Markus Lehner
In recent weeks, there has been some movement once more on several „fronts“ in the strategically deadlocked war in Ukraine. On the one hand, Ukraine entered a phase of weakness, which was exploited by the Russian military on several sections of the front. At the same time, Putin announced the possibility of a longer-term ceasefire agreement, while Ukraine and its Western allies are counting on a „peace conference“ in Switzerland in June. Finally, Ukraine’s main creditors are also exerting pressure, which could lead the war-torn country to the brink of insolvency.
More robust than expected
The background to these developments is certainly that Russian imperialism has proven to be more robust than its Western adversaries probably expected. Despite the sanctions, Russia successfully converted to a war economy. The replacement of the Minister of Defence with an economist is a clear sign of the strengthening of the military-industrial complex within the Russian leadership. The Russian Federation’s much larger population reservoir vis-à-vis Ukraine is now also having a full impact: Even without a new forced mobilisation, the Russian armed forces are succeeding in recruiting enough soldiers via economic incentives (in view of the increasingly uncertain popular response to the „normal” call up in Russia), while Ukraine is suffering serious personnel shortages.
This became particularly clear at the beginning of May, when Russian troops broke through the front line west of Donetsk, near Ochheretyne, on a strip several kilometers wide. The reason was probably that a Ukrainian brigade was tired of waiting for the long-promised replacements and withdrew before they arrived. This was one of the breakthroughs that now conjured up the danger of pincer movement on Pokrovsk and thus the fall of the remaining parts of the Donetsk region. The Ukrainian government responded with a comprehensive and highly repressive wave of mobilisations in order to be able to exchange tired front-line troops more quickly – which, however, carries the risk that poorly trained troops with complicated Western military technology will be immediately sent into battle. In addition to the shortage of personnel, increased production in Russia, cannot currently be matched by deliveries from the West, e.g. artillery ammunition. Even though supplies from the Czech Republic in particular provided partial compensation, Western arms production is far from matching the quantity of Russian armaments.
This will not rapidly be compensated for by the release of US aid money, as arms production (outside the Czech Republic) has not yet been ramped up in the necessary way. The discussion about individual technologies such as the Taurus system (German-Swedish cruise missiles) partly distracts from the fact that Western states would have to convert greater percentages of their GDP to war production to achieve a victory for Ukraine, equipped by it.
Forays
No wonder that in this tense situation, French President Emmanuel Macron bluntly began to canvass the immediate deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine as a lesser evil than a Russian victory. Militarists such as CDU MP Roderich Kiesewetter are advocating a direct NATO intervention in the form of taking over the airspace defence in western Ukraine, i.e. the establishment of a de facto no-fly zone. If Macron’s and Kiesewetter’s proposals were accepted, they would lead to a direct confrontation between NATO troops and Russia. This would not only change the character of the war in Ukraine itself, but further escalate the whole war and lead to a change in the previous Western strategy, which has always wanted to avoid a war between Russia and NATO.
In any case, it will take several months for Ukraine to get out of its materiel and personnel shortage and stabilise its fronts. Therefore, the Russian military is taking every opportunity to inflict further pinpricks. Since May 10, another front has been opened northeast of Kharkiv, with breakthroughs at Vovchansk and Lyptsi, targeted along the Oskil River. However successful the breakthrough was, the ease of overcoming the alleged fortifications there caused horror. In the meantime, a number of accusations, including corruption, have been made around the military leaders in the region. Other larger Russian units also appear to be on the move near Sudzha, northwest of Kharkiv, threatening to invade the neighbouring Sumy Oblast. This forces the Ukrainian military leadership to deploy many of its reserve troops around Kharkiv, making urgently needed replacements on the front around Donetsk impossible.
„Peace“ diplomacy
It is clear that Putin is taking advantage of this situation to make a „generous“ peace offer. According to the publications of the President’s Press Office, Ukraine is being offered a freeze in hostilities on the current front line and the start of negotiations to make this the basis for a final border between Ukraine and the Russian Federation. As was to be expected, this was immediately rejected by the Ukrainian government. The Russian government immediately proposed direct negotiations with the US on this proposal, according to Reuters.
Instead, the Ukrainian government and its Western allies have been relying for some time on a peace conference, on Lake Lucerne, starting in June, to which Switzerland says it has invited around 160 countries – not including the Russian Federation. The calculation of Western diplomacy is above all to bring Russia’s „interlocutors“, especially China, Brazil, India and South Africa, to the conference in order to be able to build up pressure on Putin. Many Western heads of government went to Beijing in particular to explain the importance of participation to the party and state leadership there – and were probably willing to make concessions in other areas in return for this. After the latter were revealed as not very substantial (viz the constant increases in punitive US tariffs), China and Brazil clearly rejected the trip to Lake Lucerne
Far from a „solution“
This diplomatic-propagandistic bluster about supposed „peace talks“ shows how far we still are from an actual solution. The depth of the conflict between the imperialist powers and the unbroken will of the Ukrainian population not to give in to the Russian occupation do not allow us to expect an inter-imperialist deal to end the conflict at present. This shows all the more how necessary it is for the workers and peasants in the region to become actors themselves in order to put an end to this murderous and materially destructive conflict. After all, it is not about „restoring clear borders under international law“ or „preserving Russia’s sphere of influence“ or similarly abstract principles as now supposedly for a „just peace“ – it is ultimately about how and under what conditions the majority of people in the embattled areas actually want to live.
Of course, the Russian proletariat holds the key to real peace. The growing dissatisfaction with the worsening conditions of everyday life in Russia, as well as the steadily increasing number of victims of the war, is slowly but surely becoming a problem for the Putin regime. Even before the war, important sectors of Russian industry had a labour shortage problem. According to Bloomberg, the Russian oil and gas industry alone is currently short of over 40,000 workers. Even in this best-paying industry to date, people now earn far less than in the army. Strikes have been a rarity in recent years but could become inevitable given this supply-demand gap. It is therefore important that the 30 million unionised workers replace their Putin-loyal leaderships with a class-struggle alternative. In particular, strikes in the huge arms industry would quickly throw a spanner in the works of the Russian military machine in Ukraine.
In Ukraine, too, it is not only dissatisfaction with growing corrupt authoritarianism in the political and military leadership that is growing. It is also becoming clear that the „friends“ in the West have their own priorities regarding their support for the Ukrainian government. For example, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal in early May, it was emphasised at a conference of Ukraine’s most important creditors that the patience of BlackRock, PIMCO, etc with Ukraine is coming to an end as far as the deferral of interest payments is concerned – because they did not expect such a long war! They are demanding interest payments of $500 million annually, starting next year, while government lenders (on behalf of their taxpayers) have waived repayments until 2027.
Failed proposals about the confiscation of Russia’s frozen foreign assets, have been replaced by the G7’s offer to Ukraine of a $50 billion low interest loan collateralised by these assets. But, unless this materialises quickly, Ukrainian national bankruptcy will be imminent. Meanwhile, it is clear how the Ukrainian economy is supposed to cope with this. Why else was the labour law de facto abolished and Ukrainian agriculture turned into an Eldorado for the dumping policies of global agribusiness? In recent years, and especially during the war, Ukrainian agricultural corporations such as Kernel Holding, but above all Western multinationals such as Bayer/Monsanto, DuPont and Cargill, have begun to take over agriculture and agricultural land – mainly at the expense of the approximately 8 million small farmers. The Ukraine war is being used by the rulers of the „democratic West“ primarily for their own enrichment. It also serves as a pretext for rearmament and militarisation in NATO countries, while Ukraine continues to be supplied with only the bare necessities so as not to collapse under Russian military strikes.
Struggle for independence in workers‘ hands!
It is time for the working class in Ukraine itself to take the lead in the struggle for Ukraine’s genuine independence – not only directly from Russian but also from Western imperialism. This means combining an effective defence against Russian attacks with the struggle for social rights, debt cancellation and expropriation of all imperialist investments in Ukraine itself. While we recognise Ukraine’s right to self-defense and to obtain the necessary means to do achieve it, revolutionaries in Ukraine and in the West must warn against the illusions that the current military support of NATO countries is for the country’s independence. Rather, these deliveries are tied to securing their own sphere of influence and exploitation. They are not aimed at real self-determination for the whole of Ukraine, but at seizing booty and strategic advantages for the West. Whether this calculation works out, or the Ukrainian masses thwart it, ultimately depends on whether the working class succeeds in building its own revolutionary party that combines the struggle against the Russian occupation with that for a socialist Ukraine.
Such a real struggle for independence in Europe can never succeed if NATO – this bulwark for Western investors’ security – continues to exist. Rather, the smashing of NATO together with the imperialist Russian military machine is the prerequisite for a peace that can ultimately only last in the form of a United Socialist States of Europe.
This may seem utopian today – but it is realistic compared to imperialist „peace negotiations“, which are now being presented by the official sides and will not bring about an end to the slaughter in the long run – but only a state of affairs that is the prerequisite for the next war.