#WORLD #WORLDWIDE #UKRAINE #ANARCHISM #News #Journal #Update - (en) Grupo Moiras de afinidad de mujeres libertarias: KRAS-AIT ON THE #WAR IN UKRAINE (ca, de, it, pt)[machine translation]

 Given the speed with which the events of the war in Ukraine are advancing and the

fragmentation, confusion and bias of the information that reaches us through the
different media, the Moiras group decided to send some questions this week to the
Russian section of the IWA, with in order to obtain a libertarian perspective
about the conflict that helps us position ourselves and make decisions based on
expanded knowledge. In the text that follows, these questions are collected
together with the answers sent by KRAS, to whom we thank from here for their
quick and clarifying response.
Moiras: In your statement to the IWA about the war in Ukraine, you point to the
gas markets as the main reason for the conflict. We would like you to tell us
more about what the specific capitalist interests are behind this war, both on
the Russian side and on the pro-NATO side, and tell us about the recent evolution
of politics in your area, based on these markets and their influence on the
economy of Western countries. This information usually remains in the background
in the version of the media here, very focused on daily news, but where there is
little analysis.

KRAS: First of all, it is necessary to understand that there are different levels
of conflict and different levels of inter-capitalist contradictions. At the
regional level, today's war is just a continuation of the struggle between the
ruling castes of the post-Soviet states for the redivision of the post-Soviet
space. Contrary to popular myth, the Soviet Union collapsed not as a result of
popular liberation movements, but as a result of the actions of a part of the
ruling nomenklatura, which divided territories and zones of influence among
themselves, when the usual and established methods of his domain was in crisis.
Since that initial division, which was based on the balance of power at that
time, a constant struggle has developed for the redistribution of territories and
resources, leading to constant wars throughout the post-Soviet region. At the
same time, the ruling classes of all post-Soviet states (all of them, to one
degree or another, come from the Soviet nomenklatura or its successors) have
adopted militant nationalism in ideology, neoliberalism in economics, and
authoritarian methods of management in politics.

The second level of conflict is the struggle for hegemony in the post-Soviet
space between the strongest state in the region, Russia, which calls itself a
regional power and considers the entire post-Soviet space as an area of its
hegemonic interests, and the states of the Western bloc (although here, too, the
interests and aspirations of the United States and individual European NATO and
EU states may not be exactly the same). Both sides seek to establish their
economic and political control over the countries of the former Soviet Union.
Hence the clash between NATO's expansion to the East and Russia's desire to
secure these countries under its influence.

The third level of contradictions is of an economic-strategic nature. It is no
coincidence that modern Russia is called "an appendage to the gas and oil
pipeline." Russia plays today on the world market, first of all, the role of
supplier of energy resources, gas and oil. The predatory and completely corrupt
ruling class, purely parasitic in its essence, did not begin to invest in the
diversification of the economic structure, contenting themselves with
super-profits from oil and gas supplies. Meanwhile, Western capital and states
are beginning the transition to a new energy structure, the so-called "green
energy", aimed at reducing the consumption of gas and oil in the future. For
Russian capital and its economy, this will mean the same strategic collapse that
the fall in oil prices caused for the Soviet economy at the time. Therefore, the
Kremlin seeks to prevent this energy turnaround, or slow it down, or at least
achieve more favorable conditions for itself in the redistribution of the energy
market. For example, looking for long-term supply contracts and better prices,
pushing out competitors, etc. If necessary, this can involve direct pressure on
the West in various ways. alienate competitors, etc. If necessary, this can
involve direct pressure on the West in various ways. alienate competitors, etc.
If necessary, this can involve direct pressure on the West in various ways.

Finally, the fourth level (global) is the contradictions between the main
capitalist superpowers, the United States in retreat and China in the advance,
around which blocs of allies, vassals and satellites are forming. Both countries
are now vying for world hegemony. For China, with its "one belt, one road"
strategy, the gradual conquest of the economies of Asia, Africa, Latin America
and the penetration of Europe, Russia is an important minor partner. The response
of the United States and its allies in the West is NATO's expansion eastward,
reaching out through Ukraine and Georgia to the Near and Middle East and its
resources. This is also a type of "belt" project. He encounters resistance from
imperialist rivals: China and Russia, which are increasingly dependent on him.

At the same time, the internal political aspect should not be overlooked. The
Covid crisis has exposed the deep internal instability of the political, economic
and social structure of all the countries of the world. This also applies to the
states of the West, Russia, Ukraine, etc. The deterioration of living conditions,
the growth of prices and social inequality, the massive indignation of the
population with coercive and dictatorial measures and prohibitions gave rise to
widespread discontent in society. And in such situations, the ruling classes have
always resorted to tried and tested methods to restore the notorious "national
unity" and the population's confidence in power: by creating the image of an
enemy and whipping up military hysteria, even a "victorious little war".».

Moiras: In the countries of the European Union, the media, echoing the
governments, continually repeat to us that Putin is solely responsible for this
war. Knowing the history of NATO, with the United States in the lead, we think
that this is not the case. How to explain this to our populations without
appearing that we are justifying the Russian attack and siding with the Putin
government?

KRAS: Unfortunately, the mass public consciousness tends to look for simple,
crude answers to questions. We have no reason to sympathize with the owner of the
Kremlin and its administration. His neoliberal policies have led to a true
collapse of the health and education systems, to the poverty of retirees and
public sector workers in the province. Wages in the country are monstrously low,
the labor movement is really paralyzed... But, regardless of this, we understand
that all this is the product of a certain system based on the State and Capital.
We do not live in the 17th century, not in the era of absolutist monarchies. To
consider everything that happens in the world as the work of a few individual
"heroes" or "antiheroes" is naive to say the least. but in fact it is one of the
forms of the same conspiracy theory. This was forgivable in the 19th century by
the romantic Carlyle or the writer Alexandre Dumas. But in our time it is already
worth understanding that the world is much more complicated, and that capitalism,
as a social system, works differently. Therefore, our task is to explain to
people the systemic conditionality of the problems that shake the world today.
Including the wars of this world. And that the only way to solve these problems
is to destroy the social system that creates them. our task is to explain to
people the systemic conditionality of the problems that shake the world today.
Including the wars of this world. And that the only way to solve these problems
is to destroy the social system that creates them. our task is to explain to
people the systemic conditionality of the problems that shake the world today.
Including the wars of this world. And that the only way to solve these problems
is to destroy the social system that creates them.

Moiras: The schemes of the Cold War are being reproduced, so that it seems that
if you criticize one side it is because you are with the other. Anarchists find
this very problematic, especially when we have no social force. We want to act,
but we fear being dragged down and used by the armies of the states. In the
demonstrations that are taking place in our cities, the proclamation of "no to
war" is being mixed with requests for NATO intervention. Journalism related to
the government of the Spanish socialist party, the PSOE, presents us with the
need to intervene, sometimes drawing a historical parallel with the Spanish civil
war and the consequences of non-intervention by European countries, or the
participation of Spanish exiles in France, many anarchists, in the French army
against the Nazis. To do? Pacifism and non-intervention, as was the majority
position of anarchism against World War I, or support the Ukrainian resistance
against the invasion of Russian troops? Could this second option be considered as
an internationalist action against imperialism?

KRAS: From our point of view, there is no comparison with the situation of the
civil war in Spain and it cannot be. The Spanish anarchists advocated a social
revolution. Similarly, there can be no comparison between, say, the Makhnovist
movement in the Ukraine and the defense of the modern Ukrainian state. Yes,
Makhno fought against the foreign invaders, Austro-Germans, and against the
Ukrainian nationalists, and against the Whites and, in the end, against the Reds.
But the Makhnovist partisans fought not for the political independence of Ukraine
(which, in fact, they were indifferent to), but in defense of its revolutionary
social achievements: for peasant land and workers' management of industry, for
free soviets. In the current war, we are talking exclusively about the
confrontation between two states, two groups of capitalists, two nationalisms. It
is not up to anarchists to choose the "lesser evil" among themselves. We do not
want victory for one or the other. All our sympathy goes to the ordinary workers
who die today under projectiles, rockets and bombs.

At the same time, it is worth remembering that the position of most anarchists in
the First World War was not simply pacifist. This, as stated in the 1915 anti-war
manifesto, is a way to turn the imperialist war into a social revolution.
Whatever the chances of achieving this at the present time, anarchists, in our
opinion, should constantly formulate and propagate such a perspective.

Moiras: On the other hand, we get images from the internet of armed groups that
present themselves as an anarchist battalion in the Ukrainian army. Do you know
if they really are anarchists and what is their way of seeing the conflict? And
as for the reliance on Western weapons to combat the Russian attack, doesn't that
condition too much the possibility of libertarian battalions in the army or of an
independent Ukrainian anarchist guerrilla? Do you know what has remained of the
Makhnovichin, the anarchist revolution of a century ago, in the memory of the
Ukrainian people? Is there an anarchist movement in Ukraine today?

KRAS: In 2014, the Ukrainian anarchist movement was divided between those who
supported the liberal-nationalist Maidan protest and later helped the new
government against the separatists in Donbass and those who tried to adopt a more
internationalist position. Unfortunately, the second was less, but they were. Now
the situation is similar, but even more acute. Broadly speaking, there are three
positions. Some groups (such as «Nihilist» and «Revolutionary Action» in kyiv)
consider what is happening as a war against Russian imperialism and the Putin
dictatorship. They fully support the Ukrainian nationalist state and its military
efforts in this war. The infamous photo of the "anarchist" fighters in uniform
shows exactly the representatives of this trend: it specifically shows fans of
the "anti-fascist" football club Arsenal and participants in "Revolutionary
Action". These "anti-fascists" are not even embarrassed by the fact that openly
pro-fascist armed formations, like Azov, are among the Ukrainian troops.

The second position is represented, for example, by the group "Black Banner" from
kyiv and Lvov. Before the war, he was a harsh critic of the Ukrainian state, the
ruling class, their neoliberal policies and nationalism. With the outbreak of the
war, the group declared that capitalism and the rulers on both sides were to
blame for the war, but at the same time called for joining the forces of the
so-called "territorial self-defense" - volunteer military units of light
infantry. , which are formed on a territorial basis, on the ground -.

The third position is expressed by the group «Assembly» in Kharkov. He also
condemns both sides of the conflict, although he sees the Kremlin state as the
most dangerous and reactionary force. It does not call to join armed formations.
The group's activists are now organizing assistance to the civilian population
and the victims of the Russian army's bombing.

The participation of anarchists in this war as part of the armed formations
operating in Ukraine, we consider a break with the idea and cause of anarchism.
These formations are not independent, they are subordinate to the Ukrainian army
and carry out the tasks set by the authorities. They do not raise programs or
social demands. Hopes of carrying out anarchist agitation among them are
doubtful. There is no social revolution that must be defended in Ukraine. In
other words, those people who call themselves anarchists are simply sent to
"defend the motherland" and the state, playing the role of cannon fodder for
Capital and strengthening nationalist and militarist sentiments among the masses.

Moiras:In our towns, the communities of Ukrainian migrant workers, with the
collaboration of humanitarian organizations and municipalities, are organizing
the collection and shipment to Ukraine of food, warm clothes, medicines... The
Spanish population is very supportive but neither the war nor the pandemic of the
covid seem to have served our societies to question the dependencies on energy
resources and raw materials, dependencies that sustain neo-colonialism and
destroy the natural balance of the planet. Given the scarcity of resources, a
return to coal and a boost to nuclear power is expected. Perhaps Russian society
is more aware of the dangers and the need for alternatives? Is there an action
plan in this sense from the social movements? What do the KRAS and the IWA think
about this?

KRAS: Unfortunately, the state of social movements in modern Russia is
deplorable. It is true that, even in recent years, there have been several active
and persistent environmental protests at the local level: against dumpsters,
waste incinerators or environmental destruction by the mining industry, including
coal mining. But they never resulted in a powerful movement at the country level
as a whole. As for the fight against atomic energy and nuclear power plants,
which reached its peak in the Soviet Union and Russia in the late 1980s and
1990s, there are practically no such uprisings now.

Moiras: The demonstrations of Russians against the war help to understand the
European peoples that it is not the Russians who are attacking Ukraine, but the
army of the state that rules Russia. This is being reflected by the media in our
countries, and we know that there are thousands of detainees there in Russia as a
result of the demonstrations, how is this affecting Russian anarchism? What will
this mean for your freedom of expression and action in your country?

KRAS: Demonstrations and various other actions against the war have not stopped
every day since the first day. Thousands of people participate in them. The
authorities prohibit their celebration under the pretext of "anticovid
restrictions" and brutally disperse them. In total, until March 8, some 11,000
people were detained during demonstrations in more than 100 cities in the
country. Most face fines of 10,000 to 20,000 rubles for holding an "unauthorized"
protest. However, there are already crueler accusations: 28 people have already
been accused of vandalism, extremism, violence against the authorities, etc., for
which they face sentences of up to many years in prison. The authorities are
clearly using the war as an opportunity to "tighten the screws" inside the
country. Critical media outlets are closed or blocked. A hysterical war campaign
is being waged in the official media. A law has been passed according to which
spreading "false information" about the activities of the army and "discrediting
the army", as well as resisting the police, are punishable by up to 15 years in
prison. A bill has even been submitted to parliament that would allow arrested
opponents of the war to be sent to the front lines. People are fired from their
jobs, students are expelled from universities for anti-war speeches. Military
censorship was introduced. A law has been passed according to which spreading
"false information" about the activities of the army and "discrediting the army",
as well as resisting the police, are punishable by up to 15 years in prison. A
bill has even been submitted to parliament that would allow arrested opponents of
the war to be sent to the front lines. People are fired from their jobs, students
are expelled from universities for anti-war speeches. Military censorship was
introduced. A law has been passed according to which spreading "false
information" about the activities of the army and "discrediting the army", as
well as resisting the police, are punishable by up to 15 years in prison. A bill
has even been submitted to parliament that would allow arrested opponents of the
war to be sent to the front lines. People are fired from their jobs, students are
expelled from universities for anti-war speeches. Military censorship was
introduced. students are expelled from universities for anti-war speeches.
Military censorship was introduced. students are expelled from universities for
anti-war speeches. Military censorship was introduced.

In this situation, the small and divided anarchist movement in Russia is doing
what it can. Some participate in protest demonstrations. So, two of our
colleagues were also arrested and fined. Others are critical of these
demonstrations, as calls for them often come from the right-wing liberal
opposition and are often not so much anti-war as pro-Ukrainian (and sometimes
even pro-NATO). There remains the possibility of going to demonstrations with
their slogans and banners (some anarchists do), or of undertaking small
independent and decentralized actions. Anarchists write anti-war slogans on the
walls, paint graffiti, paste stickers and flyers, hang anti-war banners. It is
important to convey to the people our special and independent position,

https://grupomoiras.noblogs.org/post/2022/03/13/kras-ait-acerca-de-la-guerra-en-ucrania/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca