By Michael Pröbsting, International Secretary of the Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT), 1 July 2021, www.thecommunists.net

The Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT) and our comrades of Convergencia Socialista (Argentina) have supported the popular uprising against the military dictatorship in Myanmar from the very beginning. [1] We did so not only because we recognize its progressive role for the liberation struggle in the country itself but also because we understand the importance of this insurrection for the international class struggle.

In a joint statement on this uprising we noted two month ago: “Finally, we ask all those committed to the liberation struggle of the oppressed masses to pay attention to the international significance of the current events in Myanmar. The country is centrally located in the region and a neighbor state of two powers – China and India. It also shares border with two other important countries in the region – Thailand and Malaysia. It is evident that all imperialist Great Powers – the U.S., China, Japan, EU and Russia – try to utilize the civil war in Myanmar for their geopolitical interests. Hence, the revolutionary struggle in Myanmar affects world politics in general and the international class struggle in particular. There are strong indications that the popular uprising could transform Myanmar into the Syria of South-East Asia. As the liberation struggle in Syria has become a key axis of the Arab Revolution, the popular uprising in Myanmar might become a focal point of the revolutionary process in Asia!” [2]

A key region for the capitalist world economy as well as for the international working class

In this article we want to explain such a Marxist approach in more detail. Let us start with emphasizing that Myanmar geographically lies in the center of East, South-East and South Asia. As we have pointed out on several occasions, this region plays a key role – one could even say the most important one – in the capitalist world economy. [3] Among the 12 leading countries in terms of global manufacturing production, five are from this region (and here we exclude Russia which in fact is also, partially, an Asian country). China is the global leader with a share of 25%. These five countries – China, Japan, South Korea, India and Indonesia – have a combined share of about 43% of global manufacturing production. There is no doubt that if we add the other countries of East, South-East and South Asia, they make up at least half of global industrial proudction. [4]

We see a similar concentration when we look to the global proletariat. As the RCIT demonstrated in a number of works, the majority of the global proletariat live in East, South-East and South Asia. Today, 866 million – this means 50,1% of all wage laborers on this planet – live in this region. And if we take the international industrial labor force, the share of this region is even higher (60%). [5]

In summary, the popular uprising in Burma/Myanmar takes place in the heart of a region which is of highest significance both for world capitalism as well as for the international working class struggle! From this follows the imperative that Marxists and revolutionaries must unreservedly support the popular uprising in Burma/Myanmar not only because of its legitimate and progressive cause but also because it takes place in a region which is in the focus of the global class struggle.

A region in the crosshair of the Great Powers

Naturally, the gigantic economic significance of the region of East, South-East and South Asia finds its translation into world politics. Except the Middle East, the Asian region is the most important arena where the rivalry between the imperialist Great Powers (and also smaller imperialist states like South Korea [6] or regional powers like India [7]) assumes its most pointed form. If the take the five Great Powers – the U.S., China, EU, Russia and Japan – it is only Western Europe which is not located in or close to this region. While the U.S. is not geographically located in East and South Asia, it has a strong military presence there (several bases, a strong and permanently present naval force, etc.) and it has security treaties with countries like Japan, South Korea or the Philippines. And while the European Great Powers don’t have a strong military presence in the region, they increasingly try to overcome this weakness as East and South Asia is of growing importance for their economic interests.

As we have dealt with the issue of Great Power rivalry in many works, we will not go further into detail at this point. [8] We limit ourselves to refer to the fact the region of East, South-East and South Asia is not only the scene of regular tensions between the U.S. and China, but also between China and Japan [9], between Japan and South Korea [10], between China and India [11], between the U.S. and North Korea [12] or between India and Pakistan. [13] Add to this the unresolved dispute between Japan and Russia over the Kuril Islands.

In short, Myanmar lies in the center of region which is in the focus of all imperialist Great Powers and which is – again except the Middle East – the region where a major war is most likely to take place in the next years. As we noted in a recent article, various high-ranking commanders in the U.S. expect a war with China in East Asia already as early as 2024 or 2026. [14]

It is therefore no accident that the Great Powers try to interfere in the events in Burma-Myanmar. China and Russia unabashedly take the side of the Tatmadaw regime. [15] The North American and European imperialists had closer relations with the detained Prime Minister Aung San Suu Kyi and hence they have opposed the military coup d'état. And Japan which has considerable business interests in Burma-Myanmar tries to keep relations with the regime without openly offending its Western partners. [16]

In summary, the popular uprising in Burma/Myanmar takes place in the heart of a region which is of crucial importance in world politics as all imperialist Great Powers have a stake there. These geopolitical interests result, on one hand, in the direct support of some imperialist powers for the regime of Senior General Min Aung Hlaing (mainly China and Russia) and, on the other hand, in sanctions and diplomatic protests by other powers (mainly the U.S. and the EU).

It is of crucial importance for the international solidarity movement to fight against the Chinese and Russian support for the Tatmadaw regime, to hit the business interests of the latter by their own working class actions, to keep its political independence from any Great Power and to refuse support for imperialist sanctions (by the UN or by any Great Power).

Can the popular uprising in Burma/Myanmar be the spark for the revolutionary process in South and East Asia?

Let us briefly deal with the question if the popular uprising in Burma/Myanmar can become the spark for the revolutionary process in South and East Asia? To an important degree, as we have pointed out in our statements, the events in this country bear strong resemblances with the Arab Revolution.

Now, there is also an important difference. The Arab Revolution has taken place in countries which have much in common – by their history, culture, language, religion, etc. Hence, it was not much surprising that the uprising in Tunisia in December 2010 / January 2011 soon provoked a revolutionary process in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Yemen and other Arab countries. [17] Add to this that the Arab Revolution affected the global Muslim umma with 1,8 billion people around the world.

There are no such close bonds between Burma/Myanmar and the other countries in the region. While there are sentiments like Pan-Arabism or global Muslim solidarity, there is no such thing as Pan-Asianism. In this respect, the potential for international effects for the revolutionary process are more limited in the case of the popular uprising in Burma/Myanmar.

On the other, the region of East and South Asia has already experienced a number of important class struggles in the recent past. Take for example the gigantic peasant movement in India [18], the popular protests in Thailand [19], or the – now nearly defeated – uprising in Hong Kong. [20] Add to this the long-standing heroic Intifada in Indian-occupied Kashmir. [21]

In other words, there exist a number of starting points which could help to transform the popular uprising in Burma/Myanmar into a region-wide revolutionary process. In fact, there exist already bonds between activists in Thailand, Hong Kong and Burma/Myanmar – the so-called Milk Tea Alliance.

It is the task of revolutionaries to explain the necessity and to build for the internationalization of the revolutionary struggle so that the uprising does not remain nationally isolated.

Confusion and betrayal of the reformist left

Finally, the issue of international solidarity with and the internationalization of the popular uprising in Burma/Myanmar poses the question: where is the so-called “left”?! As we have already pointed out on other occasions, it is a matter of fact that large sectors of international workers and popular movement mostly ignore the uprising – despite its global significance. How can this be explained?

It seems to us that there are basically two reasons for this. First, there is a large degree of what we call imperialist-aristocratic arrogance among the progressive and left forces in the imperialist countries. The left in Northern America and Western Europe is to a large degree closely connected with the domestic labor bureaucracy and liberal state institutions and has therefore strongly assimilated a viewpoint of the “superior” imperialist civilization. They can not and they do not put themselves on the standpoint of the international proletariat (which is mostly centered in the South and East). [22]

The Russian “left” is not much better – often it is even more unabashed “patriotic” and centered on a reactionary “Russkij Mir” outlook. [23] And in China, an independent left is not allowed to exist by the Stalinist-capitalist regime, hence there are only small groups operating in the underground (often under heroic circumstances!).

One could and still can see a similar ignorance of these “leftists” in relation to the Arab Revolution which has already lasted for more than a decade!

Related to this is a widespread failure of many reformist and centrist organizations to oppose all imperialist Great Powers. Large sectors of the left refuses to recognize the imperialist character of China and Russia. Hence, if there is a popular uprising directed against a regime with close relations with Beijing and Moscow, these “leftists” refuse to support it. We have seen this already since many years in the case of Assad where these “leftists” have failed to side with the Syrian Revolution. [24] As the ruling class of China and Russia support the Tatmadaw regime, these “leftists” prefer to leave the popular uprising alone. Such an approach is not only relevant for the reformist and centrist left in the imperialist countries but also in various countries of the South. Just take the Bolivarian or Castro-Chavista forces in Latin America which are strongly pro-Chinese or various proto-Stalinist forces within the Pan-Africanist movement.

In summary, these “leftists” replace Marxist anti-imperialism with bourgeois “geo-politicism”. The concrete result is the betrayal of crucial liberation struggles as those in Syria and now in Burma/Myanmar.

All these political failures demonstrate once more the urgent necessity to overcome the crisis of working class leadership and to replace the reformist and bureaucratic parties with an authentic revolutionary leadership. Hence, building a Revolutionary World Party is the most important task of Marxists today. The RCIT is dedicating all its forces to this great, indeed historic task!

미하엘 프뢰브스팅, 혁명적 공산주의인터내셔널 동맹 (RCIT) 국제서기, 2021년 7월 1일

혁명적 공산주의인터내셔널 동맹 (RCIT)과 사회주의통합당 (CS 아르헨티나)은 미얀마에서 군부독재에 반대하는 민중봉기를 그 시작 때부터 지지했다.[1] 우리가 그렇게 한 것은 미얀마에서의 해방투쟁 그 자체의 진보적 역할을 인정해서이기도 하지만, 그와 함께 국제 계급투쟁에 이 봉기가 갖는 중요성을 이해해서이기도 하다.

우리는 두 달 전 이 봉기에 관한 공동성명에서 이렇게 말했다. “끝으로, 우리는 피억압 대중의 해방투쟁에 헌신하는 모든 이들에게 미얀마 현 사태의 국제적 의의에 주목해 줄 것을 요청한다. 미얀마는 이 지역의 중앙에 위치하고 있으며 중국과 인도라는 두 열강의 인접 국가다. 또 이 지역의 다른 두 주요 국가인 태국과 말레이시아와도 국경을 접하고 있다. 미국, 중국, 일본, EU, 러시아 등 모든 제국주의 강대국들이 자신의 지정학적 이익을 위해 미얀마 내전을 이용하려는 것은 분명하다. 따라서 미얀마의 혁명투쟁은 세계정치 일반과 특수하게는 국제 계급투쟁에 영향을 미친다. 민중봉기가 미얀마를 동남아시아의 시리아로 전화시킬 수 있다는 강한 조짐이 나타나고 있다. 시리아에서의 해방투쟁이 아랍 혁명의 핵심 축이 되었듯이, 미얀마에서의 민중봉기는 아시아에서 혁명적 과정의 초점이 될지도 모른다!”[2]

동아시아·남아시아 - 자본주의 세계경제와 국제노동자계급 투쟁에 핵심 지역

이 글에서 우리는 이러한 맑스주의적 접근법을 보다 구체화하고자 한다. 먼저 미얀마는 지리적으로 동아시아 · 동남아시아 · 남아시아의 중심에 위치해 있다는 점을 강조하는 것으로 시작하자. 우리가 여러 차례 지적했듯이, 이 지역은 자본주의 세계경제에서 주요 지위 ㅡ 심지어는 가장 중요한 지위라고 말할 수도 있겠다 ㅡ 를 점하고 있다.[3] 세계 제조업 생산 면에서 선도적인 12개국 중 5개국이 이 지역에 있다. (여기에 러시아는 빠져 있는데, 실제로는 러시아도 부분적으로는 아시아 나라다). 중국은 전 세계 제조업 생산의 25%를 점하는 글로벌 리더다. 이들 5개국 (중국, 일본, 한국, 인도 및 인도네시아)은 전 세계 제조업 생산의 약 43%를 담당하고 있다. 여기에 동아시아·동남아시아·남아시아의 다른 나라들을 추가하면, 이 지역이 전 세계 산업 생산의 최소 절반을 차지한다는 것에는 의심의 여지가 없다.[4]

세계 프롤레타리아트의 지역별 분포 면에서도 비슷한 집중도를 이 지역에서 볼 수 있다. RCIT가 여러 문서를 통해 보여주었듯이, 세계 프롤레타리아트의 다수가 동아시아·동남아시아·남아시아에 살고 있다. 오늘, 전 세계 임금노동자의 50.1%에 해당하는 8억6천6백만 명이 이 지역에 살고 있다. 그리고 국제 산업 노동인력 면에서 이 지역의 점유율은 그보다도 더 높은 60%다.[5]

요컨대 미얀마 민중항쟁은 세계자본주의와 국제노동자계급투쟁 양쪽 모두에게 최고의 중요성을 지닌 지역의 심장부에서 전개되고 있는 싸움이다! 이것이 지시하는 바는 사회주의자들이 미얀마 민중봉기를 유보 없이 전면적으로 지지해야 한다는 것이다. 이 항쟁의 정당하고 진보적인 대의 때문만이 아니라, 이 항쟁이 글로벌 계급투쟁의 초점을 이루고 있는 지역에서 벌어지고 있기 때문이기도 하다.

강대국들의 표적이 되고 있는 지역

동아시아·동남아시아·남아시아 지역의 거대한 경제적 중요성은 당연히 세계정치에서도 거대한 중요성을 부여 받는다. 중동을 제외하고 아시아 지역은 제국주의 강대국들 (및 한국 같은 보다 작은 제국주의 국가들[6]이나 인도 같은 지역 열강들[7]) 간 패권경쟁이 가장 첨예한 형태를 띠는 중요한 무대다. 다섯 강대국 미국, 중국, EU, 러시아, 일본 중 EU를 제외한 네 강대국이 이 지역에 위치해 있거나 또는 가까이 있다. 미국은 지리적으로 동아시아·남아시아에 위치해 있지는 않지만, 이 지역에 강력한 주둔군 (여러 기지, 강력한 상설해군 등)을 가지고 있고 일본, 한국, 필리핀 같은 나라들과 안보조약을 맺고 있다. 그리고 유럽 강대국들은 이 지역에 주둔군을 가지고 있지는 않지만, 동아시아·남아시아가 자신의 경제적 이해에 중요성이 더해 감에 따라 이러한 약점을 극복하려는 노력을 배가하고 있다.

강대국 패권쟁투 문제에 대해서는 많은 문서들을 통해 다루었으므로 여기서는 더 세부적으로 나아가지는 않을 것이며[8], 다만 동아시아·동남아시아·남아시아 지역이 미·중 간에 상시 긴장의 현장일 뿐만 아니라 중·일 간[9], 한·일 간[10], 중국·인도 간[11], 북·미 간[12], 인도·파키스탄 간[13]에도 상시 긴장의 현장이라는 사실을 언급하는 것으로 국한하겠다. 여기에 한 가지 더 추가하면, 쿠릴 열도를 둘러싼 러·일 간의 미해결 분쟁이 있다.

간단히 말해서 미얀마는 모든 제국주의 강대국들의 표적이 되고 있는 지역이자, 향후 몇 년 안에 본격 전쟁이 일어날 가능성이 ㅡ 다시 중동을 제외하고는 ㅡ 가장 높은 지역인 동아시아·남아시아의 중심에 놓여 있다. 우리가 최근 글에서 언급했듯이, 미국에서 여러 군 고위 지휘관들이 이르면 2024년 또는 2026년에 동아시아에서 중국과의 전쟁을 예상하고 있다.[14]

그러므로 강대국들이 미얀마 사태에 개입하려 하는 것은 우연이 아니다. 중국과 러시아는 부끄럼 없이 군부정권을 편 든다.[15] 미·유럽 제국주의자들은 구금된 아웅산 수치와 더 긴밀한 관계를 맺고 있어 군부쿠데타에 반대해 왔다. 그리고 미얀마에 상당한 비즈니스 이해관계가 있는 일본은 공공연히 서방 동맹들을 불쾌하게 하지 않는 선에서 군사정권과 관계를 유지하려 한다.[16]

요약하자면, 미얀마가 그 중심에 위치한 이 지역에 대한 모든 제국주의 강대국들의 지정학적