💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › tristan-leoni-goodbye-life-goodbye-love.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 14:20:08. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Goodbye life, goodbye love…
Author: Tristan Leoni
Date: May 8th, 2022
Language: en
Topics: Ukraine, self-organization, Russia, NATO, war
Source: Retrieved on September 8th, 2022 from https://ddt21.noblogs.org/?page_id=3423
Notes: Originally in French, translated into English through Google Translate.

Tristan Leoni

Goodbye life, goodbye love…

“ What she drank of it, beautiful blood, this land Worker's blood

and peasant's blood Because the bandits, who cause wars Never die from

it, we only kill the innocent 1 . »

To evoke the uncertainty of the battlefield, Clausewitz spoke of "fog of

war", the term could just as well be applied to the media avalanche

that, since February 24, 2022, we are undergoing with regard to Ukraine.

The two camps are engaged in a fairly classic war of propaganda and

images reinforced in an unprecedented way by social networks. From this

point of view, the Ukrainians have the advantage; many images are

available on their side (taken by civilians or journalists), much less

on the Russian side (no smartphone for soldiers, no civilians, few

journalists). Hence, for example, at the beginning, an overabundance of

destroyed Russian vehicles. This is what Westerners (us) see, but it is

only part of the reality. Especially since algorithms accentuate the

banality of our respective cognitive biases, pushing us to favor

information that confirms our opinions and our presuppositions: this is

the "Diagoras problem", but in times of war this daily lot becomes

excessive, stuffy. It is not easy to maintain the necessary distance and

a cool enough head to understand what is happening and, possibly, to act

accordingly; it is even less so when you live in a belligerent or

co-belligerent country.

The good, the bad and the ugly

" Don't worry, these are outgoing 2 . »

Russia invaded Ukraine, not the other way around. However, important as

it is, the difference between “aggressor” and “aggressor” is not a

sufficient criterion for understanding the situation. The democrat and

the authoritarian, the good guy and the bad guy, etc.

On July 28, 1914, after the assassination of Archduke

François-Ferdinand, the powerful Austro-Hungarian Empire (50 million

inhabitants) declared war on Little Serbia (ten times less populated).

In the days that followed, through the game of alliances, all the

European powers went to war, and one of the arguments of France and

England was the defense of the weak against the strong. " No one can

believe in good faith that we are the aggressors ", declares René

Viviani, President of the Council of a very democratic French Republic

on which Germany, inevitably despotic and cruel, has just declared war.

If, in their vast majority, the social democrats of all countries (and

even some anarchists including Pierre Kropotkine) adhere to this

narrative and to the respective policies of Sacred Union, the Serbian

Socialist Party refuses national defense, and does not vote war credits.

In 1914, few revolutionaries did not succumb to war propaganda 3 .

But the causes of the First World War are no longer explained in this

way. The initiator or the triggering incident of a conflict is only one

element of a much more complex overall situation 4 . Each country can

legitimately affirm that it defends itself, the invaded against the

invader of course, but also the invader intervening to prevent a third

party from occupying, dominating or manipulating the invaded. The USSR

acted in this way in Hungary in 1956, Great Britain and France in Egypt

the same year, the United States in Vietnam, the USSR in Afghanistan,

etc. The weak exist only through the strong which protect them against

other strong, and each defends itself to prevent its neighbor from

attacking it, or serving as a base for this purpose.

Like so many before it, the war that is being played out today on

Ukrainian territory, and at the expense of its population, is part of

the broader framework of the confrontation between large blocs; and the

characterization of the regimes involved (democracy or not) is (as

usual) anecdotal.

In the West, good minds lament that, instead of dissolving NATO when the

Warsaw Pact broke up after the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, the

United States gradually expanded this military alliance to include most

of the ex-satellites of the USSR. How would the United States react if

Mexico or Canada joined a military alliance directed against them ? In

2022, the Russian invasion has the advantage of retrospectively

justifying NATO enlargement and continuing it (Sweden, Finland).

That is not the question. It was only natural for the United States (and

its allies) to seize the opportunity of the demise of the USSR to

promote their interests and limit Russian power. Just like the USSR did

in the past whenever it could. Ukraine is far too strategic a territory

(especially the east and south of the country) for one side or the other

to agree to abandon it easily (mass of population and therefore of

proletarians, industries, irrigation, numerous existing or potential

resources including under the Black Sea, access to and control of this

sea, etc.).

“ Stop the war. Don't believe the propaganda. You are being lied to here

”… It took courage for Marina Ovsiannikova, on March 14, 2022, to dare

to publicly denounce the war waged by her own country. It is doubtful

that the television news of a major French channel could one day be

interrupted at 8 p.m. by an untimely questioning of Western war

propaganda. Are there more pacifists in Moscow than in Paris?

Rudyard Kipling may have never written that " the first casualty of a

war , is the truth but still... Certainly, this was to be expected, but

it is amazing how quickly the media in each country express a consensus

corresponding to the policy of the rulers 6 . The more or less general

acceptance of the state management of the Covid-19 crisis by the

populations did not prevent acts of protest, which were in the minority

and despite everything repeated with a certain echo. War, on the other

hand, creates not only submission, but adhesion – in any case, as long

as the conflict does not drag on to the point that its objectives appear

less and less credible. Knowing that in 2022 we no longer call tens of

millions of men to the flag: we mobilize hundreds of millions of

spectators in front of their screens.

In Paris or Marseilles, everyone is against the war… but wants Ukraine

to win, asks for more arms to be delivered to it, even for French

soldiers to be sent there. The "pacifist" rallies in yellow and blue

colors are very calm and meager if we compare them to the fiery

demonstrations against the 2003 war, where, it is worth remembering,

nobody wanted Iraq to win, nobody offered to deliver weapons to Baghdad

so that it could shoot down American planes. It is true that this very

special operation was officially aimed at debasing and demilitarizing

the country, fighting terrorism, liberating a people and bringing

democracy to them. We get a bit lost.

But why?

" It's an anti-fascist war... - It's a war. With its deep origins,

its historical reasons, its explanations. Nationalism, the Treaty of

Versailles, rivalries between expansionist 7 . »

Indeed, why did Russia embark on this operation, the consequences of

which will be catastrophic, including for her? What was his interest?

Let us first get rid of the psychologizing or pathologizing explanations

that are very fashionable today when it comes to talking about an

adversary; the senility or mental confusion of any political leader is

not in question; let's also evacuate personalization since you never

lead alone.

History shows us that to launch a war, this “madness”, is in reality, at

a given moment, the option which seems the most reasonable for a State;

but the logic and the interests of the ruling classes are very different

from those of honest people and proletarians.

Let us note first of all that, if the threat was hovering, the start of

this operation and especially its scale surprised almost all observers

and specialists. The invasion of the Ukraine had been considered and

planned (the staffs always make plans for the most diverse situations),

and preceded by gigantic maneuvers in Belarus. But it is not certain

that the operation was really chosen and even less the date of its

launch; it may have imposed itself on the Russian leaders because of a

complex but fatal spiral having as its framework the confrontation

between NATO and Russia (especially since 2014), and in which we find

elements such as:

Considered as a possibility, brandished as a threat in diplomatic poker,

the invasion of Ukraine was undoubtedly decided upon and then postponed,

perhaps several times; the final decision was probably taken only at the

last moment, after having lost several weeks, hence the very unfavorable

weather conditions, during the raspoutitsa .

Workflow

What surprises first of all "advised" observers is that the Russian

ground offensive is preceded by only a few hours of aerial bombardment

and missile fire aimed at barracks, air bases, defense systems

anti-aircraft and Ukrainian radars 10 . Then, it is the audacity of the

initial plan (worthy of a perilous roll of the dice during a wargame).

The objective is then probably to make Ukraine capitulate in a few days,

following a large-scale helicopter operation against an airport in the

suburbs of kyiv, paving the way for a rapid penetration of armored

vehicles, the capture of capital and the fall of the government. If the

paratroopers take the airport well, the operation fails because they are

crushed by a counter-offensive. At the same time, at several points,

armored columns crossed the border and plunged through the country, but

without precaution or protection, without tactical air support and,

above all, another surprise, without preparation or artillery support;

whereas, heir to the Soviet doctrine, " the Russian army is first and

foremost a large artillery that rolls and an air strike force that drops

smooth bombs ” (Michel Goya). No destruction of strategic sites, means

of electricity distribution or communication either (in Serbia, in 1999,

NATO had targeted power stations and bridges). Whatever the Western

media say, Russia is waging a relatively "restrained" war in the first

fifteen days of its offensive. This can be explained by media pressure,

but also by Russia's desire to preserve the infrastructures, the heavy

industries of the areas it wishes to annex, and above all by the

prospect of accommodating a Russian-speaking population with whom it

expects to meet a warm welcome and that, officially, she claimed to want

to free herself from the Nazi yoke. But this strategy ended in failure.

Russian intelligence analyzes are completely erroneous: the population

proves to be hostile to the soldiers and, sometimes, improvises actions

of armed resistance (throwing Molotov cocktails). In addition, the

Russian invasion faces opposition from the Ukrainian army much more

stubborn than expected. This is primarily due to the fact that the

Russian army does not benefit from any surprise effect; Although the

weeks of maneuvers in Belarus obviously caused concern, the Ukrainians

received from American intelligence the precise details of the operation

to come and prepared for it, in particular by dispersing troops and

equipment to limit the effects of the first bombardments Russians.

The Russian columns of armored vehicles or supply trucks advancing as if

on conquered ground faced a virulent guerrilla force; they are a target

of choice, less for armed civilians than for small groups of heavily

equipped soldiers (in particular formidable American anti-tank missiles

Javelin or Swedish NLAW 11 ) or for combat drones (Turkish Bayraktar).

Progress also seems to be hampered by the lack of fuel, food, even

ammunition, that is to say by faulty logistics and/or working with a

degree of unpreparedness. Hence the relatively low morale of the

fighter, especially after weeks of exhausting maneuvers.

After fifteen days of fighting, as the thaw and mud spread and the

positions froze, the attackers began to make much less moderate use of

artillery, especially against the outskirts of the big besieged cities,

where the Ukrainian infantry. The Russian air force remains little used,

it seems to have only a few precision ammunition, so the strikes must be

done on sight, therefore in clear weather, but the weather is bad and

the ceiling is very low, so the planes are at range of Ukrainian Manpads

(man-portable anti-aircraft missiles), which inflict heavy damage on

them. In addition, the Ukrainian army very quickly benefited from

significant support from NATO, whether in terms of equipment (massive

and increasing deliveries of weapons and equipment), training (on site

or in Western countries) , in supervision (on site 12 ), but also in

intelligence 13 .

Very quickly there was talk of a failure or a stalemate of the Russian

army 14 , without however knowing the initial goals of the Kremlin;

there is, moreover, a difference between political aims and military

objectives, which must be broader than the former to make it possible to

seize places which will serve as bargaining chips during future

negotiations. Invading all of Ukraine is probably not the Kremlin's

project: too costly, too complex (notably to occupy the territory),

whereas it would be more practical for it to keep a Ukraine reduced to

its western part (if only so that the millions of refugees and the

populations most hostile to Russia may be received there). The desire

for more or less disguised annexation of new provinces (eastern bank of

the Dnieper, part or all of the Black Sea coast) is more likely. In any

case, unless it is humiliated (in the eyes of the world and its

population), Russia cannot stop its operation before having conquered a

minimum of strategic positions. " Putin is in the exact posture of the

gambler. He made a bet, he lost it at the start. How far will he

continue to bet so as not to leave with empty pockets? It's exactly

that. And the West must understand that it cannot walk away with empty

pockets, because if it has the feeling that it can walk away with empty

pockets, it will continue to bet. That is the mirage of victory that

seizes all leaders who engage in a military operation ” (General Vincent

Desportes) 15 .

At the end of March, when the stalemate was confirmed and it was

necessary to avoid too bitter a failure, the Russian troops withdrew

from the conquered territories around kyiv and in the north of the

country and redeployed in the East. From now on, the Kremlin's objective

is to complete the conquest of Donbass and to ensure territorial

continuity between this territory and Crimea, or even with Transnistria.

To this end, the Russian units reconnected with their classic doctrine

and placed great emphasis on the preparation of artillery and aerial

bombardment. At the end of April, slowly but methodically, these troops

advanced; the confrontation, both mechanical and human, is fierce,

especially since the forces are now relatively balanced. Moscow, which

in this war only mobilized relatively few men, around 200,000 (against

kyiv's 200,000 to 300,000), took advantage of a certain air superiority

(limited by the enemy's anti-aircraft missiles) and in artillery

(limited by the powerful fortifications of the defenders). If it does

not manage to break the resistance in the Donbass, Russia will have to

find another solution in order not to lose face... especially since some

are already talking about the possibility of a reversal of the situation

and Ukrainian offensives against Transnistria or Crimea. Since very few

countries seem to be working for de-escalation – quite the contrary –

the risk of a rise to extremes is very real today.

The self-organization of the population

“ There are no longer any reasons to fight, we no longer have an

army, neither you nor me, nothing but rags of different colors which

only have the name of uniforms. What do we look like now in these

tinsel? There are no more borders, no governments, no noble causes, so

no reason to fight 16 … ”

As we have seen, Russia expected a good reception in the

Russian-speaking regions of the east and south of the country, but the

opposite happened. There was a lot of emphasis in the first days,

whether in the bourgeois media or on the militant networks, on the

mobilization of the Ukrainian population; this seems to us to come from

two different fields.

First of all, basic material solidarity in the face of disaster: helping

and welcoming refugees fleeing combat zones (they are below your home

and come from the town next door), helping the wounded or people buried

under the rubble of a house, etc. We organize ourselves as best we can,

in coordination with the emergency services, the town hall, an NGO or

just between neighbours. These gestures have sometimes been interpreted

as the harbingers of a necessarily emancipatory self-organization of the

proletarians if it spreads and strengthens. This seems to us

particularly exaggerated, these gestures proceeding from reflexes of

minimal mutual aid quite common among human beings.

And there is a mobilization that could be called martial, with the aim

of countering the Russian offensive. Here again, we organize ourselves

as best we can while the State services are completely overwhelmed:

artists creating a workshop for making Molotov cocktails, restaurateurs

establishing a canteen to provide rations to soldiers, business

converting into the factory of anti-tank obstacles, women gathering to

sew camouflage netting, pensioners filling sandbags, locals building

barricades, etc.

What strikes people unaccustomed to war (us) a lot are these civilians

who line up to put on the uniform and join the territorial defense (DT),

this branch of the Ukrainian army made up of reservists and volunteers .

Tens of thousands of assault rifles are distributed to the population,

convicts are freed in exchange for their participation in the fighting,

and so on. Very quickly, it is the weapons and the material which are

lacking, not the volunteers; at first, those who enlist must largely

equip themselves, at their own expense, from military surplus stores

(army, lashing, helmet, body armor, etc.). As for the following,

especially those who have registered on waiting lists, unless they have

military experience, the government asks them above all to continue to

work, another essential form of resistance.

The tactical value of units made up in this way is, understandably,

quite limited, but the role of the DT is above all to relieve the

best-trained soldiers of the most thankless and time-consuming tasks:

guarding the rear (warehouses, bridges , etc.), patrolling cities,

imposing curfews and fighting looting. The door is open to all

"excesses": checkpoints and identity checks are multiplying (under the

authority of your neighbour, your grocer or a work colleague), vigilant

citizens are watching and denouncing, we tracks down suspicious

civilians (spies, saboteurs, pro-Russians?), who are arrested and

transferred who knows where for questioning, etc. The courts no longer

functioning, it is the DT which sometimes applies summary justice, in

particular against thieves and looters (those who are not shot on the

spot are tied to a post, in the middle of the street, their pants down

on the ankles, the icy cold as a bonus).

Without making the apology of a blissful pacifism seem more interesting

to us the demonstrations of civilians that we have sometimes observed

and which aimed to block the roads, to stop the columns of tanks by a

non-violent action (things seen in Iran in 1979, in Beijing in 1989, in

Slovenia in 1990). But, here again, what is expressed is not a visceral

rejection of war, a somewhat naive pacifism, but a deep nationalism; it

does not wave flags of peace, but the Ukrainian emblem. It is because

with this crisis we are undoubtedly witnessing "live" the completion of

the construction of this Ukrainian nation, the result of a process born

with independence: a population which, whatever its language, suddenly

takes aware of its historical, cultural, even religious specificities

(the Orthodox Church, still dependent on Moscow, separates from it

today) and which, beyond the classes, is proud of itself... even if, at

the Looking at history, these specificities may seem very artificial,

even if they are created from scratch for the occasion (as after the

break-up of Yugoslavia in the 1990s). There will be some who will find

this moving. In any case, that doesn't seem to bother a number of

Western humanists and social democrats who are usually more resistant to

nationalism; we find a superb illustration of this with the filmmaker

Mathieu Kassovitz explaining to a journalist that the Ukrainians, whom

he knows well, are " ultra-nationalists in a good way, that is to say

that they are proud of their country and want to protect it absolutely

”. The same seems to be the case for some French far-left activists (for

whom, generally, waving a tricolor flag in a demonstration is a sign of

fascism). But there are already Ukrainian anarcho-syndicalists promoting

a “ liberating and creative nationalism ” !

A nationalist feeling which, quite logically, goes hand in hand with the

support of the population for its army, a vibrant and already

long-standing support, combined with a relationship to virility somewhat

different from that which we know in Western Europe, which explains

quite "naturally" this desire to take up arms to defend his country,

even if " the training, maintenance and armament of Ukraine, as well as

the IMF's requirements in terms of loans granted to the State, are at

the same time the structural causes of the dismantling of hospitals,

under-investment in education, poverty pensions for pensioners, the

absence of wage increases in the public sector 18 ”. Because defending

your country is first and foremost, let us remember, defending the

interests of your bourgeoisie against those of the bourgeoisie opposite.

The exaltation linked to land, blood and democracy has some limits,

however. From the beginning of the invasion, if conscription was

decreed, making it possible to enlist all men aged 18 to 60, it was

accompanied by a ban on leaving the territory... because all Ukrainians

didn't seem to want to join the army or the DT. There are indeed rebels

and deserters; some try to hide, to obtain false papers, to flee abroad;

it is therefore not for nothing that there are border controls for the

exit of refugees. Others, cautiously, engage in their local DT, in the

rear, to avoid being forcibly incorporated into a unit which would leave

for combat. Unfortunately for them, the deliveries of NATO (for example

tens of thousands of helmets and bullet-proof vests) allow the equipment

of a growing number of new recruits (and members of the DT) and their

sending on the dreaded Eastern front… from there, mechanically, a

growing number of resisters and perhaps even the first demonstrations

against compulsory conscription (in Khoust, in the west of the country).

But, if Ukraine experienced a few weeks of hesitation, the government

quickly took things in hand, in particular, it must be recognized,

thanks to the support of its citizens. The latter did not self-organize

against the state, or because of its absence, but in order to prevent it

from collapsing under the Russian battering. This is a fairly “normal”

reaction in a country that knows a strong sense of national unity, which

is formatted for this purpose by ad hoc . This is confirmed, once again,

self-organization is not in itself revolutionary.

What to do… under the bombs?

“ Victory by singing opens the barrier for us; Freedom guides our

steps 19 . »

We are not in the situation of Ukrainians nor in that of anarchists or

communists living in Ukraine; difficult to know what should be done

there, to make an on-the-spot assessment of their action, because

(whatever our ideas) we don't know how we would react in their place;

historical hindsight often allows this type of judgement, because it is

easy to be right when one knows the sequence and the end of events 20 .

However, should our Ukrainian comrades, simply because of their

situation as the “first concerned”, be exempt from any criticism? At the

very least, if their activity concerns them, the discourse that they

carry there, that they address to us and which is relayed in France

deserves quite another attention.

The reactions of Ukrainian “radical” militants appear very diverse,

sometimes contradictory. Some antimilitarist and pacifist comrades

maintain revolutionary defeatist positions, but propaganda in this

direction looks as risky in Ukraine as in Russia. Others engage in

helping refugees or the wounded 21 .

Nevertheless, what surprised many in France was to learn, via a few

texts and testimonies, that Ukrainian anarchists had joined the army or

the DT. Some groups thus seem to have taken advantage of the

distribution of arms to form combat units; a brochure mentions the

creation of “ two squads ”; around twenty militants in fatigues and

Kalashnikovs pose for the photo around a black flag with a circled A,

the caption of the photo cautiously stating that these groups “ would

have a certain degree of autonomy ” within the DT – which, we will have

understood, signifies a certain degree of subordination 22 . Indeed,

even after a short period of chaos, it is evident that the army sought

to control groups of armed civilians, especially if they openly

proclaimed a political ideology a priori incompatible with state

authority. The fact remains that the anarchist or antifa military units

probably do not group together more than a few dozen local fighters

(perhaps joined by a few dozen Westerners), in an area where two

gigantic armies confront each other, several hundred thousand of men 23

… As a reminder, the famous Azov regiment – ​​one of the military branches

of the many organizations of the Ukrainian extreme right – is a

permanent unit of the DT comprising several thousand combatants and

having armored vehicles and tanks.

The first scenes of a victorious ambush against a Russian convoy led

some to believe that if the Ukrainian state collapsed, the Russian army

would have to face a vast popular guerrilla force composed of autonomous

groups acting each in their corner; groups certainly mainly animated by

a patriotic feeling, but in the midst of which anarchist groups could

perhaps hold their own and play an influential role... This is to forget

that, to be effective, a resistance of this type must be particularly

structured, disciplined, funded and supported by other states.

But, after a few days marked by spectacular techno-guerrilla actions led

by small units of professional soldiers (trained in this type of action

by the Americans), the fighting very quickly took on a more classic

aspect, that of the clash between vast, heavily equipped units, within

which coordination, movement, fortifications, artillery duels and the

flow of ammunition and fuel become central. What has become of the

anarchist “squads” in this maelstrom? It is unlikely that their

“autonomy” was thereby increased.

So why get involved? In several texts, Ukrainian anarchists and radicals

testify that they want to “weigh in” on events, be ready “just in case”

and not remain cut off from the rest of society 24 ; it is in the

defense of this "society" that they explain that they participate, but

of course not in that of the State, and moreover, if some state that

they have suspended their anti-State fight, it is in the perspective of

resuming it more vigorously once peace has returned. First win the war,

then work for the revolution… the refrain is well known. If, obviously,

they draw no lesson from the Russian civil war or the war in Spain, some

evoke to justify themselves the memory of these wars which preceded the

Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917 – one can also think of 1871 – or

the supposed role of the Afghan conflict in the collapse of the USSR.

However, if the unfolding of wars, and especially their consequences,

can trigger a revolution, the situation must already be quite mature;

that which has nothing mechanical about it. And, above all, it is not

clear how the fact of actively participating in such a conflict, through

a engagement in one of the armies in question, would change anything 25

.

" Historically, the overwhelming majority of proletarians, on the

occasion of each warlike conflict, aligned themselves with their

national capital and the imperialist front of which they were a part (in

the era of imperialism, all national capital is potentially imperialist

, just as all war is by definition imperialist). It is only when the

conflict has dragged on – beyond the expectations of the very

governments that promoted it – to the point of having a heavy impact on

living and working conditions, that they are opposed more or less

vigorously 26 . »

It should all the same be remembered that if the history of humanity is

larded with wars, in almost all cases, their consequences on the

proletarians are catastrophic.

Under the blows of a popular fed up or a proletarian revolt, could

Russia, following its army, collapse? The low morale of the invading

troops initially led some to believe that a wind of mutiny was blowing

over the Russian army in the field, but this was not the case. The

withdrawal of forces around kyiv went well, and the offensive launched

in April in the Donbass shows that the mistakes and errors of the first

weeks have been corrected.

Admittedly, pacifist demonstrations have taken place in several Russian

cities, but a large part of public opinion (including certain opposition

parties) supports the current invasion there. We know that an external

war is generally a good way to reunite citizens around a government, to

make them forget the daily ills under a rain of propaganda (see for

example the war against Libya in 2011). In this context, if the economic

sanctions impoverish the populations, they often have the effect of

strengthening the national feeling, and therefore the regime in place

(Cuba, Iraq, etc.).

Nevertheless, if due to a prolongation of the war the Russian government

found itself weakened and a popular revolt loomed, and if repression

were ineffective, the ruling class would seek to divert the protest

towards a political alternative: either extreme ( on the side of the

Kremlin hawks who find that the invasion of Ukraine lacks firmness), or

more democratic (without opting for the colt of the West).

The likelihood of a revolt seems even lower in Ukraine. We have said

what we think of the self-organization of citizens on the basis of a

national feeling; the state has been strengthened, just as the

government is currently legitimized by its management of the crisis. A

great popular outpouring seeing the strengthening of national sentiment

is, by nature, interclassist and counter-revolutionary.

It is difficult to predict whether the process of democratization will

be strengthened as a result. So far, we are witnessing above all a

(real) militarization of society, censorship of the media, the banning

of left-wing opposition forces, a hunt for dissenters, etc. ; above all,

nationalist and reactionary forces are on the rise, which is nothing new

in Ukraine. If Anatole France were alive, he would probably sum it up

like this: “ we believe we are dying for democracy, we are dying for

industrialists ”.

One might wonder why devote so many lines to this question when,

ultimately, the role of Ukrainian anarchists and radicals in this

conflict is so weak. The interest of a subject is not measured first of

all by the number of people involved. Then, many media, including

bourgeois, and of course social networks, evoke this commitment; the

militants on the spot communicate abundantly, and their prose meets a

certain echo in France; it would therefore not be surprising if, in the

near future, the figure of the anarchist fighter in Ukraine becomes,

after that of the Kurdish soldier in Rojava, the reference in terms of

political radicalism. This would be in our opinion – it will be

understood – very regrettable.

What to do… in France?

“ Above all, don't let yourself be carried away by the immediate

aspect of events, by propaganda, by the ease of simplification. There

are times when we have no control over the course of things. It is

better to know this and not mask one's impotence with gesticulation or,

worse, embark on a boat that is not ours 27 . »

The problem is that, concretely, we cannot do much. The most classic,

and the most in accordance with the old principles of revolutionary

defeatism, if at least one thinks that the proletarians have no

fatherland, would be to fight, here, against our own bourgeoisie. This

would be logical, since France is almost co-belligerent. If this

revolutionary internationalist position is maintained by various

anarchist, ultra-left, left communist or even Trotskyist groups or

groupings, it is not certain that it is the majority among activists and

movementists. We know what is happening with the current state of the

class struggle in France; hence, once again, very often, a despairing

feeling of helplessness. In fact, it seems that the more gloomy the

times, the stronger the injunction to act: it would be a question of

being effective, of " having an impact " on reality, whereas the

revolutionary movement perhaps does not have any. to be never had so

little... Hence this attraction for distant battlefields and this need

to choose a side even if it means accepting compromises and, barring a

bad conscience, the moral obligation to help those who, precisely, are

doing something, anything. A sour comment, found on Twitter, about the

call for comrades to participate in the last presidential election (by

voting for a left-wing candidate) could just as well apply to some of

the positions on the war in Ukraine: " these people really think that

their call […] is a break with their usual militancy when it is only an

end ”. Acid…

So what to do? Difficult, as some libertarians had done in favor of

Rojava, to demonstrate to ask NATO for arms deliveries… they are already

flowing in by the thousands of tons, accompanied by billions of dollars.

It is difficult, as some humanists do, to ask for the dispatch of French

soldiers on the spot, or even the imposition of a no-fly zone over

Ukraine, acts which would amount to a declaration of war on the Russia.

This vision of the camp of Good being attacked by that of Evil (much

less subtle than in the works of J. R. R. Tolkien) has the corollary of

bringing to the fore the need to have good armies, those which deploy in

order to defend democracy and “ our values”, therefore the usefulness of

NATO 28 , therefore the importance of substantial defense budgets and of

an efficient and innovative military-industrial complex ahead of its

Chinese and Russian counterparts. You have to know what you want.

The Sacred Union around the figure of democracy and more generally the

camp of Good obviously replaces that which could once be constituted

around the fatherland; it is better to present the patriots – who,

strictly speaking, can be differentiated from the nationalists – as

freedom fighters . A logic that comes to interfere even in the most

radical militant circles 29 – it should be noted that there is also a

more confidential current which, through a rather primitive

anti-Americanism, defends Moscow's positions.

Support (financially) the anarchists and antifas who fight in the ranks

of the Ukrainian army? While some make this choice by organizing parties

or concerts, they generally tend to minimize the military nature of the

issue and, no doubt a little embarrassed, embark on uncertain lexical

contortions: such a militant newspaper which, in 2016, had denounced the

creation in France of a national guard of reservists today praises the

merits of that which exists in Ukraine; we speak moreover rather of "

resistance ", of " volunteers in arms " or of a " militia structure "

evoking Spain in 1936 (although here it is two nationalist camps which

oppose each other), we relativize the weight of the extreme right,

despite being very present in the Kiev army, etc. 30 . We translate and

distribute texts that evoke the situation, with a slight uneasiness and

a lot of indulgence, even with a touch of the condescension that was

expressed for the Kurds of Syria, except that in Ukraine there is not

even shadow of the illusion of social change.

What, once again, distorts the point of view and the analysis, is

obviously the fact that men make the choice to take up arms, to risk

their lives, while we are discussing them buried in a sofa mauve. And

the prestige of the uniform, of the fighter, of the guy who wielded an

assault rifle – which is easily criticized when it concerns the extreme

right – can also exist among supporters of social emancipation (of Spain

to Rojava via Nicaragua).

Support deserters? This at least is a classic revolutionary activity in

wartime (organizing networks to cross borders, obtain false papers,

harbor fugitives), more applicable in neighboring countries. In France,

we can certainly come across banners or initiatives in support of “

deserters, refractory and rebellious Russians ”, but not, it seems, in

favor of their Ukrainian counterparts, whose number is however

increasing. The situation may change, but for the moment it reminds us

that, during the war in Syria, the Kurds refusing compulsory military

service within the YPG were conveniently forgotten when many of them

took refuge in the big cities. European 31 .

We repeat it, it is a question here for us of criticizing not the way in

which people react to the bombardment of their city or their country,

but, possibly, the speeches that they can intend for us and, especially,

those that the we carry on them.

The propensity is now well established in militant circles to see

revolutionary “potential” everywhere, especially if the region is

distant and exotic… a point of view that is particularly far-fetched

here. But, beyond this reflex, the specters that haunt the Ukrainian

question, in a very bewitching way and perhaps more openly than in other

"theaters of operation", are nothing less than militarism, nationalism

and the concept of Sacred Union, morbid variants of interclassism.

Ideologies by which even the most seasoned militants, the most

structured by theory, can be carried away if the circumstances lend

themselves to it, history has sadly demonstrated.

But it turns out that we do not suffer from bombardments, that fighting

does not take place in our streets and that we do not risk being killed

every minute. So we have no excuse, no excuse to lose our minds. We can

take advantage of a relatively comfortable setting in order to reflect

calmly on current events. We would be wrong not to abuse it, because

this framework will perhaps disappear more quickly than we think.

The Return of War

« He said Son, don’t you understand now 33 ? »

The implication of the formula is that it is about the return of the war

in Europe . But had she ever left? The difference is that in 2022 it

will hit the center of Europe more than its periphery, as was the case

in the 1990s in the former Yugoslavia, until NATO's offensive against

Serbia. in 1999. Who can today doubt that these wars were ultimately

very profitable for both the European Union (EU) and NATO, if only

through the integration of new members 34 . Sarajevo may be closer to

Paris than kyiv, but Serbia has never challenged the supremacy of the

United States and the EU over Europe: that is what Russia is doing

today. Contrary to the fate of Bosnia in the past, the Ukrainian issue

is crucial, because it touches the heart of a Europe where one of the

main industrial, financial and commercial centers of the world is

located. It is crucial as it sees some of the major powers on the planet

clash, including nuclear powers, that it mobilizes considerable

mechanical and human forces - if there is a return, it is that of the

war of high intensity – and that it is already having enormous economic

repercussions.

At present, the most probable course, which would be the most

"reasonable", is for Russia to complete the conquest of the Donbass

oblasts in the short term, for the fighting to stop, for negotiations to

be initiate and lead to a peace agreement and the attachment of these

regions to the Russian Federation; a territorial adjustment that could

have been achieved through negotiations in 2021, without war, and which

today would benefit both Russians and Ukrainians. It would be in no

one's interest for the war to continue with, for Russia, a sort of

Afghan-style stalemate. Nobody, if not the United States, but,

precisely, it is they who will decide what happens next. Will they

choose to concede Russia a meager victory, keep the conflict going for a

few more months, or fight to the last Ukrainian soldier?

In the meantime, NATO's military supplies to Ukraine, already strong

before the invasion, add up to thousands of tons of steel and billions

of dollars. But not only.

A process that has already been sensitive for several years is suddenly

accelerating. Although Russia has just displayed its weaknesses, we will

see an increase in military budgets in the countries of the EU and NATO,

which are already jostling to place orders with the military industry of

the United States. (tanks, combat aircraft, etc.). The latter are, for

the moment , the great victors of the war. While the grave of the

military industries of the Old Continent is being dug, the idea of ​​a

European Defense is finally buried in favor of a reinvigorated NATO.

Many countries are now openly opting for their very conscious

vassalization in Washington. A voluntary (and very costly) submission

which could only be interrupted if, for example, a new military power

emerged in Europe, but this is unlikely since one of NATO's functions is

precisely to prevent it 35 . However, among the surprising consequences

of the war in Ukraine, we should note the remilitarization of Germany,

which has already announced an extension of 100 billion euros for the

year 2022 (for a defense budget of around 50 billion , that of France

being 40 billion); an investment which, for the moment, only translates

into orders for American equipment. To be continued…

It would certainly be tempting for certain Western governments to bog

down and ruin Russia in Ukraine, but the powers involved at the margins

should not accidentally find themselves plunged into a military

escalation, that the conflict does not escalate, does not extend and

that, ultimately, it does not require the direct involvement of NATO,

and therefore of the United States; such as in the event of an incident

around Kaliningrad and the Suwalki Gap (eg an attempted blockade) or an

invasion of the Baltic States by a beleaguered Russia. This would not

necessarily mean a nuclear war, but perhaps, in turn, a stagnation of

the Americans in Europe, very little indicated since the Third World War

must take place in the Pacific 36 . So the question is: how far not to

go too far?

If we exclude the deaths on the ground (which the capitalist class never

has trouble doing), the main collateral damage of this story is, of

course, to endorse the fact that Russia broke with the Europe to turn to

Asia and, in particular, to China. Shame ? The fanciful idea of ​​a

rapprochement and then an alliance between the EU and Russia (which

could have favored its democratization) disappears in passing. The

blocks are formed, formalized. The risk would be that the war in

Ukraine, despite its share of horrors, is only a skirmish heralding

conflicts of another magnitude, in the short or medium term.

In the meantime, those who pay for the damage are always the same, the

proletarians: accentuation of the crisis, increased international

competition and exploitation, inflation, increase in military budgets

which can only mean increases in taxes and reductions in services

(health , education), etc. Local revolts will take place, in particular

in France, but nothing that for the moment cannot shake the capitalist

order or extinguish interstate tensions.

We bet, however, that if, in the coming months or years, France and its

army were to be involved much more directly in a high-intensity war (of

the kind that Ukraine is undergoing), the government and the media will

explain to us that it is in order to defend justice, law and democracy,

as in 1914! So, to be consistent, what shall we do?

Footnotes

1. Montéhus, The Red Butte , 1923.

2. A Ukrainian soldier reassuring a French journalist about artillery

fire, Le Figaro , March 4, 2022.

3. There will be, for example, the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks in

Russia, Karl Liebknecht then Otto RĂĽhle in Germany. On this subject, see

the brochure Anarchists Against War. 1914-2022 .

4. In September 1939, France and Great Britain declared war on Germany,

which had just invaded Poland. A few months later, the two countries

plan a major military operation against the main ally of the Third Reich

, the USSR, which, for its part, has just attacked Finland. These are

Operation Pike, a vast program to bomb oil wells in Baku; the German

offensive of May 10, 1940 leads to the abandonment of the project.

5. One only has to see, at the time of writing, the efforts that the

United States is making to ensure that the Solomon Islands do not sign a

defense agreement with China.

6. On this question, through the examples of the wars in Kosovo, Iraq,

Afghanistan or Libya, see: Serge Halimi, Mathias Reymond, Dominique

Vidal, Henri Maler, L'opinion, ça se travail… Les media et les “ just

wars ” , Agone, 2006, 272 p.

7.Louis Mercier Vega, The Anonymous Ride , Noir editions, 1978, p. 78.

8. We now know that in 1990, a few weeks before the invasion of Kuwait

by Saddam Hussein's troops, American diplomacy had given its Iraqi

counterpart to understand that the United States would not intervene in

the event of an operation such a soldier.

9. Helmuth Karl Bernhard von Moltke, Prussian field marshal (1800-1891).

10. The American army and its Western auxiliaries generally do not

venture into the field before having bombarded enemy positions and towns

for weeks if not months (Iraq 1991, Serbia 1999, Iraq 2003, Mosul 2017,

etc.). What really differentiates these armies is their relationship to

death, that of their own soldiers.

11. Until February 23, 2022, American, British and Canadian special

forces units are officially present in Ukraine to train the military in

the use of these weapons; they leave the country a few hours before the

Russian offensive.

12. Some members of American or British special forces have the

unfortunate tendency to lay off and immediately acquire a new

nationality, in this case Ukrainian. Journalists have for example shown

that it is Americans who manage and control the engagement of foreign

volunteers in the Ukrainian army, Régis Le Sommier, “With French

volunteers”, Le Figaro magazine , April 8, 2022, p. 55-57.

13. If Western spy satellites are at work, the same goes for NATO's

electronic intelligence planes or drones, which, since the start of the

invasion, have been skirting the Ukrainian borders and Russian

territorial waters (we sometimes sees them on the Flightradar24 ) and

provides Kiev, in real time, with crucial information for the fights.

14. According to the French media, Russian troops only bombed schools,

nurseries, maternities and hospitals… we therefore understand that they

are struggling to overcome the Ukrainian forces.

It is characteristic of modern wars to take place in urban areas,

therefore in the midst of civilians, in their homes and in their

workplaces. And when the Ukrainian troops take back a locality from the

Russians, it is after having used the same methods as them, almost the

same equipment (minus the air force), and almost the same doctrine.

For a serious and technical point of view, see for example Gaston Erlom,

“Strength or weaknesses of the Russian army”, Raids , no . . 430,

p.29-42

15. " War in Ukraine: what is Putin's military strategy?" »,

video.lefigaro.fr, March 3, 2022.

16. Montgomery Pittman, "Two", first episode of the third season of The

Twilight Zone , 1961.

17. Perrine Poupin, “ The irruption of Russia in Ukraine. Interview with

a Kyiv Territorial Defense volunteer ,” Movements , March 29, 2022.

18. “ Letters from Ukraine ”, first part on the Tous hors website.

19. Marie-Joseph Chénier, Song of Departure , 1794.

20. But what would we have really done in France in August 1914 or in

June 1940? On these questions, we recommend reading the book by Louis

Mercier Vega La Chevauchée anonyme: une attitude internationaliste avant

la guerre (1939-1942) or that of Pierre Lanneret, The Internationalists

of the “ third camp ” during the Second World War (Acratie, 1995),

available in PDF at: archivesautonomies.org

21. See in particular the blog Another war: uneautreguerre.wordpress.com

22. Between two fires. Provisional collection of texts by anarchists

from Ukraine, Russia and Belarus about the current war , March 13, 2022,

64 p.

23. We use the word men as an outdated synonym of soldiers , because the

forces involved seem relatively insensitive to recent Western

developments concerning gender. Here, although we are in Europe, the

pattern is much more classic: those who fight are men (with perhaps a

few very rare exceptions in the DT) and those who flee the fighting are

women, children and women. old people.

24. “ If we stay away from conflicts between states, we stay away from

real politics. This is one of the most important social conflicts taking

place in our region today. If we isolate ourselves from this conflict,

we isolate ourselves from the current social process. So we have to

participate in one way or another. Cf. “ Interview: “Anarchists and the

war in Ukraine” ”.

“[…] any force investing in future political development must be present

here and now, alongside the people. We want to make strides to connect

with people on a larger scale, to organize with them. Our long-term

goal, our dream, is to become a visible political force in this society

in order to obtain a real opportunity to promote a message of social

liberation for all. See “ Interview: Resistance Committee, Kyiv ”, March

2022.

25. In 1870 and 1914, how many proletarians donning the uniform of a

very undemocratic imperial army imagined that they would then take part

(for some) in the Paris Commune or in the German and Russian

revolutions?

26. An Italian comrade from Il lato Cattivo , " Ukraine "At least, if

one wants to be materialistic" ".

27. Louis Mercier Vega, op. cit.

28. Since it is a question of value and democracy, it is always good to

remember that NATO takes care of its LGBTQI+friendly reputation. “ NATO

is committed to diversity. Any discrimination based on sexual

orientation, gender, race or ethnic origin, religion, nationality,

disability or age is strictly prohibited. It also broke new ground by

being the very first organization in the world to recognize same-sex

marriage, offering same-sex couples the same benefits as opposite-sex

spouses, at a time when same-sex marriage was recognized only in one

country, the Netherlands. » www.nato.int

29. After the war against Serbia, Claude Guillon publishes Dommages de

guerre. Paris-Pristina-Belgrade, 1999 (L'Insomniaque, 2000, 128 p.),

incisive book which returns to the hesitations and NATO compromises of

some of the French "radicals".

30. We put things into perspective, whereas in France Marine Le Pen and

Éric Zemmour are described as Nazis; while, next to the members of the

Azov regiment, the militants of the RN would look like timid social

democrats; whereas, apart from Ukraine, there are relatively few

countries in the world where far-right organizations have their own

military units integrated into the national army.

31. About 2,000 deserters from the French army each year prefer flight

and illegality to the continuation of their engagement; some end up in

court. But nobody cares. This could change in the future.

32. On these questions, see our book, Manu milit ari? Critical

radiography of the army , Le Monde Ă  l'envers, 2020 (new edition), 120

p.

33. Bruce Springsteen, Born in the USA , 1984.

34. Apart from the jackpot that the war represents for the US

military-industrial complex and for its gas industry, and although it is

likely to cause an economic disaster for the EU, it is a boon for a few

sectors of activity, in particular because of the arrival of Ukrainian

refugees; this is particularly the case of the prostitution sector (in

Germany) or the industrial and manufacturing sector in Poland (a country

that lacks labor since its proletarians go to work in Western European

countries) .

35. In the words of its first Secretary General, Lord Ismay, NATO's role

is to “ keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans under

control ”. See Wikipedia.

36. The gigantic arms deliveries to Ukraine planned by the United States

are already slowing down those destined for Taiwan. Cf. Laurent Lagneau,

“ Taiwan is concerned about possible delays in its orders for American

military equipment ”, Zone militaire , May 3, 2022.

Ukraine has already received about 7,000 Javelin anti-tank missiles,

which is about a third of the US stockpile, with an estimated

replacement time of three or four years. Cf. Matías Maiello, “ Some

elements of military analysis on the war in Ukraine ”, Permanent

Revolution , April 28, 2022.