war opponents | Black sea, red thoughts

How can different movements work constructively under the motto “No War but Class War”? These and other questions were discussed in Bulgaria. Photo: IMAGO/Jean MW They still exist. Opponents of capitalism who do not take sides in the ongoing wars. The Ukraine war seemed to have caught leftists across Europe off guard. In October 2024, the European Left Party even split because several members agreed to support a “defensive war” against Russia – regardless of whether it was Ukraine or their own state. Conversely, others see “anti-imperialist forces” in Russia and China.

Neither position was met with any understanding among the around 50 people who gathered for a non-public meeting in Bulgaria last weekend. Left-wing and council communists, anarchists and syndicalists, state-critical Marxists and feminists from Bulgaria, Greece, Great Britain, Cyprus, Ireland, Hungary, Poland, Croatia, the Federal Republic and post-Soviet states met to discuss the situation in their respective countries, causes of war and resistance to current and future wars.

Even though memories of the Zimmerwald conference of socialist war opponents in 1915 were repeatedly raised, elements such as reenactments, pompous declarations and pathetic greetings were avoided. People met to work.

While the major parties, unions and organizations are currently going through serious conflicts over their stance on Ukraine and the Middle East, in which the tone is becoming increasingly harsh, it is precisely those whose position in the history of the workers' movement has been repeatedly branded "divisive", "sectarian" and "left-wing deviation" that are listening patiently and expressing dissent without scandal.

»The world order that the USA itself established is now declared an obstacle to it. Now more and more countries are considering war against each other.

There is a consensus among all those involved that the war between Russia and Ukraine, which is supported by NATO, has an imperialist character, that national liberation movements should not be supported and that the bourgeois states - whether governed democratically or dictatorially - are not suitable as a means for the implementation of socialist programs.

But there are also many differences. These can not only be traced back to different traditions. For example, the questions are answered differently: how can one make one's own criticism of the Western-supported mass murder in Gaza clear while making clear one's demarcation from nationalist groups? How can different movements work constructively under the motto “No War but Class War”?

A lot of space was also taken up by fundamental theoretical questions: Are military escalations a consequence of the economic crisis or did political decisions have serious consequences for many national economies? How this question is answered depends on how different organizations and currents define the relationship between state and capital interests.

The line, which comes from the German “state derivation debate” of the 1970s, insists on the existence of the state's own interest, which guarantees and regulates the capitalist economic order. “Exploitation is the business of capital, the monopoly of violence is that of the state,” said one speaker. Being a state that makes decisions about the conditions for other states is, he continued, not a “megalomania” but rather existentially important for major capitalist powers.

Russia's imperialism is therefore not fighting for territorial gains or resources, but for its status in the world order. For the left-wing communists in the tradition of the co-founder of the Italian CP Amadeo Bordiga, the state acts under pressure from capital affected by the fall in profit rates.

The changing world order was also excitedly discussed. »After 1945, the world order was the means for the USA to repeatedly assert its unchallenged position. “Now Trump is turning the competing calculations of other capitalist states on their head,” said one lecture. »He announces that his state is now considering territorial expansion - the world order that the USA itself established is now declared an obstacle to it. Now more and more countries are considering war against each other. For the EU, an armed conflict with the USA is now within the scope of conceivability. 

Nobody in the group really believes in trade and negotiation as an alternative to war - and that is an important difference to the position of large left-wing parties and unions. The conclusion is that brisk trade between the EU and Russia or between the USA and the People's Republic of China would not have contributed to more peace between these powers.

What it means to fight for a cause when your comrades are members of hostile communities is a problem that is affecting more and more leftists worldwide. The participants heard reports about the solidarity work of comrades in conflict hotspots such as Cyprus and Northern Ireland, about the solidarity of the post-Soviet left with Russian and Ukrainian deserters.

“What options are available to a radical minority?” was the question in the final discussion. “The answer cannot be that we all do more and more, but rather that we become more,” concluded one participant.

The »nd.Genossenschaft« belongs to the people who make it possible: our readers and authors. They are the ones who ensure left-wing journalism for everyone with their contribution: without profit maximization, media companies or tech billionaires.

→ report independently and critically → make topics visible that would otherwise go unnoticed → make voices heard that are often ignored → counter disinformation with facts → initiate and deepen left-wing debates

“Pay voluntarily” now and support the financing of our solidarity-based newspaper. So that nd remains.