started, this stand was reiterated by him. The position of the other NATO members is identical. They have clearly stated that their support will only be in the form of military aid.

A close look at the economic sanctions will show that they are not so effective. Russia owns one of the largest financial reserves in the world. Its economy has improved. A financial transaction system, to some extent capable of handling exclusion from SWIFT, is also said to be in place. Moreover it has the support of China. Quite possibly it will be able to weather the sanctions. This is known to those enforcing them.

One can get an idea of the real nature of these sanctions from the Nord 2 gas-line issue. Germany has now frozen its commissioning. But, another pipeline, the Nord 1, has been operational since 2011. It too passes through the Baltic sea and takes Russian gas to Germany. It is still operational and so too are the pipelines passing through Ukraine. Most of the East European countries depend on Russian gas and these haven’t been affected by the sanctions.

The contradictions between European powers and the US too have played a role in the actual watering down of sanctions against Russia. America is keen to make them stop getting gas from Russia and switch to US, Canadian sources. Though touted as a means to break dependence on Russian gas the real intention is to tighten Europe’s dependence on the US and open up a new market for them. Germany and France are not willing to go with this.

Ever since the break up of the Soviet Union, US imperialism has been trying to establish absolute domination over Europe. Earlier it was contained by the Warsaw Pact controlled by Soviet social imperialism. Europe is decisive for world domination. Who gets to control it is crucial. This was something pointed out by Mao Tsetung long ago. Towards the fag end of Soviet social imperialism, Russia had agreed to the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact on the assurance that the NATO wouldn’t be expanded eastwards. But with the collapse of the Soviet Union into a number of independent countries, US imperialism ignored this undertaking and started expanding the NATO. Its aim was to ensure that Russia would be contained forever. Since then 14 new countries have joined the NATO, all from East Europe. Though a number of them are also members of the European Union, they are closer to the US.

The US imperialists concluded that their ‘American century’ had truly begun, with no one capable of standing up to them remaining. They arrogantly declared that they are the sole power with total hegemony over the world. Driven by this thinking they unleashed war and aggression all over the world, including in Europe. This was done unilaterally, with the message that those who wanted to join could come and opposition would be simply ignored. It was done without even trying to get formal acknowledgement from the UN. It attacked Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia and many other countries. The NATO was transformed into a military intervention force operating under US command all over the world, outside of UN supervision.

However, the resistance it encountered in these countries upset these aims. It couldn’t succeed in forcing its diktat and getting out. It got trapped in endless wars. Utilising this situation Russia and China built up their strengths. China became an imperialist country. Overcoming its weaknesses Russia too regained much of its power under Putin. It began to resist US expansion into East Europe and other parts of the world. The wars in Georgia, Azerbaijan and its armed intervention to protect the Assad regime in Syria were examples of this reassertion. Its aggression in Ukraine is a continuation of this policy.

Weakened by the Iraq, Afghan wars, US imperialism and its allies were not in a position to resist Putin. Moreover, over this period Russian imperialism and Chinese social imperialism set up bodies like the Shanghai Co-operation and BRICS. They started to build up an alternate international financial institutional set up, paralleling the US-controlled IMF and World Bank. China became prominent as source of finance and investment for 3rd World countries. Ignoring US opposition, many countries in Europe started to join it in its international ventures. Though China is still behind the US in economic size its growth potential is far greater. As a result of all of this, a multi-centred world imperialist system, quite beyond the sole control of the US, has emerged. What we see in Ukraine is the contradictions of this global system playing out, the compulsions of this global system.

The real issue of the Ukraine war is the contention between US imperialism and its allies on the one side and Russian imperialism and Chinese social imperialism on the other. It represents a tactical move on either side towards imposing a resolution of the contention between the attempt of the latter to setup a new imperialist order and of the former to preserve the existing one. Ukraine’s sovereignty is not the issue for the US or its allies. Neither is the independence of the Luhansk and Donetsk Republics for Russia. Both the contenders are solely interested in improving and consolidating their positions in their global contention.

We must distinguish the national interests of the Ukrainian people and the people of the Donbas republics from those of these imperialist powers. At present these interests are subordinated to the moves of these powers. Yet they still have their own objective existence. World experiences teach that there is every possibility of their gaining an independent role.

The Ukraine had played an important role in the formation of the Soviet Union. Its self-determination was denied under the Czars. The Russian revolution acknowledged it and made it real. 17 per cent of the Ukrainian population is ethnically Russian. Russian culture and literature have been influential since centuries. Hence there is a sizeable population of Russian speakers. While Russian was the official language of the Soviet Union, Ukrainian was compulsory in the schools. This was a result of the Leninist approach on national languages and cultures. Putin, with his imperialist chauvinist arrogance, has condemned this policy. In his view the weakening of the Russian empire built by the Czars by recognising Ukraine as a nation, and accepting Ukrainian as a distinct language, were two ‘crimes’ committed by Lenin and the Bolsheviks. According to him Ukraine had never existed before that and Ukrainian was only a dialect of Russian. Thus the contradiction between this hegemonic design of Russian imperialism and the just national interests of the Ukrainian people is a factor in this war. However, though the aspiration for national resistance is surely evident, it has still not carved out its own space, distinct from US imperialism and the Ukrainian rulers who are acting as its pawns.

After gaining independence, the new rulers of Ukraine adopted an oppressive policy towards national minorities. In the name of strengthening national identity, they actively promoted the worst type of national chauvinism. The use of Russian was banned. Earlier a law permitting the use of a language spoken by a local majority as the local official language was in existence. This was annulled in 2014. This national oppression went to the extent of even banning Russian artists, cultural acts and music. All of this had a diehard Rightist political content. A Ukrainian Nazi leader who had actively collaborated with Hitler’s forces against the Soviet Union, during the 2nd world war was acclaimed as a national hero. Evidently, all of these policies and acts caused great unease in Russian majority regions of the country. The feeling that separation is inevitable if their language and culture is to be sustained became strong. This, further stoked up by Putin’s regime, got actualised as the separatist movements in Luhansk and Donetsk. This too is a factor in this war. Russia is utilising it. Similar to the national resistance of the Ukrainian people, the national resistance of the Russian national minority too has yet to carve out its own space.

These contradictions are different from those among the imperialists and their pawns. One of the poles in them are the people. Hence they contain the potential for a different direction. Even while suffering from the national oppression of the Ukrainian rulers, a large number of the Russian speakers of that country consider themselves as Ukrainians. Their roots in that land go back for generations. For the Ukrainian speakers too, Russian language and culture is not something alien. The chauvinist policies of the rulers affect their cultural, social lives too. Ukrainian identity is one in which Russian elements are interwoven. Any attempt to forcibly remove them or to deny that it has an existence separate from the Russian goes against the interests of the people. They do not accord with objective reality. The root of this discord lies in the opposition between the interests of the people and those of their exploiters, oppressors. That is why one can say with confidence that the objective grounds for its expression still exists. The anti-war demonstrations taking place all over Russia are proof.

But that is not the dominant nature of the overall situation. Though the just interests of the different national peoples are part of this war, the contention between imperialist powers is what stands out. At present this is the principal aspect to be taken into account. The revolutionaries, progressives, should not side with either side. That is not how they should express solidarity with the people of Ukraine or of the Donbas. Instead, they should expose the interests of the imperialist powers and raise their voices to end this imperialist inspired war.

The genuine people’s forces in Ukraine and the Republics in the Donbas, should raise the banner of a united struggle for a new socialist country that will guarantee the self-determination and democratic rights of all national minorities in Ukraine. They should thus differentiate themselves from the aggressor, Russian imperialism, and also from the ruling classes represented by the US pawn Zelensky. The people’s forces in Russia should step up their opposition to their own ruling class, demanding the cessation of the war and withdrawal of Russian troops. This is the only way by which they can established a new direction.

Over the past several decades, US imperialism has been trying to focus its forces against China. It insists that the European powers should shoulder the bulk of Europe’s security needs. It continuously complained that they are not doing enough in sharing NATO expenses. Trump went a step ahead and declared that it wouldn’t really matter if NATO was dissolved. That was in line with the views of a section of the US ruling classes that America should either resolve or cold-storage issues it had with Russia in order to confront China. But this isn’t feasible. It could possibly lead to the US loosing its grip over Europe altogether. The NATO wasn’t meant to check the Soviet Union alone. It also had the aim of keeping Germany under control. That remains. For some time now, France has been demanding the formation of a European defence force. If the NATO is dissolved, a European military organisation lead by France and Germany could take form. It may possibly come to an accord with Russia. The expansion of the NATO favoured by the US keeps this possibility too in mind, apart from that of encircling Russia. It cannot be abandoned, particularly with a re-assertive Russia around. Russia is the main threat for East European countries. Germany and France won’t suffice to meet this threat. They need America for it, and hence, the NATO. The US has tried to capitalise on this in order to keep the NATO active while reducing its own financial and troop burden in Europe. The Ukraine crisis and war has upset this to a great extent.

Moreover, Biden’s policy of avoiding a direct military role, starkly in contrast to all the noise he was making, will certainly give rise to misgivings. Whether and how much the US can be relied on will be central in this. This is taking place not so long after Trump declared against the NATO. It could be a spur for many European countries to come the conclusion that it may be better to have a deal with Russia instead of relying on American military might. Well before the war had started, both Germany and France had stated that Russia had legitimate security concerns that need to be addressed. After the war commenced France has seized a Russian merchant ship. Reversing its decision of not supplying lethal equipment, Germany has started supplying them to Ukraine. Apparently this looks like it is submitting to US pressure. However, it could also indicate an attempt by these countries to secure their initiative in Europe, capitalising on the concerns that have come up over US policies.

The US has been put in a situation where it is forced to divert its attention from the perceived immediate task of targetting China, at least for some time. Simultaneously it also has to face the problem of not being able to fully concentrate on Europe. So why did Biden take this turn? Does it merely indicate the compulsions of circumstances? Or was it adopted wilfully, quite aware of possible consequences? There are reasons to doubt as much. As we noted earlier, Biden had declared that US troops would not be deployed in Ukraine at the very moment when Putin was amassing his military on the borders. Was this done to egg on Russia into war, trap it there and thereby retain control over Europe while weakening the alliance between China and Russia? Calculations on the possible resistance that could come up in the Ukraine could have been a factor in making this ploy. Though the share of ethnic Russians and Russian speakers are quite significant, a large number of them consider themselves as Ukrainians. When the people of the Donbas had separated, Putin tried to carry out something similar in the Russian majority southern parts of Ukraine. He failed. Therefore, the US rulers may well have concluded that the national sentiment and defence triggered of by a Russian invasion would transform into a resistance quite unexpected by Putin. The whole affair would also serve to tighten up the NATO. These factors may well have been those guiding Biden in his choices.

However, there is strong opposition to it within the US ruling classes itself. Trump, who has now praised Zelensky, was earlier congratulating Putin. That was not just another instance of his crazy, erratic behaviour. It reflected the thinking of a weighty section in the Republican party. They may have shifted their public stance in view of the worldwide opposition to Russia’s invasion and the repercussions a pro-war stand may have on the upcoming elections in the USA. Whatever that may be, confronting China remains the focus of the US’s global political, military strategy.

Though not yet a member of the NATO formally, Ukraine has already established a formal ‘friendship’ with it. War games with NATO participation have been staged in it repeatedly. In a recent one, the stated mission was training to ‘regain territory lost due to separatists supported by a neighbouring country’. That couldn’t be more obvious. The success of Azerbaijan, with its small armed force, in seizing back Nagorno-Karabakh from Armenia by deploying drones provided an important guidance for this war game. Putin must have decided to act without delay in view of these developments. He may also have calculated that the US wouldn’t take much interest because of its preoccupation with China.

War is a continuation of politics. Countries wage war to realise specific political aims. Establishing a regime in Kiev that won’t allow anti-Russian moves, preventing the expansion of the NATO, bringing about a new security/peace treaty in Europe that will ensure the interests of Russian imperialism — such are the political aims of Putin. That is why he is repeatedly saying that Russia has no intention of occupying Ukraine. In opposition to this, US imperialism is trying to create a situation where Russia cannot fulfil its aims without doing that, or is forced to carry out military intervention continuously. The coming days will show us who will succeed. Meanwhile, lakhs of humans will die, be wounded, maimed, made homeless, jobless. Hideous misery awaits them. Crores of rupees, money and assets, are being burned up in this imperialist contention. Money which was absent when it came to tackling a microscopic virus, to treating its victims, now flows in abundance to rain death. Imperialism means war and it always kills; either way.

It is beyond question that the Ukrainians hate Russian invasion. Yet, till today, one hasn’t seen any indication of this people’s opposition coalescing as armed resistance independent of the Zelensky regime. If the war gets prolonged, if the people are forced to live under Russian rule in regions it occupies, this will definitely emerge. Moreover, even if Putin succeeds in setting up a puppet regime in Kiev, Ukraine will not know peace. We can surely expect resistance and guerilla war against it. Thus, no matter what, Russia is going to get trapped there. Powerful anti-war sentiments and protests have come up in that country. This is particularly noticeable among the youth. The jingoist Russian nationalism fanned up with the active involvement of the Russian Christian church has failed in blocking this. These protests will give further impetus to the resistance in Ukraine. It will also weaken Ukrainian chauvinism encouraged by Zelensky and his allies. Thus, the war has engendered a new political awakening in Russia. If the war gets prolonged, if Putin fails to achieve his war aims within the expected time, if the resistance in Ukraine becomes strong and inflicts heavy losses on the Russian army, it may well cause the end of his rule.

The world is entering a period of great disorder. In the past, for a long time during the contention between the two superpowers — the US led imperialist camp and the Soviet social imperialist led camp — the people of the world used to be inspired by the political and diplomatic interventions of socialist China and Albania and the revolutionary message given through this. The revolutionary struggles that continued or came up even after the restoration of capitalism in China played that role at the world level. Today there are no socialist countries. Revolutionary struggles led by communist parties are few in number. The international communist movement is still weak. Therefore, turning this disorder towards revolution is a strenuous task. However, there is something else too. This is the change that has taken place in the consciousness of the masses. The change which has come about as a result of their experiences during the Covid pandemic needs particular mention. In both the developed countries and 3rd world countries, the incompetence of the rulers and their inhuman approach was sharply exposed. The people came to see that this, rather than the virus itself, had far more to do with the loss of crores of lives. There is thus a widespread thinking in the world that the rulers can’t be trusted, that the truth is beyond what is stated by them. An anti-government, anti-ruler sentiment, opposition, is seen in many countries. Quite often it transforms into agitations. In this situation, while the opposing sides are making differing claims, if the communist forces, the progressives, pay attention to exposing the narrow imperialist interests underlying these claims and alert the people, they will quickly understand the truth. Though these forces are in a weak state they will be able to turn this disorder in favour of revolution. There is every possibility to do this. They must proceed in a direction that will make this real through correct political positions and practice. Tailing behind either of the contenders means losing this opportunity.