AWL policy on the Ukraine war, agreed at AWL conference 2022, much of which remains true and is reprinted below as part of our 2023 resolution, has stood-up well over the course of the last year.
The AWL opposes the Russian imperialist war against Ukraine. The Russian state is fighting to annex Ukrainian territory and subordinate Ukraine to Russian political power.
At the time of our 2022 conference this assessment was certainly true and is probably still the case, despite the staggering losses of equipment and manpower Russia has suffered on the battlefield. Russia continues to expand its armed forces and take steps to attempt to modernise its military equipment. We expect continued Russian attempts to attack Ukraine and occupy more Ukrainian territory in 2023.
Following Russia’s defeat north of Kyiv, and withdrawal in April 2022, the West began to consider and then supply Ukraine with more effective, modern weaponry.
Advanced artillery and other materials, donated by the US and others in mid-2022, led to Ukrainian victories in Kharkiv oblast and Kherson during the last few months of 2022. However, the West has refused, so far, to give Ukraine the weapons it needs, and the quantities it needs, to overrun and push out Russian forces occupying Ukrainian territory (modern tanks, aircraft, missiles etc).
The Western powers have been donating weapons to stop Ukraine losing the war with Russia, rather than allowing Ukraine to win a victory.
The US and European states are scared of the war escalating, spreading and spiralling out of control. Indeed, that is a real possibility, and something we oppose.
On the other hand the only possible democratic, stable peace is one which follows a Ukrainian victory and Russian withdrawal. A Russian victory in Ukraine would embolden Russian imperialism and lead to a prolonged Ukrainian guerrilla war against Russian occupation and the terror of the police-state regime Russia would impose (and has implemented in areas it already occupies).
We demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the Russian military from Ukrainian territory, including Donbas and Crimea. We demand the end to the Russian state’s war and the end to threats made to other nations.
We specifically oppose Russian threats to escalate the war through the use of nuclear (or chemical) weapons against Ukraine or other states.
We support Ukraine’s war of self-defence against the Russian invasion. Ukraine has the right to self-determination and the right to defend itself. Ukraine has the right to ask other states for political and military support. We demand the West gives arms which allow Ukraine to defend itself.
We support Ukraine against Russian imperialist aggression, and support the Ukrainian working class against the right-wing politicians and Ukrainian capitalist class. We oppose Ukrainian capitalist attacks on workers’ rights and ability to organise in Ukraine.
We will continue to seek opportunities for specific practical solidarity with the Ukrainian left, including seeking discussion and direct links with Sotsialniy Rukh (Social Movement).
Ukraine is a poor nation. Ukraine’s foreign debt should be cancelled and aid given to Ukraine to allow it to rebuild.
Extensive Western sanctions have been imposed on Russian companies, the state and individuals as an alternative to war with Russia, rather than the prelude to war. While not flatly opposing sanctions on Russia, these sanctions are not our methods. They are clumsy and their effects are difficult to calculate. Manifestly, despite some damage to the Russian economy, sanctions have not curtailed Russia’s war.
We oppose calls for cultural, academic, sporting, etc., boycotts of Russia and Russians, and for blanket boycotts of Russian goods, for similar reasons we oppose such calls in the case of Israel: they are a blunt instrument which risks cutting off possibilities for direct links with Russian dissidents, and are likely to benefit nationalist and chauvinist narratives inside Russia whilst having little effect on the Russian ruling class/state.
We oppose reactionary, anti-Russian nationalisms and actions against Russian symbols (e.g. refusal to perform music by Russian musicians, destruction of statues of Russian writers etc) that have emerged in the Baltic states, amongst the Belarusian diaspora and in Ukraine itself. These actions are not just unpleasant, but are politically counterproductive, playing into Putin’s narrative that the West opposes all-things Russian.
We advocate international working class solidarity with Ukraine. We support the international workers’ movement organising as an independent force for Ukraine and initiatives such as the recent workers’ aid convoys from various European states.
We support the Russian anti-war protesters. We demand the release of those that have been jailed and demand the end to the persecution of Russian opponents of Putin.
We support Ukraine’s attempt to join the EU, which would provide a measure of political protection.
We oppose NATO. In Finland and Sweden we would argue against NATO membership. But Russia has no right to veto them joining or dictate terms to them, and certainly no right to try to prevent them joining using threats or force.
This is on the same basis as we argue against UK membership of NATO and against the UK having nuclear weapons. If anything, we have more sympathy with Finnish and Swedish people wanting the protection of NATO membership than we do for British people wanting to maintain the UK’s place in NATO. We have no sympathy with the idea that countries in Eastern Europe should, in particular, not join NATO because the Russian state finds this threatening to its security. The much greater threat is clearly the other way (from Russia against its East European neighbours) and this is pushing more nations towards joining NATO.
NATO expansion since 1991 has primarily been driven by sentiments within the Eastern European states themselves. Whilst this was often welcomed and encouraged by the US and some other western states, a major ‘push’ factor on Eastern European states has been fear of the revanchist imperial ambitions of Putin’s Russia. Putin has repeatedly decried the dissolution of the Soviet Stalinist empire and has invoked Russian territorial ‘Claims’ and expansionist aims against Ukraine, Moldova, Poland, as well as the Baltic, the Caucasus and Central Asian regions.
We oppose the use of the slogan "No NATO expansion" or similar. It is not a general anti-NATO slogan (which would, in some contexts, be appropriate, although not as a response to Russia’s war in Ukraine). “No NATO expansion” is a soft and conservative demand, implying deference to a status quo of NATO being an alliance of North American and Western European countries with, reluctantly, some from Eastern Europe, but no more. It suggests acceptance that countries such as the UK, France and Germany have better reasons to be in NATO than countries such as Ukraine, Finland and Sweden. It is tone deaf to the fears of those peoples (clearly well-founded fears as the case of Ukraine proves) about a heavily armed and militarily aggressive neighbour in the form of the Russian state. It is saying, effectively, that "we" (the West) should be secure and "they" (the East) should be left vulnerable to military attack and invasion. This does not mean that NATO is our answer. But neutral "buffer states" between militarily-allied blocs are not our answer either. We assert that small (and relatively small) nations in Eastern Europe have as much right to security and self-determination as the big powers and their long-standing allies.
Our opposition to NATO in this war is different to the opposition of, say, Socialist Worker, which misunderstands the war as a direct fight between NATO and Russia, despite NATO steadfastly refusing to fight and governments such at the US’s and the EU states’ having taken extensive steps to avoid fighting Russia in Ukraine.
We oppose the Stop the War Campaign and the demand “Stop The War” when it is used to imply Ukraine giving up the struggle for its right to self-determination. We want the war to stop and, simultaneously, for Ukraine to retain its existence as a fully independent state. The best possible outcome, now, is for Ukraine to win this war, forcing Russia out.
We avoid slogans and demands that would clearly and immediately lead to the direct participation of NATO states in the fighting. We have not demanded the West impose a No Fly Zone over Ukraine, for this reason.
The possibility exists that the war could escalate and become some type of world war, with major powers fighting each other using Ukraine (and possibly Finland, or Poland or the Baltic states) as a battle ground. If that happens the war will change character. In such a war we will oppose both contending sides. Slogans such as “Stop the War” which are not useable now on placards or in headlines, will become relevant.
Some on the UK left have demanded that Ukraine must stop fighting and negotiate a peace with Russia. There is a difference between the intentions of these leftists (who generally do not support Ukraine, and would be pleased to see it cede territory and give away political rights), and Ukraine’s government choosing to negotiate with Russia. Ukraine has the right to negotiate, to try and find some political advantage in its struggle with Russia, and with the intention of mitigating the effects of the war on the Ukrainian people.
If a peace treaty is signed to end the war it might well involve concessions made by Ukraine. Depending on the details we may not oppose it. Ukraine is still, overall, in a weak position and might have to sign a bad peace deal to avoid worse. However, we oppose the European powers, or the US, attempting to force Ukraine to sign a poor deal in order to re-establish their political and trading relationships with Russia.
We are for rights for refugees, and an open door for all refugees. We recognise the plight faced by millions of people who have fled Ukraine and denounce the petty, mean response of our government; we demand the welcoming of those fleeing Ukraine; and we will use widespread sympathy for Ukrainian refugees and official rhetoric around Ukraine to agitate for welcoming refugees and for refugee rights more widely, too.
We will use our support for Ukraine as a lever to agitate, on the left, in the labour movement and more widely, for opposition to all national oppression — advocating the right to self-determination as an essential component of a program of consistent democracy and internationalist working-class solidarity.