Communist Labour Party of Turkey/Leninist
Several “communist” parties who have come together under the name “European Communist Action” organised a conference “in order to evaluate the experiences and conclusions of the communists during the second year of the imperialist war in Ukraine.”
They did well. They have once again given us the opportunity to see that they are doing their best to cover up the most important facts about the war, the real cause of the war, its class character and their political line in order to curry favour with their imperialist masters.
Anyone who wants to see an example of how a person, party or group of parties can claim to act in the name of the world proletariat and in reality serve their imperialist masters can look at the joint declaration of the “European Communist Action.” There is no need for anything else. In revolutionary communist literature, acting in the name of communism and serving the bourgeoisie is called social chauvinism.
The “European Communist Action” (hereafter we will refer to this social chauvinist group only as “ECA”) is a social chauvinist group that acts in the name of communism but in reality serves its imperialist masters, especially the US, NATO and the EU. They are nothing more than a “group” because there is not the slightest that they represent a “movement.”
In order for the reader to better understand the political character of this group, some brief information about their past is in order.
Except for one or two of them, the parties that make up the “ECA” operated under the name “European Communist Initiative” (ECI) from 2013 until September 2023. They formed part of the ongoing conference of the worldwide meeting of communist and workers’ parties (IMCWP). After the war in Ukraine, neither at the IMCWP conferences in Havana and Izmir, nor at the ECI meetings led by the KKE, could they issue a joint statement on the war. They could not issue it because they did not have a common view, a common ground on this most fundamental issue. There was not much the KKE could do in the IMCWP, but it could well “throw its weight” within the ECI. And so it did. The ECI shamefully ended its life in September 2023 with a teleconference via Zoom. After the KKE presentation, it was hastily declared that the ECI had completed its mission and they pulled the plug!
Thus, in order to get rid of “the important ideological and political differences … which creates insurmountable obstacles for the continuation of the ECI,” a new, narrower organisation was formed in line with the views of the KKE: The European Communist Action (ECA)!
The global civil war waged by the USA and other imperialists against the world proletariat and working classes, the oppressed peoples of the world in general, and the war waged by the Russian army against imperialism and fascism in particular, have caused the path of collaboration with the bourgeoisie to mature and forced these social reformist parties to reveal their true social chauvinist faces. They could no longer hide their true bourgeois collaborationist faces. This was the inevitable result of the war. This social reformist, compromising, collaborationist boil matured as a result of the war and was revealed to us in the form of social chauvinism.
The joint statement issued by the parties that came together as the “ECA” on the 2nd anniversary of the war was a document that showed how these parties, in the name of “communism” sided with their imperialist and reactionary states and governments. Now let’s have a look at that statement.
Is The War In Ukraine An Imperialist War?
“Marxism, which does not degrade itself by stooping to the philistine’s level, requires an historical analysis of each war” (Lenin). That is to say, if a party is to express an opinion on an emerging war, it has to make a concrete evaluation of that war; it has to analyze, in a concrete manner that relies on evidence, the situation in the warring countries, but also class relations at the global level and the general conditions of the imperialist epoch.
The “ECA” answers “yes” to the above question without hesitation. It claims that this war is an imperialist war and asserts that siding with one of the parties, for example the Russian army, means siding with its own government, its own bourgeoisie. And what is the concrete evidence that the “ECA” puts forward for this claim? There is no concrete evidence, only abstract claims, nothing more than the idea that “If I say so, it is so.” Now let us analyse these claims from their statement.
In article 1 of the statement of the “ECA” we find the following “concrete” assessment of the cause of the war:
“1. The imperialist war in Ukraine has led to thousands of deaths. Millions were forced to leave their homes and country. This imperialist war is an extension of the conditions that emerged after the dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and which have tragic consequences for the working classes all over the world. It was the overthrow of socialism that prepared the ground for this war, in which the blood of two peoples who worked together for decades to build a new society on socialist foundations, who fought shoulder to shoulder against fascism and brought it to its knees, is being shed.”
The only worthwhile opinion (if one can call it that) among all this empty talk, which is otherwise presented without a single piece of concrete evidence, is this: The war results from the dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, of socialism. “It was the overthrow of socialism that prepared the ground for this war.”
To say this is to say nothing. They put forward no idea about this war or about its causes. Because the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the destruction of socialism led not only to this war but to countless wars, to the unbridled aggression of the US-NATO-British imperialists in countless parts of the world. Under the conditions of the existence of the Soviet Union, these imperialists and their aggressive military organisation NATO could not dare to attack any country as they pleased. The disintegration of the Soviet Union and the destruction of socialism encouraged them in their aggressive policies and they started to carry out attacks everywhere. The wars in Iraq I and II, Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and Israel’s aggression in the Middle East, etc., are all “an extension of the conditions that emerged after the dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and which have tragic consequences for the working classes all over the world.”
So, to say that the war is “the result of the collapse of socialism and the conditions that emerged after this collapse” is to say nothing about this war. What we need, however, is, to use Lenin’s words, “a concrete evaluation of each war separately.”
It is obvious that the parties that make up the “ECA” are in a state of complete confusion. On the one hand, they are trying to curry favour with their imperialist masters, but on the other hand, they are trying to do it in a way that is compatible with the word “communist” in their name. According to the “ECA,” there is an imperialist war, but they cannot call Russia, one of the parties to the war, “imperialist.” That is to say, on the one side there are the familiar imperialist states; on the other side―at least for now―there is Russia, which is not yet imperialist.
We come to point 2 of the statement, where glaring confusion and demagoguery reign. Before that, however, we should make an intermediate note. There is obviously no unanimity of thought within the “ECA” on the definition of Russia. While one section defines Russia as “imperialist”―we know that the KKE is of this opinion―another section, for example, the TKP (the Communist Party of Turkey), opposes this definition. As an intermediate way, as a ground for compromise, they have come together in the freakish idea that “there is an imperialist war, but this is an imperialist war in which one of the parties is not an imperialist.” Now we can continue with Article 2 as it is.
“2. The most important factor fuelling the conflict on this ground is the fight among capitalists for the plundering of all underground and surface resources, the wealth produced by the workers. At the root of this conflict lies the competition and contradictions within the imperialist system as a whole, which in this case were expressed in the expansion of NATO and the EU to the east and the aspiration of the Russian bourgeoisie to establish new forms of organisations of capitalist states in the territories of the former USSR.”
What do we understand here that the phrase of “the aspiration of the Russian bourgeoisie to establish new forms of organisations of capitalist states in the territories of the former USSR.” Nothing! Suppose the Russian bourgeoisie were to wish to establish new forms of state organisation in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan or any other “territory of the former USSR.” What would the result be? Is that why they went to war with the USA-NATO and others? Or, on the contrary, did these imperialists decide to wage war against the “Russian bourgeoisie” because of this desire? As a concrete analysis of the war, they heap of platitudes about “the desires of the Russian bourgeoisie” before the working class and nothing else.
There is an “imperialist war”; this is true. But from the point of view of the US-NATO-UK-European imperialists, this is an imperialist war. From the point of view of the world proletariat, labouring peoples, socialist states, and global revolutionary forces, it is an anti-imperialist, anti-fascist war.
This war has arisen out of the general conditions in which the imperialist-capitalist system, that is, imperialism, especially the USA, has been living in the last twenty to twenty-five years. But what are the main lines of today’s general conditions of the imperialist epoch?
To put it in the most general terms, in the last quarter of a century, the imperialist-capitalist system has entered a process of decline, of collapse, of the loss of its world hegemony. The entire historical development of the capitalist mode of production and the fact that the productive forces have reached the point where they cannot fit into the shells of this mode of production and the struggles of the world proletariat and labouring peoples, the poor masses against capitalism and the world bourgeoisie, which have turned into revolts, uprisings, and revolutions, have formed the basic lines and general conditions of this process.
Our era is the era of the collapse of imperialism and social revolutions. NATO itself has determined that our century is the “century of uprisings” and has started to shape all its economic and military policies according to this prediction. To reverse this process, the imperialists, led by the USA and their military organisation NATO, have launched a war against the world working class, working peoples, socialist countries and revolutionary-democratic popular governments oriented towards socialism. This is a global civil war between the world bourgeoisie and the world proletariat, socialist countries, labouring, poor, oppressed peoples. Without understanding these features of our epoch and the global civil war arising from these features, it is impossible to understand either the wars in different countries or the unbridled policy of aggression of the imperialists against the territory of Russia.
The imperialists, i.e. the USA and other imperialist-reactionary states, which surround it like little jackals, are doing their utmost to erase all signs and every trace of socialism from the face of the earth. They are preparing to attack not only Russia but also Cuba and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, China, Vietnam, Laos, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and many other countries.
Russia, whose relations with socialist and socialist-orientated revolutionary-democratic popular governments are close to the Soviet-era line of foreign relations, was an obstacle to these aims. Social chauvinists will not like it, but such were the relations between Cuba and Russia, such are the relations with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Such are the relations with China and with Venezuela, where US imperialism wants to bring its henchmen to power. Needless to say, the relations between Cuba, Venezuela, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and Russia were the greatest obstacle to the destructive economic, financial, technical, and military policies of the imperialists on these countries. This is a concrete, verifiable fact.
Syria is a more typical example. It is a well-known and recognised fact that if it were not for the active support of Russia, Syria today would have become a farm for the production and export to the world of religious fascist murderous hordes. For the imperialists, but especially for the US and British imperialists to consolidate their domination in the Middle East, the capture of Syria through Turkey and the religious fascist gangs was extremely important. The whole world knows that the Syrian war is not over. Russia, with its active military intervention, has frustrated the ambitions of the imperialists and their subcontractors in the region.
Russia’s military and economic activity and policy on the African continent has also been one of the biggest obstacles to the imperialists’ plans for the African continent. The poor, labouring peoples of the African countries, who expelled French imperialism from their lands with the direct help of Russia, and indirect help of China, are the peoples who know and express this fact best.
Did USSR Become A Thing Of The Past? Why Is The USA Attacking Russia?
All these concrete facts and conditions constitute important reasons why the imperialists want to attack Russia, despite the powers in the Kremlin, which wants to get on “good terms” with them, compromise with them and even join NATO. But we have not yet touched upon the most important reason, the decisive reason for the imperialist aggression against Russia. That reason is this: despite the bloody counter-revolution of 1991-93 and the significant restoration of capitalism, imperialists, first and foremost the USA, do not believe that socialism in Russia has been completelyuprooted. We will give evidence of this.
But first, we must emphasise the following: Whether the USA and its imperialist followers are mistaken in these beliefs and thoughts is not important for now. What is important is that they have this belief and that it motivates them to attack Russia in the first place.
They believe that socialism in Russia can be completely, uprooted from the life, culture, language, literature and art, habits, and aspirations of the people to disappear without a trace only through the dismemberment and destruction of Russia as a state.
The imperialists, unlike their henchmen, are neither fools nor slackers. They are accustomed to “taking the bull by the horns”; they leave nothing to chance. That is why, unlike the social-chauvinists, who believe more than anyone else and before anyone else that socialism in the former Soviet territories has been consigned to history, the imperialists cannot rest until they see Russia disintegrate and disappear as a state.
If the social-chauvinists who make up the “ECA” want proof, let them look at the article entitled “Preparing for the Final Collapse of the Soviet Union and the Dissolution of the Russian Federation.”
Korkut Boratav explains the importance of this article in “Sol Haber,” the organ of the TKP, which hosted the “ECA” meeting:
“In the CIA, in the Pentagon, such texts are kept away from casual observers as ‘top secret‘documents. This Policy Note, on the other hand, bears the signature of Luke Coffey, a senior fellow at Hudson, and is publicly available.
The Hudson Institute’s track record, however, suggests that the document should be taken seriously. It is a neo-con organisation founded in 1960 by Herman Kahn, a major contributor to the US nuclear war doctrine… It is closely aligned with the Republican Party.
The views in the aforementioned Policy Note are in line with the intentions of Biden, who called for ‘regime change’ in Russia after the war in Ukraine. It probably also sheds light on the current, functional scenarios of the US state institutions.”
The article begins with the following paragraph:
“The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the resignation of Mikhail Gorbachev as president of the Soviet Union in 1991 marked the beginning of the collapse of the USSR, but not the collapse itself. Although the legal personality of the USSR ceased to exist after 1991, the collapse of the USSR is still ongoing today. The two Chechen wars, the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008, the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, the on-off border conflicts between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, and the Second Karabakh War between Armenia and Azerbaijan in 2020 are just a few examples. The Soviet Union is still collapsing today.”
That is to say, it is irrelevant whether this is actually the case or not―the US does not believe that the USSR has finally collapsed. It sees the problem as a process and thinks that the “process of collapse” is continuing. But this process is not over and Russia’s defeat in Ukraine (taking Russia’s defeat as a certainty) will only be the second stage of the process, but still not its end.
The article continues with the following prediction:
“Future historians, however, are likely to describe Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 as the most important, if not the last, moment in the collapse of the Soviet Union. We do not know when the war in Ukraine will end, but it will probably mark the dissolution of the Russian Federation (the legal successor to the Soviet Union) as it is known today. It is undeniable that Russia’s economy has suffered a major blow, its military capacity has been destroyed and its influence in the regions where it once held sway has diminished.”
There is a lovely proverb in Turkish; “the hungry chicken dreams that it is in the feed shed.” The goals listed in the article as “predictions” do not go beyond the dreams of a hungry chicken. We know that the US and all other imperialist states pin all their hopes on a decisive defeat of Russia in the war. The authors of the policy note have the same hopes. It is not our business to make predictions about the future of the war. But we can say, at least for the time being, to the chagrin of the social chauvinist “ECA” community, the following: The war is not going at all according to the imperialists’ wishes. Fascist Ukraine is being defeated―and we say “for the time being” with caution.
It is true that the war between Russia and the NATO-US-UK-EU imperialists―not to mention the jackals around the big tigers―is a turning point in history. The Leninists made and explained this determination on the very second day of the war. However, this break will not be in the direction the imperialists hope for, that the USSR will be buried in history, but in the opposite direction! We see the signs of it everywhere.
To avoid misunderstandings, we must also say the following: Our words should not be taken to suggest that the USSR will be revived. The USSR, as a product of certain historical conditions, was an example of one form of socialism. It would not be correct to say in advance what the new form will be like. On the contrary, we have no doubt that socialism will flourish on the territory of the USSR again and in a much stronger form than before. We say this not as an expression of “faith,” but in the sense that all traces of socialism have not and cannot be erased from the territory of the USSR, whereas the process is now beginning to reverse itself.
All the developments we are witnessing now are the practical realisation of the ideas put forward by Engels in “The Role of Force inHistory.” Force is being defeated by economic development in the forward evolution of history. That is all.
We can now come to the most summarised answer to our question in the subtitle. The USSR did not and could not become history. The attacks on Russia by the US and other imperialists aim to bring this process, which they consider unfinished, to an end.
The exploitation of Russia’s natural resources, raw materials, and other riches certainly whet the imperialists’ appetite. But this is not even worth mentioning when compared to the great goal of destroying socialism without a trace.
Imperialism and the Fascist Movement
These same general conditions of the imperialist-capitalist system explain why the imperialist states, which boast of being the “cradle of democracy,” organise neo-nazi fascists in Europe and religious fascists in Asia and elsewhere all over the world. There is a direct link between imperialism, monopoly capitalism, and fascism―not just an indirect one. This is known and we assume that the parties forming the “ECA,” which are “communist” in name and social chauvinist in reality, would also accept this characterization.
To put it in a way that the component parties of the “ECA” can understand, you can no longer explain the movements and policies of the US, UK, and EU imperialists without pointing to fascism and the fascist movement. The reverse is also true. You cannot explain the existence and actions of fascists, neo-nazis, and religious fascist gangs, in today’s common parlance, without pointing to the US and the imperialists around them and analysing their relationship.
In other words, if there is a struggle against US imperialism or any other imperialist state, if there is a war, it is inevitable that it is a war or struggle against fascism. This is a trend that results from the general conditions in which imperialism finds itself.
We can see concrete expressions of this in the ongoing struggles and wars against these imperialists in Syria, Libya, Africa, Iraq, Ukraine, etc. Of course, we take into account that each country has its own specific conditions. In Ukraine, the force actually fighting on the field on behalf of the imperialists is the Ukrainian army as well as the neo-nazi fascists who are intertwined with this army. It is almost impossible to separate them.
We are witnessing a different form of this in Syria and other forms in Iraq and Africa. Nevertheless, all these examples have one thing in common. This is that in almost all cases fascist gangs are being mobilised for war together with the imperialist armies, often in front of them. This intertwining also gives the war against imperialism an antifascist character and vice versa.
It is known that in Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, in countless countries of the African continent, the imperialists themselves organise, arm, and provide all kinds of material and technical support to religious fascist murderers such as al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and ISIS. It has been proven beyond dispute that the fascists called neo-nazis in Europe, the Banderites, were organised, trained, and armed by the secret services of the European imperialist states and then sent to Ukraine.
The social-chauvinists who gathered under the name of “ECA” have not a word to say on this subject. Since they have nothing to say, the only thing they can do is to portray the presence of fascists in Ukraine as something small and insignificant and to divert the attention of the world proletariat and working people.
In article 6 of their statement, they do this as follows:
“Although the Russian leadership claims that its main objective in continuing the war is the denazification of the region and aims to break the siege by the Western bloc, it is clear that the main motivation behind is the protection of the interests of the Russian capitalist class in the wider region.”
They present their abstract claims as evidence like this, whereas they should be presenting concrete evidence.
It is true that “the Russian leadership claims that its main objective in continuing the war is the denazification of the region and aims to break the siege by the Western bloc,” and it says this at every opportunity. What concrete evidence do you have to refute this? Does the Russian leadership not send neo-nazis to their ancestors in the sky, but protect them? Instead of producing evidence, the “ECA” offers as evidence the empty phrase. “No, the Russian leadership is motivated by something else.” When a person has nothing to say on a serious issue, he tries to fill the pathetic void of ideas with such words.
Our century, as recognised by NATO, is the “century of uprisings”; it is a revolutionary age. Since the Seattle uprising in 1999, revolts and uprisings against imperialism, fascism, and capitalism have not stopped. In order to stop this decadent process, US imperialism launched a “Global Civil War” against the proletariat and working peoples of the world with the “Twin Towers” provocation on 11 September 2001. (Trump recently announced that the destruction of the Twin Towers was the work of the USA).
In this global civil war, fascist gangs are one of the most important military instruments of the imperialists. The imperialist states and their secret services could continue the global civil war by using these fascist gangs against the working class and popular masses. And so they did. We know that the murderous hordes called Al-Qaeda are US-made and were organised to fight against the Soviets. ISIS was also organised by the US, British and French imperialists. The Muslim Brotherhood gang, which is active in the Middle East, in Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and many other Arab countries, was the work of the British imperialists against communism decades ago. Not to mention Al-Shabaab, which carries out bloody operations on behalf of imperialism on the African continent. The revolutionary democratic forces of Africa have realised that to get rid of this scourge, it is necessary to expel French imperialism from Africa and they are now doing just that.
It has just been revealed that the fascist party AfD in Germany has been holding meetings with the German intelligence services. In Ukraine, the Bandera fascists, which the social chauvinist “ECA” tries to downplay in order to deceive the people, have taken over the entire state, are organised and armed as a separate army, and exist as an officially recognised force intertwined with the Ukrainian army. Bandera has been declared a “national hero” by the fascist government in Ukraine.
We will not deal with how and what massacres were committed by the Bandera fascists under the banner of Hitler’s fascism. It is enough to know that the head of these fascists, Semyon Bandera, is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Soviet Jews. This rogue fascist, whom the “ECA” never uttered a word about, collaborated with Hitler’s army against the USSR and fought against the Red Army.
Another concrete fact, which the “ECA” people do not mention in a single word, is that the children, grandchildren, and followers of the Bandera fascist came to power in 2014 through the “Maydan coup” organised by the USA at a cost of 5 billion dollars. Neither “ECA” nor anyone else can explain the Ukraine-Russia war or the conditions that prepared it without mentioning the US-organised “Maidan coup.”
Instead of discussing these conditions that led to the war, the “Communist” parties, which have assembled under the name of “ECA” tell us the following tale:
“The war being waged on the territory of Ukraine, is not an anti-imperialist or anti-fascist war, as claimed by the leadership of capitalist Russia and its apologists, a fact that our parties have pointed out from the beginning and has been proven many times in the past two years.”
What has been “proved many times in two years”? That this war is not antifascist? Or, on the contrary, that this war is being waged on the Ukrainian side by fascists themselves, that the Ukrainian fascists in the war are day by day revealing their real fascist identity? Not only Ukrainian fascists, but also European fascists, even Latin American fascists―Colombian fascists, for example, have taken part in this war, as evidenced by the flags and symbols they carry and the tattoos they have carved on their bodies.
A quote from a news item by the organ of the TKP, which is a component of the “ECA” group, summarizes this point best. The news is accompanied by a photograph. The title of the article is “Neo-Nazis in Ukraine: ‘Our goal is fascist dictatorship’” A short part of the news report is as follows: “According to a report published in Global Research, neo-Nazis from countries such as Sweden, Bulgaria, and Hungary have arrived in Ukraine and are organising troops to fight against the eastern regions of Ukraine.
“The Swedes fighting in the Azov battalion, which has flags inspired by Nazi symbols, state that their goal is a ‘white Ukraine.’ The Swedish media organisation The Local reports the following about the battalion, which includes four Swedish militants:
“‘Azov is a special unit of about 300 soldiers, including volunteers from Europe. Although it was set up by the Ukrainian government, it is not part of the Ukrainian army and is led by ultra-nationalists. Anton Shekhotsov, a Ukrainian political scientist who researches ultra-nationalist movements, emphasises that these groups are not fighting for a democratic Ukraine, but for a fascist dictatorship.’
“This confirms the existence of neo-Nazi elements, which mainstream Western media outlets have ignored since the beginning of the crisis in Ukraine, and that these groups are working with the US-backed Kiev government and the military” (Sol Haber 02.08.2014)
This article was written ten years ago after the fascist Maidan coup. Imagine the situation now! Need we say more? So, according to these “communists,” the war against those who fight for a “white Ukraine” carrying fascist flags and symbols, who “fight not for a democratic Ukraine, but for a fascist dictatorship,” against gangs, not just a few individuals or groups, but gangs gathered from all over the world, who have become a full component of the Ukrainian army, who are supported and armed by the USA, who leads them to war against Russia and the Russian population in Ukraine, is not antifascist.
Well, if the war against a fascist state, its army, and its fascist government is not an anti-fascist war, please, “communists” of the “ECA” tell us how and against whom an anti-fascist war is fought.
These communist parties advise us to remain neutral in the war between gangs fighting in the service of the USA and other imperialists, for their interests, under fascist flags and symbols, on the one hand, and soldiers carrying red flags on tanks and using the symbols of communism on their uniforms, on the other. Why? Because they have said from the beginning that this is not an anti-fascist war! No, such nonsense, such rubbish, cannot be out of ignorance; it can only be out of love for being a servant to the bourgeoisie.
There is no doubt that this war is an anti-fascist, anti-imperialist war. In the two years that have passed, this fact has been proved day in and day out by hundreds and thousands of events and facts.
Donetsk And Lugansk People’s Republics
Just as a criminal turns his head away from the scene of a crime, the parties united under the name “ECA” turn their heads away and whistle about the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. There is not a word about these two People’s Republics in their statements. However, you cannot say a single intelligent word about the Russian-Ukrainian war without discussing the uprising of the people of Donbas against the fascist Maidan coup and the declaration of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics on 7 May 2014 as a result of this uprising.
They cannot do this, and that is precisely why, instead of establishing the relation between the general conditions of imperialism in our epoch and the uprising of the working and labouring classes of Donbas against the fascist Maidan Coup and the proclamation of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics as a result of this uprising, they resort to this tautology:
“5. The protagonists of the war are not the people of the two countries but their capitalist classes. Presenting the war as a war between Ukraine and Russia obscures the real actors of the war and makes it difficult to understand its class character. The ongoing war is being waged between the Russian capitalist class and its allies on the one hand and the Ukrainian capitalist class, the USA, the EU and NATO on the other hand.”
Even the imperialists occasionally admit that the Russian-Ukrainian war did not start in February 2022, but in fact in 2014, yet the “ECA” does not say a word about it. Why is that? The reason is simple: Because if they mentioned these two People’s Republics, they would at least feel obliged, because of the word “communist” in their name, to take the side of these two People’s Republics which have a socialist orientation and are led by communists. Instead, they find it best to look the other way and ignore these two People’s Republics. These so-called “materialists” think that by ignoring them, the People’s Republics will also disappear.
However, one of the most important, albeit not the only reason for the Russian-Ukrainian war, was the declaration of these two People’s Republics in the Donbas region, led by the communists. For the imperialists, who had been wondering whether the USSR had been buried in history, the fact that these two People’s Republics had raised the flag of socialism in the territory of the former USSR was a nightmare that they could not bear.
Fascist Ukraine, with the unlimited support of the imperialists, put all its strength into action to destroy these two People’s Republics. The fascist Ukrainian government mobilised all the fascist forces at its disposal, released fascists in prisons, and put them at the head of the fascist Azov battalions. Here are some words of Andriy Biletsky, known as the “White Leader,” who was put in charge of Azov:
“The goal of the struggle of our generation is to create the ‘Third Reich’, Greater Ukraine. The historic task of our nation in this critical century is to lead the white peoples of the world to organise a final crusade for their existence and to lead this crusade against inhumanity led by the Sami…
The migrant problem is indeed a key issue. Our goal is to destroy everything that destroys our people. As you know, you can bring back everything―the economy, order in the streets, demography, a strong army and navy, nuclear weapons―but the one thing you cannot bring back is the purity of blood… .”
Meanwhile, the imperialists were stalling, trying to buy time for the fascist Ukrainian army and government to prepare for war. The Kremlin did not want to burn bridges with them and dreamed of reconciliation and coexistence with the MINSK agreements. The imperialists admitted years later, after it was too late, through the signatories of the agreement, the German Merkel and the French François Hollande, that they had concluded the MINSK Agreement not for a real ceasefire between the two People’s Republics and the fascist Ukrainian government, but to eliminate the two People’s Republics and to buy time to prepare for a war against Russia.
For eight years the imperialists, especially the US, Britain, Germany, and France, have been preparing Ukraine for the destruction of these two People’s Republics and for a war against Russia. The Kremlin, hoping to reconcile with the imperialists and to maintain all kinds of relations with them, neither recognised the People’s Republics nor supported them openly during this period. As a result of the pressure of the Russian people, it was content to give limited, underhand support to the two People’s Republics.
The Kremlin rejected the calls of the leaders of the People’s Republics (and the CPRF) to intervene against the violent aggression of the fascist Ukrainian state. It accommodated the stalling of Merkel and Hollande. On 24 February, in the first days of the war, the Leninist Party stated that if Russia was to be criticised, it should not be criticised for starting a war against Ukraine, but for waiting until now. Indeed, at the end of the second year of the war, Putin proved the rightness and correctness of the Leninist Party’s criticism when he said: “The only thing we can regret is that Russia did not start active action in Ukraine earlier, thinking that we were dealing with honourable people.”
In Donbas, it was not only the fascist Ukrainian state, its army, and neo-Nazis fighting with the working class, labouring peoples, revolutionary forces, and communists of Donbas. On the contrary, while all the neo-nazis and fascist forces of the world were carried to war by the secret services of the imperialist states to the ranks of the fascist Ukrainian army, the revolutionary forces of the world, revolutionary internationalists, and communists also rushed to war in the ranks of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics alongside the people of Donbas. While this is a tangible, proven fact, the “ECA” groups with the word “communist” in their names can say the following words with great shamelessness:
“7. One of the most important elements showing the class character of this war is anti-communism, which is being intentionally raised in the region.”
There is no need to dwell on the anti-communism of fascist Ukraine. Anti-communism is the basic line of the Ukrainian government, army, and forces; this is known.
But can it be said about the other side, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics; moreover, can it be said about the Russian Army, whose coat patch is still the Sickle-Hammer as it was in the USSR period, where in some places there are fighting soldiers carrying red flags on tanks using sickle and hammer crests? The military forces of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics are fighting on the front line and are playing a not-insignificant role in the war. Without a word about all this, the “ECA” equates the fascist Ukrainian forces with the Russian side. What better service can be rendered to the imperialists?
What is the basis for the allegations that the “leadership of Russia” (in the words of the “ECA”) is anti-communist? They do not state it explicitly, but we know that they are based on some of Putin’s words. It is true that Putin criticised Lenin on the Ukraine issue, the October Revolution, and the question of self-determination. But what does this mean? Putin is not a communist. Everyone knows this and he himself says so. But even if Putin is not a communist, the fact that he is trying to create a “hysteria” against communism can only be the ravings of social-chauvinists who want to curry favour with their imperialist masters. In Russia, communist parties are not banned, nor is there the slightest restriction on the symbols of communism. We know that the emblem of the Russian army remains the hammer and sickle. We also know that all statues, including Lenin’s mausoleum, and all symbols and values belonging to the USSR period have not been touched and cannot be touched.
Social chauvinists will not like it, but we know that Putin jealously claims the victory of the USSR over fascist Germany; that the teaching of books and literature of the USSR period has been re-introduced into the school curriculum; that it is forbidden by law to belittle the victory of the USSR, that is Stalin’s victory over Hitler’s fascism; that the “Bologna system” imposed by the imperialists in education has been abandoned; that the statue of Fidel Castro erected in Russia was inaugurated by Putin himself; that there are very strong relations between the current Cuban leadership and Putin, etc. Why don‘t the “ECA,” who claim they seek to determine the true class character of the war with an objective evaluation (!), never mention these facts?
In this case, let us ask once again, what can come out of Putin’s words about Lenin? Absolutely nothing. It would be better to end this chapter by quoting the words of Engels, the greatest dialectician known to history alongside Marx.
“Suppose these people imagine that they can seize power; what is the harm? If they have made the hole that will collapse the dam, the flood itself will soon tear them from their illusions. (…) Look at Bismarck, who became a revolutionary against his will, and at Gladstone, who finally came to blows with the Tsar whom he worshipped.” (Letter to Vera Zasulic, 23 April 1885).
Is The Russian Bourgeoisie In Favour Or Against The War?
According to the “ECA,” who show everything upside down to please their imperialist masters and who do not hesitate to falsify the facts, it is an indisputable fact that the Russian bourgeoisie is behind the war. Why? Because Russia is “imperialist”; therefore this war is an inter-imperialist war. Well, once you characterise Russia as imperialist, the rest comes like a thread; there is no need to even undertake a “concrete analysis” of THIS war. This is the whole “scientific” view of the “ECA” on the war.
In real life, we see the opposite. The Russian bourgeoisie or so-called “oligarchs” are not in favour of this war but against it. Some of them, as we shall see an example of in a moment, have made very harsh statements against Russia after taking refuge with the imperialists. Some of them kept silent out of fear and tried to protect the wealth that they stole. Here is the news that will serve as an example for those who fled to the imperialist countries and said all sorts of things against Russia:
“54-year-old billionaire Oleg Tinkov, founder of Tinkoff Bank with 20 million customers, announced that he renounced his Russian citizenship. Tinkov said, ‘I cannot be associated with a fascist country that kills innocent people. It is a shame for me to continue to hold this passport in my hands.’”
We trust the reader’s patience and provide the rest of the article, which is also relevant. It continues as follows:
“I cannot be associated with a fascist country that starts a war with its peaceful neighbour and kills innocent people. It is a shame for me to continue to hold this passport. I hope that other Russian business people will follow my example, which will weaken the Putin regime and its economy. And eventually defeat him. I hate Putin’s Russia, but I love all Russians who openly oppose this crazy war!”
We do not have a complete list, but as far as we have been able to determine, the names of the “oligarchs” on the Forbes billionaire list who have fled Russia due to the war are as follows: Timur Turlov, Duben Vardanyan, Yuriy Milner, Nikolay Storonskiy, Oleg Tinkov, Igor Makarov, Vasiliy Anisimov. These are thieves who have stolen enough to enter the Forbes billionaires list. To these must be added oligarchs like Abromovich, and figures like the Chubays, who were primarily responsible for the dismantling of the Soviet Union and the organisation of the theft and plunder.
These are the thieves who directly and openly oppose Russia’s declaration of war against the imperialists, and who, as soon as they have so determined their allegiance, take their leave in the imperialist countries. Then there are the thieving “oligarchs” who, although they do not support the war, do not openly make statements against it. These have remained in Russia and are now waiting patiently for the day when the storm will blow over and they will return to their old days of plunder. They oppose the war underhandedly and endeavour to prevent the government from taking economic and political measures against the haute bourgeoisie.
Now, the “ECA” might respond with a joke like this: Three trees do not make a forest! Or, if a few strands are missing from someone’s head, he will not be bald! No doubt, it is so. With one difference: if the trees continue to be planted and the hairs continue to fall, let the “ECA” members have no doubt, even the most bushy-haired will become bald; what started with the planting of three trees will become a forest after a while. It is a matter of process. Therefore, our suggestion to the “ECA” who regard the victory of capitalism in Russia as a fait accompli is that they should pay attention to the process of “recovery of stolen properties” in Russia, which started some time ago but is gaining momentum. It would be appropriate to give three examples to clear their minds.
The first example is a “nationalisation” that took place in early January this year. It reads as follows:
“A number of companies belonging to Alexei Hotin’s RusOil holding have been placed under trusteeship and placed under the control of Romimushchestvo (the Russian Property Administration). The Khotin affair is important; moreover, to some extent it is reminiscent of the intimidation of other oligarchs in the course of the liquidation of Khodorkovsky. Add to this the fact that at the end of the year the property of another oligarch, Alexander Klyachin, was seized in connection with Khotin. The reason given was tax debt.”
The second example is as follows:
“Roshim was appointed to the management of Metafraks Kemikals, the largest producer of formalin and methanol in Russia, whose 94.2% stake was nationalised last September on the grounds of corruption during the privatisation (i.e. theft and plunder) of the 90s. Last April, the Bashkir Soda Company (BKS) was de facto nationalised and Roshim was appointed to manage the 47% of the company’s shares that had been transferred to the Russian Real Estate Administration (Rosimushchestvo). The management of all major chemical enterprises in Southern Russia also seems to have been transferred to Roshim. Roshim was previously called “Russkiy Vodorod,” but was renamed Roshim by government decree last year. Moreover, last October Roshim took over the management of Nortek and YSZ Avia in Altai Krai. The former produces tyres for vehicles (including heavy vehicles); the latter is the only producer of aircraft tyres in Russia.”
And the third example:
“The Russian General Prosecutor’s Office’s application for the transfer (nationalisation) of the assets of the Chelyabin Electrometallurgical Combine (CEMC) (renamed Kompaniya Etalon last July) from ‘illegal ownership’ to state ownership has been accepted; the parent company CEMC and its subsidiaries Serov Ammunition Plant and Kuznets Ferroalloys have become state property. The prosecutor’s application had been justified on the grounds that the 1992 privatisation was illegal. In a meeting with the governor of Chelyabin oblast in the middle of this month, Putin said that harmful production would be moved out of the city and the plants would be transferred to the local government. In the Forbes 2021 list, ÇEMK was ranked among the 200 largest companies in Russia with an annual revenue of 49 billion rubles. The enterprises seized by ÇEMK were symbols of Stalin-era industrialisation, the foundations of which were laid in 1929. Yuri Antipov, the boss of the TECK, and his family were 170th in the list of the 200 richest people in Russia in 2021, with $700 million. As far as I understand, the CEMK owns not only Chelyabin, but also numerous other companies from Vladivostok to Yamal. Interfax has listed some of the nationalisation cases that have had a positive outcome in recent years: Rolf, Voljskiy orgsintez, Uralbiofabrm, Metafraks Kemikals, TGK-2, Rus-Oil, Kaliningrad Port, Konti-Rus, Vyatich, etc.”
There are many examples, but there is no need to repeat them. Suffice it to say that this process, led by the Federal Prosecutor General’s Office, continues to accelerate. The source of this information on “nationalisation” is Hazal Yalın, who lives in Russia and we understand that she follows the developments and processes in Russia carefully and day by day. There is not the slightest reason to doubt their accuracy.
Nevertheless, all these examples and explanations of thieving oligarchs may not have been enough to convince the “ECA” social chauvinists. In order to be sure, we must also look at the question from the point of view of the relations between imperialist finance capital and the Russian bourgeoisie.
When we look at the problem from this point of view, we seethe following: The Russian bourgeoisie has no other way to develop and accelerate its capital accumulation than to join the world market and the financial system of imperialist capital. Not only the Russian bourgeoisie, but the bourgeoisie of any country in the world cannot flourish and develop without being integrated into the system of imperialist finance capital. The war has destroyed the bridges between the Russian bourgeoisie and imperialist finance capital. The yachts, bank accounts, and fortunes of some of them were confiscated; their activities in other countries of the world were eliminated, their trade was either banned or made impossible, etc. Imperialist monopolies, banks, and financial capital subjugate the capital groups, the capital class, not only in their own countries, but anywhere in the world, and eliminate all conditions of development except coming under their domination.
That is why the Russian bourgeoisie opposed any war with Ukraine from the very beginning and why they opposed the uprising of the working and labouring classes of Donbas, which would pave the way for such a war, and the subsequent recognition and support of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. The interests of the Russian bourgeoisie lie not in war with the imperialist states but in close and intensive cooperation with them.
There is no need to dwell on the other articles of the “ECA” declaration that contain nothing more than generalised statements. The possibility of the “global civil war” launched by the imperialist states against the working class, labouring peoples, and revolutionary forces of the world turning into an all-out inter-state war is increasing day by day. The imperialist states, which could not find what they hoped from the global civil war, could not win the war; on the contrary, witnessing the rise of revolts, uprisings, and social revolutions, they are now provoking a war that will drag humanity into a total catastrophe.
This is the meaning of French President Macron’s call to send troops to Ukraine to fight against Russia; the recently-deciphered plans of the high-ranking officers of the German army to blow up the Crimean Bridge, and the continuous shipments of weapons and equipment to the fascist Ukrainian government.
Will a total world war break out? It is impossible to give a definite “yes” or “no” answer to this question. But we can say the following: Today’s conditions are quite different from those of 1914 and 1945. We live in a revolutionary era. The imperialist-capitalist system is in the process of collapse. We face revolutionary mass actions, revolts, uprisings, and revolutionary attempts supported by millions of people every day.
The conditions of imperialism and the war have matured the social reformist boil, transforming it into social chauvinism. The emergence of the boil of social chauvinism at a time when the world proletariat and labouring peoples need revolutionary communist parties more than ever will, of course, lead to negative consequences for the revolutionary communist movement. However, we cannot undo what has been done. The Belgian communists have shown what must be done by expelling their social chauvinist leaders from the party.
Let us not forget that “the development of the proletariat everywhere passes through civil war”(Engels, Letter to August Bebel, 28.10.1882).
