Almost 4 Years Since the Russian Imperialist Invasion of Ukraine

For almost four years now, the fierce large-scale Russian imperialist aggression against the people of Ukraine has continued. Over nearly four years, the Ukrainian people have put up a heroic resistance to this inhumane attack. The “second largest army in the world” of a country of 140 million people, armed with nuclear weapons and a powerful military-industrial complex, has carried out an unprecedented act of aggression and occupied a considerable part of the territory of a non-nuclear, very weak, and dependent country of some 40 million people and a peripheral capitalist economy.

This imperialist attack, which began in full force on February 24, 2022, has become a serious and unprecedented challenge for the entire global socialist movement in terms of the application of a Marxist dialectical method to analyze social phenomena. It has also become a key point for testing the authenticity of today’s revolutionary forces in their anti-imperialism and their support for the national liberation struggles of oppressed peoples and victims of imperialist aggression. In one way or another, the Russian invasion drew a dividing line between left-wing forces around the world.

On the Nature of the Russo-Ukrainian War

From the very beginning of the large-scale Russian aggression, the International Socialist League outlined its principled position in a series of political statements and articles.

The war in Ukraine combines, from its very beginning, two parallel processes. On the one hand, Ukraine’s just defense of its sovereignty and the Ukrainian people’s right to self-determination and independent development; and on the other, the compounding of inter-imperialist tensions and contradictions between the NATO powers and the emerging imperialisms of Russia and China. The lack of understanding of this dual nature of the war underlies the confusion that prevails among a considerable portion of the left.

The campist left, neo-Stalinists and certain marginal Trotskyist organizations openly support Putin’s imperialist Russia, taking advantage of the masses’ hatred of US imperialism and NATO. Such a position deserves the rejection of any consistent revolutionary, because, whatever the characterization of the current war, nothing can justify aligning with a capitalist power that oppresses peoples and with a regime as reactionary as Russia’s. To justify themselves, some go so far as to deny the capitalist nature of the Russian regime; others spread the myth that Russia, not Ukraine, is the main victim of the war. All these organizations act as transmission belts for the lies emanating from Moscow’s enormous propaganda apparatus.

The objective of the Russian imperialist invasion is to subjugate Ukraine, return it to its zone of influence, deprive it of even its relative independence, and seize as much of its territory as possible. From the first days of the Russian aggression, the International Socialist League has clearly and categorically declared that the working and popular masses of Ukraine have the full right to defend themselves and respond militarily to the occupiers. This is a just war in defense of the Ukrainian people’s right to self-determination. Therefore, revolutionary socialists are obliged to support this national liberation movement, doing everything in our power to defeat the invader.

Our support for the Ukrainian resistance has nothing to do with support for the Ukrainian bourgeois power or Western imperialism, which, taking advantage of the extremely grave situation of the Ukrainian people, is trying to consolidate its influence in Ukraine. Our military support for the Ukrainian resistance does not imply any political backing or collaboration with Zelensky’s neoliberal and anti-working-class government. We support the military resistance from a class position, maintaining a policy of independence and delimiting the broad popular resistance movement from the Ukrainian bourgeoisie.

This position distinguishes us from campist and pacifist positions, and also from those who minimize the war’s role in the inter-imperialist struggle for the division of the world, such as the mainstream of social democratic parties, Western trade unions, and sectors of the left that turn a blind eye to NATO’s expansion and militarization programs. Some even went so far as to support NATO intervention and expansion and sanctions against Russia, all of which are part of the New Cold War and militarization. We reject this adaptation to the Western bourgeoisie, especially in Western imperialist countries, where it constitutes a form of political support for their “own” bourgeoisie’s struggle for the division of the world.

However, this does not alter the just nature of Ukrainian self-defense. If the working class and revolutionaries, both in Ukraine and worldwide, are not prepared to fight against the Russian imperialist invasion, they will hand a powerful political weapon to the Ukrainian bourgeoisie and strengthen illusions in “democratic” imperialism by refusing to support legitimate national self-defense.

The True Interests of Ukraine’s “Western Partners”

The current imperialist system exists with its complex dialectic of unity and struggle of opposites, which coexist in all their complexity. The intensification of inter-imperialist contradictions tends to break down any manifestation of unity and leads to the creation of competitive alliances and realignments. And since all the world’s great powers—the US and China, but also the Western European powers, the EU, Russia, and Japan—at least for now wish to avoid direct confrontation, this includes various manifestations of imperialist unity. This unity is strengthened the greater the unity of the working class in its efforts to destroy capitalism and the more world imperialism fears the threat of a qualitative and global escalation of its struggles.

At the very beginning of the large-scale Russian aggression, the countries of Western imperialism attempted to remove the Ukrainian leadership from the country to neutralize any attempt to organize resistance. However, it was precisely the grassroots popular resistance of the Ukrainian people to the Russian occupation, and not the actions of Zelensky’s bourgeois leadership or its “partners” in the United States and Western Europe, that became the key and decisive factor in halting the Russian blitzkrieg (a sudden and powerful lightning war) in the spring of 2022. It was precisely this widespread popular resistance that forced Western imperialism, towards the summer and autumn of 2022, to begin supplying arms and financial aid to Ukraine.

In the first years of the war, Western imperialist powers wanted to take the chance to weaken Russian imperialism. They turned to arm Ukraine and imposed massive economic sanctions against Russian, not seen against an imperialist power since the second world war. They say the chance to humiliate Russian and force it to a second rate imperialist state. At the same time also wanted a direct military confrontation with a nuclear power (which would have been a reactionary imperialist war on both side) and the fall of Putin’s regime, since this would destabilize the entire region – including to open the possibility of national liberation struggles and the dynamic for the struggle for our social and democratic rights and for advancing a socialist perspective.

Therefore, this aid, of course, has been and continues to be limited and steadily declining, especially given the declared openness of US imperialism toward Russian imperialism under the Trump administration. As for the EU, stark internal contrasts exist regarding its stance toward Russia: between hostile imperialisms or powers, such as France and Poland; openly pro-Russian governments, such as Hungary and Slovakia; and governments with intermediate positions, such as Italy. Trump’s shift toward Putin tends to deepen these contradictions within the EU.

It is also worth remembering that Ukraine became so militarily weak after 1994, when, under simultaneous and coordinated pressure from Russian and Western imperialism, it was forced to sign the so-called “Budapest Memorandum.” According to this document, all nuclear weapons existing on Ukrainian territory were transferred to Russia, as were all carriers of such weapons (long-range missiles and strategic aviation aircraft). It is precisely those missiles and aircraft that Ukraine handed over to Russia at the time that are today destroying the Ukrainian people and their resistance.

The main idea and key to understanding US and European military aid to Ukraine is their intention to supply weapons exactly to the extent necessary to prevent Ukraine from losing the war and, at the same time, prevent it from winning. Since Trump became president, there is no common Ukraine policy of Western imperialism. Donald Trump’s team openly and repeatedly declares that its key task is to destroy the military-political alliance between Russia and China and to bring Russia over to its side. It is clear that this can only be achieved at the cost of making concessions to Putin, that is, at the cost of partitioning Ukraine and occupying a significant portion of its territory. Donald Trump may repeatedly say that he is “disappointed in Putin,” but his actions show exactly the opposite.

The Transformation of Global Imperialism

As mentioned above, this imperialist aggression has become a kind of litmus test for all actors in the international left to define their position on this situation. Their reflections, application of the Marxist method, and the moral and ethical paradigms with which they assess what is happening have proven to be very diverse, and sometimes even diametrically opposed. Once again, the Marxist axiom that social consciousness often fails to keep pace with the evolving social being has been confirmed.

The qualitative transformation and growing complexity of the imperialist world, as well as the emergence of new, young and aggressive imperialisms, such as Russia and China, have unfortunately not been adequately understood or analyzed by a considerable portion of the left. Traditional and largely obsolete forms and clichés of analysis have been applied to the drastically changing world situation and the sharpening inter-imperialist conflicts.

We, the International Socialist League, have never denied, nor do we deny, the predominant role of US imperialism globally, a role that still prevails. But failure to recognize the dynamics of its transformation and its notable weakening on a global scale leads to falling into self-deception, misinterpreting, and disorienting the international working class.

The withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, the displacement of French military forces by Russian armed units in North and Central Africa, the openly pro-Russian foreign policy of two NATO members—Hungary and Slovakia—as well as the completely independent foreign policy of another NATO member, Turkey; the total impotence of US imperialism in the face of the situation in Venezuela and Cuba, along with the growing prominence of China and Russia in those regions: these are factors that still require a thorough analysis in all their complexity and dynamics. However, it is already completely evident that both US imperialism and Western imperialism as a whole, as well as its political-military bloc, NATO, are going through difficult times and are considerably weakened.

But NATO responded by expanding into Sweden and Finland, increasing military spending to 5%. A coalition led by Britain and France is at least attempting to prop up western and central Ukraine and defend against Russia. However, all these attempts to stem the relative decline of the Western powers are hampered by economic and social pressures. It is clear that US imperialism and the Western European powers are going through difficult times and are weakened. While NATO has increased its budget since 2022, the alliance itself remains in crisis as a result of the growing divisions between the US and the Western European powers.

On the counterrevolutionary nature and manifestations of “campism”

In the current situation, any manifestation of “campist” analysis within the left takes on features that are truly alarming for the development of the autonomy and political independence of the global working class. De facto support for Russian or Chinese imperialism under the guise of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” or within the framework of the traditional “anti-Americanism” of many sectors of the left, is not only categorically unacceptable to us and our analysis, but is also extremely damaging to the prospects of the left in general.

The Stalinists’ reaction to the armed aggression of Russian imperialism was predictable, and their “campism” is well known. But what is truly discouraging is that a number of organizations claiming the political heritage of Trotskyism have ended up in the same camp as the Stalinists. We will not list these organizations—they are well-known, and there are enough examples in every country. But regardless of the arguments with which they try to cover up their theoretical and political capitulation to “campism” they all share one common feature: the complete denial of the Ukrainian people’s right to independent and autonomous development, as well as their de facto participation in Russian imperialist aggression.

In recent times, the central idea of this circumstantial sector of contemporary “campism” can be summed up in the following argument: “A genuine defensive and national liberation war is only possible when the proletariat has taken power and is led by a revolutionary party. If the proletariat is not in power in the country suffering imperialist aggression, any call for resistance will only benefit that country’s bourgeoisie and not its proletariat.” In other words, in practice, it is a call to renounce resistance in the face of imperialist aggression, disguised in an attractive guise of pseudo-Marxist rhetoric and with the abandonment of the Leninist principle of unconditional support for the right to self-determination and independent development of all the peoples of the world.

Internationalism in Action

For us, the International Socialist League, being truly internationalist means not turning a blind eye to any form of national oppression or to the national liberation struggles of peoples oppressed or attacked by imperialism, but rather supporting these struggles with all our strength.

We, revolutionary Marxists, understand the dialectical relationship between the national form of oppression and the primary form of oppression—that of a class and economic nature. But we also fully understand that proposing to workers that they fight exclusively for proletarian power and consciously lying to them by claiming that such power will automatically solve all the other problems inherent in the capitalist world—inequality, oppression, and exploitation—is tantamount to consciously disarming the proletarian masses.

It is like proposing to the Indians of the 19th century that they fight for proletarian power and not resist the aggression of the British Empire… To the Irish revolutionaries that they renounce resistance against the British occupiers under the pretext that the proletariat is not yet in power in Ireland… To the Polish revolutionaries of the 19th century that they stop resisting the Tsarist/Russian occupiers and direct all their fighting potential exclusively against their own Polish feudal lords (the szlachta)… To the Palestinian, Kurdish, Catalan, Basque, Western Saharan and many other revolutionaries that they renounce the slogans of self-determination and independence of their peoples on the grounds that a proletarian party does not yet govern in their countries… (edit)

We can smell the obvious imperial-chauvinist and pro-imperialist stench of that position.

Karl Marx, for his part, condemned “British rule in India” and supported the resistance of the Indian people in 1857, even when it did not develop under proletarian slogans and was led by the feudal caste elite. At no point did he call on Indians to turn their weapons against their Brahmins, refusing to resist the British occupiers. In Poland, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels also decisively and consistently supported the Polish uprisings against the Tsarist regime, instead of cynically urging the insurgents to “turn their weapons” against their own Polish feudal lords (the szlachta). As for Ireland, their position was equally consistent and analogous.

The fact is that our great classics knew how to clearly establish the priorities of the moment and analyzed all social processes from their internal logic and dynamics of development. For us, the International Socialist League, the conclusion is simple: class liberation cannot be achieved on a planetary scale as long as national oppression persists, as long as imperialist attacks against the legitimate rights and interests of the peoples fighting for their autonomy and independence continue.

Leon Trotsky’s theory and strategy of the Permanent Revolution are relevant to the case of Ukraine. The national bourgeoisie, insofar as it has been forced to resist the threat to its existence posed by Russian imperialism and colonialism, is incapable of and has no intention of achieving Ukrainian independence or meaningful sovereignty. Rather, it seeks to exchange Russian colonization of a part of the country for becoming a vassal state of Western imperialism. Only the working class can lead the struggle for national liberation and, in doing so, establish a workers’ republic.

The Lie and Truth of “Zimmerwald”

The latest attempt by “campism” to justify its support for Russian imperialist aggression is based on a profoundly false and hypocritical appeal to the heritage of the “Zimmerwald Left” of 1915–1917 and its slogans: “No war credits! No support for our governments in the imperialist war!”

But our false and anti-historical “campist” opponents deliberately forget that these absolutely correct slogans were directed by the Zimmerwaldians precisely at the proletariat of the warring imperialist powers.

However, in the context of Little Serbia, attacked by the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the analytical situation was completely different. In his famous work, The Collapse of the Second International (1915), Vladimir Lenin noted that “In the present war the national element is represented only by Serbia’s war against Austria… It is only in Serbia and among the Serbs that we can find a national-liberation movement of long standing, embracing millions, ‘the masses of the people’, a movement of which the present war of Serbia against Austria is a ‘continuation’. If this war were an isolated one, i.e., if it were not connected with the general European war, with the selfish and predatory aims of Britain, Russia, etc., it would have been the duty of all socialists to desire the success of the Serbian bourgeoisie — this is the only correct and absolutely inevitable conclusion to be drawn from the national element in the present war.”

And, as is well known, Lenin’s refusal to support Serbia was precisely related to the fact that, in 1914, Serbia had already joined the imperialist bloc of the Triple Entente, and that the main armies of the Entente (Great Britain, France, Russia, and Italy) were already directly (!) involved in military actions on European territory.

What do we observe, then, in the situation of Russian imperialist aggression against Ukraine, which entered its most vicious phase in 2022?

1. NATO persistently and systematically rejects Zelensky’s requests for Ukraine to join the alliance.

2. NATO consistently and deliberately avoids direct participation in the war against Russia.

3. NATO is significantly limiting its arms supplies to Ukraine, reducing them to a minimum.

It is absolutely evident that this combination of factors completely dismantles the entire “campist” mythology according to which NATO imperialism is waging a war against Russian imperialism.

The International Socialist League has pointed out on numerous occasions that, if Western imperialism as a whole and its political-military bloc, NATO, were to intervene directly in the war against Russian imperialism, the situation for our analysis would change radically, and we would immediately call for the defeat of both imperialist blocs and the transformation of the imperialist war into a world proletarian revolution. But for now, the prospect of NATO’s entry into the Russian-Ukrainian war seems unlikely and even minimal.

Long live the Ukrainian popular resistance! Defeat Russian imperialism!

It is completely clear to us that, for almost four years, it has been exclusively and solely the Ukrainian people and popular resistance that have been fighting Russian imperialism. And this resistance very often proves effective and tenacious not thanks to the Ukrainian bourgeois power, but in spite of it. For revolutionary Marxists, it is important to participate in this anti-imperialist resistance movement, not to help “our” bourgeoisie “free itself” from the attacks of the “alien” bourgeoisie, but precisely to tirelessly expose —in the course of this struggle, which is an inseparable part of the class struggle— “our” bourgeoisie before the working masses, denouncing its inconsistency and its betrayal of the true national interests.

Only by participating directly in the national liberation struggle of the popular masses against the foreign invader can the proletarian vanguard travel this arduous path, the path of unmasking its “own” bourgeoisie. Evading this struggle leads the proletarian vanguard to self-liquidation as a relevant political force.

Going forward, Ukraine may accept the terms of a “peace” imposed by imperialism for various reasons, including the US threat to cut off arms supplies. In response, Ukrainian workers must demand that any ceasefire occur without annexations, refusing to accept the loss of any captured territory, even if they cannot immediately recover it.

They must also recognize the right to self-determination of the republics of Crimea and Donbas, which can only be realized after the complete withdrawal of Russian occupation forces from these territories and not under the Ukrainian army. All residents of Crimea and Donbas who were living there before the war, the year of the Russian imperialist annexation of these territories, must have the right to participate in the respective referendums.

In Ukraine, restrictive and anti-democratic laws against the people must be repealed. Workers’ and residents’ committees must monitor the aid for reconstruction and its use. We, the workers, must demand the cancellation of Ukraine’s debt and confront privatizations and the handover of resources to the West. We must fight to expropriate imperialist and oligarchic enterprises without compensation and under workers’ control. We must confront the government and the extreme right, with the goal of seizing power for a revolutionary workers’ government. In Russia, where the magnitude of losses contrasts sharply with the meager profits amidst economic hardship, we are fostering protest and the beginning of a movement, rooted in the working class, youth, and oppressed minorities, to overthrow Putin.

The Ukrainian Socialist League

Our Ukrainian section, the USL, has carried out, under increasingly difficult conditions, the orientation of the ISL during the nearly four years of imperialist aggression. They have collaborated permanently in theoretical and political development, participating in international forums and seminars, and sending valuable information from the field.

They have seen several members of the union they led fall in combat and have allowed us to develop a solid campaign of solidarity with the resistance, while simultaneously combating the lies of Putin’s media apparatus and successfully confronting the polemics with the campism and the centrist left.

A fundamental part of our tasks as an international organization in the coming period is to assist in the development of the Ukrainian Socialist League and our work throughout Eastern Europe.

Adopted by the III World Congress of the ISL