Russia and the Theory of “Lesser-Evil” Imperialism

On some Stalinists and “Trotskyists” who formally recognize Russia’s class character but reject the political consequences

By Michael Pröbsting, International Secretary of the Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT), 28 July 2022, www.thecommunists.net

 

Contents

 

Introduction

The originator: the Stalinist RKRP (Russia)

The tradition of Lenin … and Stalin

The RKRP’s version of “Philosophia ancilla theologiae

The Stalinist KKE (Greece) and its allies: a discreetly hidden version of the “lesser-evil” theory

Alan Woods’ IMT: A de facto version of the theory of “lesser-evil” imperialism

Conclusions

 


Introduction

 

We have argued for many years that Russia, after overcoming the chaotic years of capitalist restoration in the 1990s, became an imperialist power at the turn of this century. [1] Since then, unfortunately, most socialists treated this question as a rather abstract-theoretical issue. In fact, the subject did not provoke much interest. However, this has changed since 24 February when Putin invaded the Ukraine. Now many people recognize that this is a theoretical issue of major actual importance!

Usually, the deniers of Russia’s imperialist character belong to Stalinist or Bolivarian parties for which this thesis serves as excuse for supporting, openly or concealed, Moscow (and Beijing). [2] Recently, Claudio Katz, a progressive professor at the University of Buenos Aires who is a well-known economist in Latin America, developed the theory that Russia is not an imperialist power but rather “a semi-periphery country which is harassed by the United States” and “a non-hegemonic empire in gestation.” [3]

At this place, we will not deal again with this revisionist theory. Here, we rather want to discuss a different concept which, however, arrives at similar practical conclusions like the deniers of Russian imperialism.

We talk about a conception which we can label as a theory of “lesser-evil” imperialism. The advocates of such a policy formally recognize the characterization of Russia (or China) as “imperialist” but still consider this state as less dangerous than its Western rivals in NATO. As a result, the supporter of the “lesser-evil” theory refuse to draw the political and tactical conclusions from their designation of Russia as imperialist, i.e. they reject the policy of revolutionary defeatism. [4]

 

The originator: the Stalinist RKRP (Russia)

 

It is fair to say that the Russian Communist Workers’ Party – Revolutionary Party of Communists (RKRP-RPK), led by Viktor Tyulkin, is the originator of the theory of Russia as a “lesser-evil” imperialism. This party has been, at least until recently, probably the second-largest Stalinist party in Russia – after the misnamed Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) under the leadership of Gennady Zyuganov. [5] The latter is the largest opposition party in the State Duma where it acts as a Great Russian chauvinist servant of the Putin regime and a loyal defender of Russian imperialism. [6]

The RKRP avoids such unashamed red-brown “Ruskij Mir” socialism a la Zyuganov. They take a more critical stance to the Putin regime (which is certainly easier for them as – in contrast to the KPRF – they don’t have to lose any positions in the state apparatus). Furthermore, as we discussed in our book Anti-Imperialism in the Age of Great Power Rivalry, the RKRP explicitly recognizes Russia’s imperialist class character. [7]

The foreign policy of Putin is connected with the interests of the Russian capital. Russian imperialism is still young. Nevertheless, it is well established and has a good appetite. It faces competition in the world arena from much larger and experienced opponents like the USA and the EU. (...) Russia and China as imperialist countries form some kind of union (including the BRICS) ...[8]

At the same time, we explained from the very beginning and are now explaining that help from the Russian Federation can and should be accepted, but imperialist Russia is not the Soviet Union, that the Vlasovites are no better than the Banderaites.[9]

When Putin’s invasion of Ukraine started on 24 February, the RKRP leadership advocated its support in the name of “helping the people's republics of Donbass against fascist aggression by the Kiev Nazis.“ It declared in an official statement after the beginning of the war: “Once again, returning to the fact of recognition of the republics of Donbass, we note that it happened, although late, much later than it should have been, but better late than never. The RKRP not only supported this step from the very beginning of the proclamation of these republics, but also demanded that the bourgeois authorities of the Russian Federation take this step as help in supporting the people's republics of Donbass against fascist aggression by the Kiev Nazis. Of course, the goals of the military intervention of the Russian Federation by the authorities and Putin are only declared as humanitarian - saving people from the reprisals of the Nazis. In fact, the source of the conflict is the inter-imperialist contradictions between the US, the EU and Russia, into which the Ukraine is drawn. The goal of the most powerful US imperialism in the world is to weaken the Russian competitor and expand its influence in the European market space. (…) From the class viewpoint, the Russian ruling powers, as well as those of the USA and the EU, do not care in the least about the working people in the Donbass, or those in Russia and Ukraine. We have no doubt that the true objectives of the Russian state in this war are entirely imperialistic - to strengthen the position of imperialist Russia in world market competition. But, since this struggle today to some extent helps the people of Donbass to repulse Bandera fascism, the communists in this part of it do not deny, but allow and support as much as it is waged against fascism in the Donbass and Ukraine. And they categorically oppose the actions of their government, when, under the cover of the fight against fascism, the issues of expansion and strengthening of Russian imperialism and its allies will be resolved. As long as Russia's armed intervention helps save people in the Donbass from reprisals by punishers, we will not oppose this goal. In particular, we consider it acceptable if, due to circumstances, it is necessary to use force against the fascist Kiev regime, insofar as this will be in the interests of the working people.[10]

We see, the Stalinists of the RKRP-type abstain from the vulgar “Ruskij Mir” chauvinism a la Zyuganov. They pursue a more “Marxist”-sounding policy, recognize the class interests of the Putin regime, and even recognize Russia’s imperialist character. This is, we note in passing, an insight which many so-called “Trotskyists” have not managed to achieve until now! [11] However, they combine such a correct thesis with an arch-Stalinist policy as they call for support of such an imperialist power against “fascist” Ukraine and Western imperialism.

 

The tradition of Lenin … and Stalin

 

Of course, such a class-collaborationist policy of supporting one imperialist power against another (or even against a semi-colonial country like the Ukraine) is thoroughly reactionary and has nothing to with the principles of Lenin and the Bolsheviks. In the midst of World War I, the Russian Marxists strongly denounced any “tactical” support for one imperialist power against its rival under the pretext of “national rights” or “democracy” or because it would be smaller.

The question of which group dealt the first military blow or first declared war is immaterial in any determination of the tactics of socialists. Both sides’ phrases on the defence of the fatherland, resistance to enemy invasion, a war of defence, etc., are nothing but deception of the people. [12]

But imagine a slave-holder who owns 100 slaves warring against another who owns 200 slaves, for a more “just” redistribution of slaves. The use of the term of a “defensive” war, or a war “for the defence of the fatherland”, would clearly be historically false in such a case and would in practice be sheer deception of the common people, philistines, and the ignorant, by the astute slave-holders. It is in this way that the peoples are being deceived with “national” ideology and the term of “defence of the fatherland”, by the present-day imperialist bourgeoisie, in the war now being waged between slave-holders with the purpose of consolidating slavery. [13]

From the standpoint of bourgeois justice and national freedom (or the right of nations to existence), Germany might be considered absolutely in the right as against Britain and France, for she has been “done out” of colonies, her enemies are oppressing an immeasurably far larger number of nations than she is, and the Slavs that are being oppressed by her ally, Austria, undoubtedly enjoy far more freedom than those of tsarist Russia, that veritable “prison of nations”. Germany, however, is fighting, not for the liberation of nations, but for their oppression. It is not the business of socialists to help the younger and stronger robber (Germany) to plunder the older and overgorged robbers. Socialists must take advantage of the struggle between the robbers to overthrow all of them. [14]

Such an internationalist and anti-imperialist policy was the complete opposite of the one pursued by the reformist parties which lent support (or refused to oppose) one or the other imperialist power. As is well-known, the British, French and U.S. social democrats sided with their bourgeoisie against the “reactionary monarchies” of Germany, Austria and Turkey during World War I. And, using the same national-reformist logic, the German social democrats argued that they had to defend “their cultural superior fatherland” against the “Tatarian Russians”.

From the 1930s onwards, Stalinism picked up this political method and advocated an alliance with one imperialist camp against the other. In the years 1935 to 1939, they advocated siding with the “democratic”, “anti-fascist” imperialist states against the “reactionary”, “fascist” imperialist rivals. When Moscow’s foreign policy interests changed, the whole hypocritical ideology was turned on its head. Between 1939 and 1941, during the period of the Hitler-Stalin Pact, the Stalinists’ fire was focused on “plutocratic” Western imperialism, while “peace-loving” Nazi-Germany was treated much more cautiously. In fact, Moscow handed over a number of German and Austrian communists to the Gestapo (among them the founder of the Austrian Communist Party Franz Koritschoner or the German communist Margarete Buber-Neumann). Likewise did various Stalinist parties in France, Denmark, etc approach the German occupants and looked for possibilities of collaboration. In that period, Stalinism denounced Britain and France as “brutal colonial masters” oppressing the peoples in Asia and Africa.

And when the Nazis invaded the USSR in June 1941 – to the complete surprise of Stalin and Molotov – everything changed again. Britain and France were no longer considered oppressive imperialists but rather democratic antifascist allies. Political hypocrisy, ideological confusion and unprincipled manoeuvre were definitely the hallmark of Stalinism!

 

The RKRP’s version of “Philosophia ancilla theologiae

 

Today, the RKRP applies the same method to the current conditions. They proclaim that Russian imperialism – which, by “accident”, happens to be the motherland of these “Marxist-Leninists” – is the “lesser evil” against the “bigger evil”. This means, effectively, that the supports imperialist Russia against nearly everyone – from the Western Great Powers to the semi-colonial Ukraine (which conveniently is slandered as “fascist”).

Needless to say that this is all reactionary nonsense from the beginning to the end. If “democracy vs fascism” would be the criterion for support, the RKRP would have to side with the U.S. and Western Europe since these countries are definitely more “bourgeois-democratic” than Putin’s Russia. Surely, there exist a bunch of right-wing extremists in the Ukraine. But the same is true for Russia – just think about Aleksandr Dugin and his “Eurasian” movement, the notorious ex-FSB paramilitary leader Igor Girkin/Strelkov or Tsargrad, a right-wing media owned by the Great Russian monarchist oligarch Konstantin Malofeev.

But it would be naïve to imagine that the RKRP leadership would consider Marxist theory as a scientific guideline. These Stalinists rather follow the notorious method of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages which proclaimed the principle “Philosophia ancilla theologiae” ('Philosophy is the servant of theology'), i.e. that science and rational thought must be subordinated to its dogmas.

Authentic Marxists do not base their analysis of imperialist wars on such criteria like which side was more expansive before, which side is stronger, has more military basis, is more “democratic”, etc. These are secondary issues compared to the main question: what is the class character of a given state and its goals? These issues are decisive for the approach of Marxists. In a conflict between rivalling imperialist powers, socialists can not support any side irrespective of which one is “more aggressive“ or “more democratic”. In a conflict between an imperialist and a semi-colonial country, other things being equal, socialists defend the latter. These are the most important conclusions from the program of revolutionary defeatism as it was elaborate by Lenin and Trotsky! [15]

However, one has also to admit that the position of the RKRP contains at least one advantage: it makes no effort to hide its theory of “lesser-evil” imperialism and openly states its approach. The same compliment can not be made to other Stalinists and pseudo-Trotskyists.

 

The Stalinist KKE (Greece) and its allies: a discreetly hidden version of the “lesser-evil” theory

 

The Communist Party of Greece (KKE) is a sizeable party which constantly receives between 5-8% of the votes at elections. It is also a key force in the international Stalinist milieu since it has been the initiator of the so-called International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties. This is a loose alliance which holds annual conferences since 1998. The parties attending this conference adopt joint declarations. A number of these organizations publish a journal – the International Communist Review - and constitute a Working Group. While these structures exist on a very federalist and loose basis, they nevertheless manage sometimes to initiate joint statements on important world political events.

While it often plays a militant role in the class struggle (combined with wild sectarianism towards other left-wing forces), it has also taken a reactionary position promoting Greek chauvinism against neighbouring states (e.g. Türkiye, Macedonia) or support for the Assad dictatorship in suppressing the uprising of the Syrian people since 2011. [16]

However, as we noted somewhere else, the KKE has recently moved towards a more progressive position concerning their approach to Russian imperialism. It strongly condemned Moscow’s military intervention in Kazakhstan in January this year. [17] And when the Ukraine War started, it denounced it too. Furthermore, since a few months it publicly characterizes Russia as an “imperialist state”. [18] Remarkably, the KKE even attacked the above-mentioned RKRP in a polemical article for “its supports of the imperialist Russian invasion of Ukraine.[19]

However, despite such welcoming criticism the KKE itself pursues a different, more concealed version of the theory of “lesser-evil” imperialism. While it denounces both NATO and Russia as imperialist, while it condemns Putin’s invasion, it nevertheless directs most of its criticism and its public activities against NATO. Worse, it even initiates acts of boycott against military aid for the Ukraine, i.e. they are deliberately weakening the resistance of the Ukrainian people and their ability to fight back Putin’s attempt to colonialise the country. [20]

Hence, in essence, while the KKE formally recognizes the imperialist character of Russia, it refuses to defend semi-colonial countries – like the Ukraine, like Syria – which are under attack of the very same power. So, its political consequences demonstrate that the KKE views Russia as a “lesser-evil” imperialism.

 

Alan Woods’ IMT: A de facto version of the theory of “lesser-evil” imperialism

 

The so-called “International Marxist Tendency” (IMT), led by Alan Woods and his group, effectively pursues a similar theory of “lesser-evil” imperialism. As we did show somewhere else, while it sometimes recognises, in passing, the fact that Russia is an imperialist power, it usually “forgets” to mention this fact in its articles. [21] Most of its documents on the Ukraine War focus on denouncing … Western imperialism and do not even mention the imperialist character of Russia.

The IMT version of the theory of “lesser-evil” imperialism is built on the concept that U.S. imperialism is a much worse enemy than its Russian rival. It repeatedly calls the U.S. the most counterrevolutionary force on the planet in its major documents on the Ukraine War. [22] The meaning of this formula is evident: even if Russia might be an imperialist power, it would be “a less counterrevolutionary force on the planet” than the U.S.!

Based on such a revisionist conception of “more“ and “less counterrevolutionary“ Great Powers, it is only consequential that the IMT leadership strictly opposes any support for the Ukrainian people and its war of defence against Putin’s invasion. It considers both Russia as well as the Ukrainian people as equally reactionary. We cannot support either side in this war, because it is a reactionary war on both sides. [23]

According to the IMT’s assessment, the Ukraine War is merely a “US imperialism’s proxy war”, i.e. the Ukrainian people are resisting Putin’s attempt to colonize their country only because they are servants of Washington. [24] In the end, the IMT considers NATO as the main reactionary factor in the Ukraine War; it views the Ukraine – a semi-colonial country – not worth of defence against the invasion by a Great Power; in other words, effectively, it characterises Russian imperialism as a “lesser evil” compared to the U.S. and Western Europe.

Such a shameful approach was symbolised by the participation of a representative of the IMT Russia as a speaker at a recently held conference which promoted support for Russia in the Ukraine War! [25]

In fact, the leaders of the IMT are continuing the same line which led them to support the so-called “People’s Republics” in Donbass in their war against the Kiev government in 2014/15. [26] They claimed that these pseudo-states were the expression of a working-class rebellion while, in reality, these were proxies of Russian imperialism, based on the military power of thousands of Russian soldiers which had intervened in the civil war. [27]

It is not without irony, by the way, that the IMT denies the proxy nature of the so-called “People’s Republics” in Donbass in 2014/15 despite the well-known presence of up to up to 16,000 Russian soldiers (not to speak about the artillery and tanks which Moscow sent). [28] However, at the same time, the IMT denounces the Ukraine as a “proxy” of U.S. imperialism despite the fact that there are, at most, a few hundred Western advisers and agents on the ground!

The IMT pro-Russian opportunism has gone so far that it even praised a warlord like the late Alexei Mozgovoy (commander of the so-called “Ghost Brigade“) as a kind of communist hero because of his “statements in favor of a class war of the people against the oligarchs.[29] We note in passing that the above-mentioned Stalinist RKRP also called this figure a “spontaneous communist”.

As we did show somewhere else, Mozgovoy was, in fact, a red-brown figure who mixed class rhetoric with Great Russian chauvinism and Anti-Semitism, denouncing “Jewish Nazis” for having plans to “build a new Israel in Ukraine” and for waging “Jewish terror after the Jewish revolution that has won in Ukraine [by this he meant the Euromaidan insurrection in February 2014, Ed.][30]

 

Conclusions

 

At the end of this essay, we shall summarize our main conclusions in a few theses.

1.           The theory of “lesser-evil” imperialism is wrong in principle. There are stronger and weaker, bigger and smaller imperialist states. None of them is a “lesser evil”. They are all enemies of the working class and the oppressed peoples. The people in Afghanistan and Iraq, suffering from years of U.S. war and occupation as well as the people of Chechnya and Syria, tortured by Russia, bear witness to the equally criminal character of the imperialist powers of East and West.

2.           It is impermissible for socialists to lend support, in any form, to one or the other of these imperialist states. Such could only result in the political subordination of workers and oppressed to the monopoly bourgeoisie in this or that country. Marxists characterize such a policy as social-imperialism which has been implemented by social democracy since World I and by Stalinism since the 1930s.

3.           The RCIT advocates the program of revolutionary defeatism. This means that in conflicts between Great Powers, we support neither the one nor the other. Both are enemies and the working class must oppose all of these.

4.           In case of an attack by a Great Power against an oppressed people, the program of revolutionary defeatism, other things being equal, obligates socialists to defend the latter against the imperialist aggressor and to openly advocate the defeat of the imperialist aggressor.

5.           The RCIT therefore unreservedly condemns the theory of “lesser-evil” imperialism. We strongly reject the position advocated by various Stalinist and pseudo-Trotskyist forces – like the RKRP (Russia), the KKE (Greece) or Alan Woods’ IMT – that Russia would constitute such a “lesser-evil” imperialist power. This thesis is wrong and only serves as an excuse for downplaying the reactionary role of Russian imperialism. The practical consequences of this revisionist theory are either open support for its reactionary wars of aggression (RKRP) or, at the least, denunciation of the legitimate resistance of oppressed people like in Syria or in the Ukraine (KKE, IMT).

 



[1] The RCIT has published numerous documents about capitalism in Russia and its rise to an imperialist power. The most important ones are several pamphlets by Michael Pröbsting: The Peculiar Features of Russian Imperialism. A Study of Russia’s Monopolies, Capital Export and Super-Exploitation in the Light of Marxist Theory, 10 August 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/the-peculiar-features-of-russian-imperialism/; by the same author: Lenin’s Theory of Imperialism and the Rise of Russia as a Great Power. On the Understanding and Misunderstanding of Today’s Inter-Imperialist Rivalry in the Light of Lenin’s Theory of Imperialism. Another Reply to Our Critics Who Deny Russia’s Imperialist Character, August 2014, http://www.thecommunists.net/theory/imperialism-theory-and-russia/; Russia as a Great Imperialist Power. The formation of Russian Monopoly Capital and its Empire – A Reply to our Critics, 18 March 2014 (this pamphlet contains a document written in 2001 in which we established for the first time our characterisation of Russia as imperialist), http://www.thecommunists.net/theory/imperialist-russia/; see also these essays: Russian Imperialism and Its Monopolies, in: New Politics Vol. XVIII No. 4, Whole Number 72, Winter 2022, https://newpol.org/issue_post/russian-imperialism-and-its-monopolies/; Once Again on Russian Imperialism (Reply to Critics). A rebuttal of a theory which claims that Russia is not an imperialist state but would be rather “comparable to Brazil and Iran”, 30 March 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/once-again-on-russian-imperialism-reply-to-critics/. See various other RCIT documents on this issue at a special sub-page on the RCIT’s website: https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/china-russia-as-imperialist-powers/.

[2] See e.g. these pamphlets by Michael Pröbsting: Putin’s Poodles (Apologies to All Dogs). Putins Pudel. The pro-Russian Stalinist parties and their arguments in the current NATO-Russia Conflict, 9 February 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/nato-russia-conflict-stalinism-as-putin-s-poodles/; Servants of Two Masters. Stalinism and the New Cold War between Imperialist Great Powers in East and West, 10 July 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/servants-of-two-masters-stalinism-and-new-cold-war/; by the same author: Stalinist and “Trotskyist” Supporters of Chinese Imperialism under the Fig-Leaf of “Anti-Imperialism”. A commentary on the statement “No to U.S. war threats against China!” by the “United National Antiwar Coalition” in the U.S., 4 April 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/stalinist-and-trotskyist-supporters-of-chinese-imperialism-under-the-fig-leaf-of-anti-imperialism/; One-sided and Naïve … at Best! A joint call by the friends of Chinese imperialism and the daydreamers of well-meaning global capitalism, 31 March 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/joint-call-by-friends-of-chinese-imperialism-and-the-daydreamers/

[3] Claudio Katz: Is Russia an imperialist power? Part I, https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-part/; Part II, https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-part-2/; Part III: https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-part-3/; Part IV, https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-benevolent/. This essay has been reproduced on various websites. The Spanish original can be also viewed on Katz’s website (https://katz.lahaine.org). We will publish a reply to this essay in the near future.

[4] See e.g. RCIT: Theses on Revolutionary Defeatism in Imperialist States, 8 September 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/theses-on-revolutionary-defeatism-in-imperialist-states/

[5] Since the RKRP suffered several splits in the last period, it is difficult to say if it still the second-largest Stalinist party.

[6] For our critique of the KPRF see e.g., in addition to the two pamphlets mentioned above in footnote 2, Michael Pröbsting: “Socialism” a la Putin. On a telling dialogue between the Stalinist party leader and the Russian President, 13 July 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/europe/socialism-a-la-putin/; by the same author: The Popular Uprising in Kazakhstan and Putin’s Patriotic “Communists”. The Stalinist KPRF of Gennady Zyuganov supports the bloody crackdown of the protests and the imperialist intervention of Russian troops, 8 January 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/kazakhstan-and-putin-s-patriotic-communists

[7] See chapters VIII and XVI in Michael Pröbsting: Anti-Imperialism in the Age of Great Power Rivalry. The Factors behind the Accelerating Rivalry between the U.S., China, Russia, EU and Japan. A Critique of the Left’s Analysis and an Outline of the Marxist Perspective, RCIT Books, Vienna 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/anti-imperialism-in-the-age-of-great-power-rivalry/

[9] RKRP: Перспектива для Донбасса - Заявление коммунистических и рабочих партий Донбасса, России и Украины, 19.2.2022 http://www.solidnet.org/article/RCWP--00001/ (our translation)

[10] RKRP: Нет фашизму, нет империалистической войне! О вооружённой фазе конфликта между РФ и Украиной, Заявление Политсовета ЦК РКРП-КПСС, 25.2.2022 http://www.solidnet.org/article/Russian-CWP--00003/ (our translation). The party leadership polemized against opponents who recognized the reactionary nature of Putin’s war. “[T]hey say, there are only imperialists around, which means "a plague on both your houses." At the same time, Comrade Batov somehow immediately forgot the assessments already given earlier and the position of the party worked out on the previous events in the Donbass. The fact that in order to fight fascism it is possible and necessary to use the contradictions of the imperialists, incl. aid to bourgeois Russia. (…) And meanwhile, we repeat, the party has not only declared that it stands for the recognition of the DPR and LPR, but also believes that in order to fight fascism, it is possible and necessary to make alliances even with bourgeois forces. This, of course, does not exclude the possibility that the military campaign of assistance to the Donbass from Russia will develop into a truly completely aggressive war.” (Комментарий первого секретаря ЦК РОТ ФРОНТа тов. Тюлькина, 5.3.2022, https://aloban75.livejournal.com/6049225.html [our translation]) One month later, the RKRP noted with satisfaction: "I would say that the Russian Federation has come to a key moment, the territory of Donbass has almost been liberated, which we consider a positive component in this military operation. The military power of Ukraine is significantly suppressed. Putin and the government need to think about how to emerge victorious from the war. (…) It's time for bidding. Under the conditions that have been created, the positive component is only in the recognition of the Crimea and Donbass, and, well, a little in demilitarization.” (Stepan Malentsov on Ukraine war: "The fundamental solution of the problem is only on the path of socialism", March 21, 2022, http://www.idcommunism.com/2022/03/stepan-malentsov-on-ukraine-war-the-solution-of-the-problem.html#more)

[11] Examples of such “Trotskyists” are the Argentinean PO and its affiliates (like DIP, EEK, etc.), the PTS/FT, Alan Woods’ IMT, Peter Taaffe’s CWI, various Stalinophile groups of the so-called Spartacist family, etc. See on this . Michael Pröbsting: Closet Putinistas. On the Ukraine War and the inter-imperialist rivalry: a reply to a polemic of the Partido Obrero (Argentina), 7 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/ukraine-war-closet-putinistas-reply-to-po-argentina/; by the same author: Ukraine War: Stalino-“Trotskyist” Chamber of Horrors. On a recently held “anti-war” conference organised by some “Trotskyists” as well as Russian Stalinist parties, 29 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/stalino-trotskyist-chamber-of-horrors/; Ukraine War: The Outcome of the Stalino-“Trotskyist” Conference. On the official conference declaration in support of Russian imperialism and on some “Trotskyists” participants (IMT, OKDE Spartakos), 13 July 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/ukraine-war-outcome-of-stalino-trotskyist-conference/; No to Workers Boycott against Russia but Yes to Boycotting the Ukraine? On the support of the PTS/FT for boycott actions against arms shipments for the Ukraine, 26 March 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/pts-ft-workers-sanctions-against-ukraine/; The IMT and the Ukraine War: A Shameful Betrayal. Alan Woods and the IMT fail to defend the Ukrainian people against the Russian invasion and effectively refuse to recognize Russia’s imperialist character, 2 March 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/the-imt-and-the-ukraine-war-a-shameful-betrayal/; NATO-Russia Conflict: The Anglo-Saxon ‘Marxist’ Tendency. On the IMT’s confusion about the role of Russian imperialism, 31 January 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/nato-russia-conflict-the-anglo-saxon-marxist-tendency/

[12] V. I. Lenin: The Conference of the R.S.D.L.P. Groups Abroad (1915); in CW 21, p. 159

[13] V.I. Lenin:  Socialism and War (1915); in: CW 21, p. 301

[14] V.I. Lenin:  Socialism and War (1915); in: LCW 21, p. 303

[15] For a more detailed elaboration see e.g. the book by Michael Pröbsting: Anti-Imperialism in the Age of Great Power Rivalry. The Factors behind the Accelerating Rivalry between the U.S., China, Russia, EU and Japan. A Critique of the Left’s Analysis and an Outline of the Marxist Perspective, RCIT Books, Vienna 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/anti-imperialism-in-the-age-of-great-power-rivalry/

[16] See on this e.g. the pamphlet by Michael Pröbsting: Syria and Great Power Rivalry: The Failure of the „Left“. The bleeding Syrian Revolution and the recent Escalation of Inter-Imperialist Rivalry between the US and Russia – A Marxist Critique of Social Democracy, Stalinism and Centrism, 21 April 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/syria-great-power-rivalry-and-the-failure-of-the-left/; by the same author: Stalinism: Assad’s Best Friends Forever. A commentary on a joint international initiative of Stalinist parties, 3 July 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/africa-and-middle-east/stalinism-is-assad-s-best-friends-forever/; Stalinist Chauvinism: The Example of the Greek KKE. Is “Defending the Sovereign Rights of Greece” against Turkey and Macedonia Legitimate? Marxist Internationalism versus Bourgeois Social-Chauvinism, 12 November 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/the-greek-kke-and-stalinist-chauvinism/

[17] See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: Kazakh Uprising and Stalinism: Marital Row or Serious Divisions? The revolutionary events in Kazakhstan and Russia’s military intervention provoke deep divisions between various Communist Parties, 12 January 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/kazakh-uprising-and-stalinism-marital-row-or-serious-divisions/

[18] See e.g. Michael Pröbsting: A Progressive Step Towards Anti-Imperialism. Some Stalinist parties refuse to support Russian or EU imperialism in the current NATO-Russia conflict, 17 February 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/kke-and-nato-russia-conflict/

[19] KKE: On the stance of the RCWP on the imperialist war in Ukraine, article of the International Relations Section of the CC of the KKE, in: “Rizospastis”, 29 April 2022, http://www.solidnet.org/article/CP-of-Greece-On-the-stance-of-the-RCWP-on-the-imperialist-war-in-Ukraine/; KKE: On the unacceptable stance of the RCWP towards KKE, 03.06.2022, http://www.solidnet.org/article/CP-of-Greece-On-the-unacceptable-stance-of-the-RCWP-towards-KKE/

[20] See e.g. The KKE denounces the sending of weapons to Ukraine by the Greek government, 09.06.2022, http://www.solidnet.org/article/CP-of-Greece-The-KKE-denounces-the-sending-of-weapons-to-Ukraine-by-the-Greek-government/

[21] See e.g. Michael Pröbsting: The IMT and the Ukraine War: A Shameful Betrayal. Alan Woods and the IMT fail to defend the Ukrainian people against the Russian invasion and effectively refuse to recognize Russia’s imperialist character, 2 March 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/the-imt-and-the-ukraine-war-a-shameful-betrayal/; Introductory Notes on the Russian Translation of this, 14 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/the-imt-and-the-ukraine-war-a-shameful-betrayal/#anker_3

[22] IMT: The Ukrainian war: an internationalist class position, 01 March 2022, http://www.marxist.com/the-ukrainian-war-an-internationalist-class-position-imt-statement.htm; Alan Woods: The Ukrainian conflict: is this the start of World War III? 28 February 2022 https://www.marxist.com/the-ukrainian-conflict-is-this-the-start-of-world-war-iii.htm

[23] Ibid

[24] Jorge Martín: Western imperialism turns to pessimism in Ukraine, IMT, 13 June 2022, https://www.marxist.com/western-imperialism-turns-to-pessimism-in-ukraine.htm

[25] See on this the above-mentioned articles on the Stalino-“Trotskyist” conference.

[26] See on this e.g. Peter Mikhailenko: Perspectives for the People’s Republics: The external and domestic struggle of the left and progressive forces, IMT, 15 December 2014, https://www.marxist.com/perspectives-for-the-peoples-republics-the-external-and-domestic-struggle-of-the-left-and-progressive-forces.htm

[27] See on this RCIT: “Self-Determination for Donbass”: A Reactionary Slogan in the Service of Russian Imperialism. On the historical, theoretical, and political reasons why this slogan is contrary to the Marxist program of national self-determination as well as to the interests of the current national liberation struggle of the Ukrainian people, 27 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/theses-on-donbass/; Petr Sedov: On the Donbass Uprising in Spring 2014. A necessary correction of our assessment of the early phase of the “anti-fascist” Uprising in the Eastern Ukraine, RCIT Russia, July 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/reconsidering-the-donbass-uprising-in-spring-2014/; Michael Pröbsting: The Uprising in East Ukraine and Russian Imperialism. An Analysis of Recent Developments in the Ukrainian Civil War and their Consequences for Revolutionary Tactics, 22.October 2014 https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/ukraine-and-russian-imperialism/

[28] The figure of 3-4,000 Russian volunteers and 9-12,000 regular soldiers has been reported in Western media (see Wikipedia: War in Donbas (2014–2022), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas_(2014%E2%80%932022). This seems to us to be a realistic assessment since, in April 2017, the Union of the Committees of Soldiers’ Mothers of Russia estimated that 1,500 Russian soldiers and other fighters had been killed. (See Sabine Fischer: The Donbas Conflict. Opposing Interests and Narratives, Difficult Peace Process, SWP Research Paper 2019/RP 05, 17.04.2019, p. 9, https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2019RP05/)

[29] Ben Gliniecki: Ukraine after the ceasefire: contradictions pile up, 26 Feb 2015, IMT, https://www.socialist.net/ukraine-after-the-ceasefire-contradictions-pile-up.htm

[30] Quoted in: Дневник комбрига. Алексей Мозговой, 22.06.2016, http://rusdozor.ru/2016/06/22/dnevnik-kombriga-aleksej-mozgovoj/ (our translation)

Россия и теория «меньшего зла» империализма

О некоторых сталинистах и «троцкистах», формально признающих классовый характер России, но отвергающих политические последствия

Майкл Пребстинг, международный секретарь Революционно-коммунистической интернациональной тенденции (РКИТ) , 28 июля 2022 г., www.thecommunists.net

 

 

Содержание

 

Введение

Создатель: сталинская РКРП (Россия)

Традиция Ленина… и Сталина

Версия RKRP « Philosophia ancilla theologiae »

Сталинская КПГ (Греция) и ее союзники: скрытая версия теории «меньшего зла»

IMT Алана Вудса: де-факто версия теории империализма «меньшего зла»

Выводы

 


Введение

 

Мы много лет утверждали, что Россия, преодолев хаотические годы капиталистической реставрации в 1990-х годах, стала империалистической державой на рубеже этого века. [1] С тех пор, к сожалению, большинство социалистов относились к этому вопросу как к проблеме довольно абстрактно-теоретической. На самом деле тема особого интереса не вызвала. Однако ситуация изменилась с 24 февраля, когда Путин вторгся в Украину. Теперь многие люди признают, что это теоретический вопрос большой фактической важности!

Обычно отрицатели империалистического характера России принадлежат к сталинским или боливарианским партиям, для которых этот тезис служит предлогом для явной или скрытой поддержки Москвы (и Пекина). [2] Недавно Клаудио Кац, прогрессивный профессор Университета Буэнос-Айреса, известный экономист в Латинской Америке, разработал теорию о том, что Россия является не империалистической державой, а скорее « полупериферийной страной, преследуемой Соединенные Штаты » и « негегемонистская империя в зачаточном состоянии ». [3]

Здесь мы не будем снова касаться этой ревизионистской теории. Здесь мы скорее хотим обсудить другую концепцию, которая, однако, приходит к тем же практическим выводам, что и отрицатели русского империализма.

Мы говорим о концепции, которую можно назвать теорией империализма «меньшего зла». Сторонники такой политики формально признают характеристику России (или Китая) как «империалистической», но все же считают это государство менее опасным, чем его западные соперники в НАТО. В результате сторонники теории «наименьшего зла» отказываются делать политические и тактические выводы из своего обозначения России как империалистической, т. е. отвергают политику революционного пораженчества . [4]

 

Создатель: сталинская РКРП (Россия)

 

Справедливо будет сказать, что Российская коммунистическая рабочая партия – Революционная партия коммунистов (РКРП-РПК), возглавляемая Виктором Тюлькиным, является создателем теории России как империализма «меньшего зла». Эта партия была, по крайней мере до недавнего времени, вероятно, второй по величине сталинистской партией в России — после ошибочно названной Коммунистической партии Российской Федерации (КПРФ) под руководством Геннадия Зюганова. [5] Последняя является самой крупной оппозиционной партией в Государственной Думе, где выступает как великорусский шовинист-слуга путинского режима и верный защитник российского империализма. [6]

РКРП избегает такого наглого красно-коричневого « русского мира » социализма а-ля Зюганов. Они более критично относятся к путинскому режиму (что им, безусловно, легче, так как, в отличие от КПРФ, им не приходится терять никаких позиций в госаппарате). Более того, как мы обсуждали в нашей книге « Антиимпериализм в эпоху соперничества великих держав », РКРП открыто признает классовый империалистический характер России. [7]

« Внешняя политика Путина связана с интересами российского капитала. Русский империализм еще молод. Тем не менее, он хорошо прижился и имеет хороший аппетит. На мировой арене она сталкивается с конкуренцией со стороны гораздо более крупных и опытных противников, таких как США и ЕС. (...) Россия и Китай как империалистические страны образуют некий союз (включая БРИКС)... » [8]

« При этом мы с самого начала объясняли и сейчас объясняем, что помощь от Российской Федерации можно и нужно принимать, но империалистическая Россия — это не Советский Союз, что власовцы ничем не лучше бандеровцев. [9]

Когда 24 февраля началось путинское вторжение в Украину, руководство РКРП выступало за его поддержку во имя « помощи народным республикам Донбасса против фашистской агрессии киевских нацистов». «Он заявил в официальном заявлении после начала войны: «Еще раз, возвращаясь к факту признания республик Донбасса, отметим, что это произошло хоть и поздно, но гораздо позже, чем должно было быть, но лучше поздно, чем никогда. РКРП не только поддержала этот шаг с самого начала провозглашения этих республик, но и потребовала от буржуазных властей РФ сделать этот шаг как помощь в поддержке народных республик Донбасса против фашистской агрессии киевских нацистов. Разумеется, цели военной интервенции РФ со стороны властей и Путина лишь декларируются как гуманитарные - спасение людей от расправы нацистов. На самом деле источником конфликта являются межимпериалистические противоречия между США, ЕС и Россией, в которые втягивается Украина. Цель самого могущественного в мире американского империализма — ослабить российского конкурента и расширить его влияние на европейском рыночном пространстве. (…)

С классовой точки зрения российские правящие силы, равно как и США и ЕС, нисколько не заботятся о трудящихся Донбасса, России и Украины. Мы не сомневаемся, что истинные цели русского государства в этой войне вполне империалистические — укрепить позиции империалистической России в мировой рыночной конкуренции. Но, поскольку эта борьба сегодня в какой-то мере помогает народу Донбасса дать отпор бандеровскому фашизму, коммунисты в этой ее части не отрицают, а позволяют и поддерживают столько, сколько она ведется против фашизма на Донбассе и Украине. И они категорически против действий своего правительства, когда, под прикрытием борьбы с фашизмом будут решаться вопросы расширения и укрепления российского империализма и его союзников. Пока вооруженное вмешательство России помогает спасать людей на Донбассе от расправы со стороны карателей, мы не будем противиться этой цели. В частности, мы считаем допустимым, если в силу обстоятельств придется применить силу против фашистского киевского режима, поскольку это будет в интересах трудящихся.[10]

Мы видим, сталинисты типа РКРП воздерживаются от вульгарного «русского мира» шовинизма а-ля Зюганов. Они проводят более «марксистскую» политику, признают классовые интересы путинского режима и даже признают империалистический характер России. Это, заметим мимоходом, прозрение, которого до сих пор не удавалось достичь многим так называемым «троцкистам»! [11] Однако такой правильный тезис они сочетают с архисталинской политикой, призывая к поддержке такой империалистической державы против «фашистской» Украины и западного империализма.

 

Традиция Ленина… и Сталина

 

Конечно, такая классовая коллаборационистская политика поддержки одной империалистической державы против другой (или даже против такой полуколониальной страны, как Украина) насквозь реакционна и не имеет ничего общего с принципами Ленина и большевиков. В разгар Первой мировой войны русские марксисты резко осуждали любую «тактическую» поддержку одной империалистической державы против ее соперника под предлогом «национальных прав» или «демократии» или потому, что она будет меньше.

« Вопрос о том, какая группа нанесла первый военный удар или первой объявила войну, не имеет значения для определения тактики социалистов. Фразы обеих сторон о защите отечества, сопротивлении вражескому нашествию, оборонительной войне и т. д. есть не что иное, как обман народа. « [12]

« Но представьте себе рабовладельца, владеющего 100 рабами, воюющего против другого, владеющего 200 рабами, за более «справедливое» перераспределение рабов. Употребление термина «оборонительная» война или война «за защиту отечества» было бы в таком случае явно исторически ложным, а на практике явилось бы сплошным обманом простонародья, мещан и невежд. , хитрыми рабовладельцами. Так обманывает народы «национальной» идеологией и термином «защита отечества» современная империалистическая буржуазия в войне, ведущейся теперь между рабовладельцами в целях консолидации рабство. [13]

« С точки зрения буржуазной справедливости и национальной свободы (или права наций на существование) можно было бы считать Германию абсолютно правой по отношению к Англии и Франции, ибо она «устранена» из колоний, ее враги угнетают неизмеримо гораздо большее число народов, чем она, и славяне, угнетаемые ее союзницей Австрией, несомненно, пользуются гораздо большей свободой, чем славяне царской России, этой настоящей «тюрьмы народов». Германия же борется не за освобождение наций, а за их угнетение. Не дело социалистов помогать более молодому и сильному разбойнику (Германии) грабить разбойников постарше и наевшихся. Социалисты должны воспользоваться борьбой грабителей, чтобы свергнуть их всех. ” [14]

Такая интернационалистская и антиимпериалистическая политика была полной противоположностью той, которую проводили реформистские партии, оказывавшие поддержку (или отказывавшиеся противостоять) той или иной империалистической державе. Как известно, социал-демократы Англии, Франции и США встали на сторону своей буржуазии против « реакционных монархий » Германии, Австрии и Турции во время Первой мировой войны. что они должны были защищать « свое культурно превосходящее отечество » от « татарских русских ».

С 1930-х годов сталинизм подхватил этот политический метод и выступал за союз с одним империалистическим лагерем против другого. В 1935—1939 годах они выступали на стороне «демократических», «антифашистских» империалистических государств против «реакционных», «фашистских» империалистических соперников. Когда изменились внешнеполитические интересы Москвы, вся лицемерная идеология перевернулась с ног на голову. В период с 1939 по 1941 год, в период действия пакта Гитлера-Сталина, огонь сталинистов был направлен против «плутократического» западного империализма, а к «миролюбивой» нацистской Германии относились гораздо осторожнее. Фактически Москва передала гестапо ряд немецких и австрийских коммунистов (среди них основатель Австрийской коммунистической партии Франц Коритшонер или немецкая коммунистка Маргарет Бубер-Нойман). Точно так же различные сталинские партии во Франции, Дании и т. д. обращались к немецким оккупантам и искали возможности для сотрудничества. В этот период сталинизм осуждал Великобританию и Францию как «жестоких колониальных хозяев», угнетающих народы Азии и Африки.

А когда в июне 1941 года нацисты вторглись в СССР — к полному удивлению Сталина и Молотова — все снова изменилось. Великобритания и Франция больше не считались деспотическими империалистами, а скорее демократическими антифашистскими союзниками. Политическое лицемерие, идеологическая неразбериха и беспринципный маневр, несомненно, были отличительной чертой сталинизма!

 

Версия RKRP « Philosophia ancilla theologiae »

 

Сегодня РКРП применяет тот же метод к текущим условиям. Они провозглашают, что русский империализм, который по «случайности» оказывается родиной этих «марксистов-ленинцев», есть «меньшее зло» против «большого зла». Фактически это означает, что Россия поддерживает империалистическую Россию почти против всех — от западных великих держав до полуколониальной Украины (которую удобно клеветать как « фашистскую »).

Нечего и говорить, что все это реакционная чепуха от начала и до конца. Если критерием поддержки будет «демократия против фашизма», то РКРП придется встать на сторону США и Западной Европы, поскольку эти страны определенно более «буржуазно-демократичны», чем путинская Россия. Наверняка на Украине есть кучка правых экстремистов. Но то же самое верно и для России — достаточно вспомнить Александра Дугина и его «евразийское» движение, печально известного бывшего лидера военизированных формирований ФСБ Игоря Гиркина/Стрелкова или« Царьград » — правое СМИ, принадлежащее великороссийскому олигарху-монархисту Константину Малофееву .

Но было бы наивно думать, что руководство РКРП будет считать марксистскую теорию научным ориентиром. Эти сталинисты скорее следуют пресловутому методу католической церкви в средние века, провозгласившей принцип « Philosophia ancilla theologiae » («Философия — служанка теологии»), т. е. что наука и рациональное мышление должны быть подчинены ее догматам.

Подлинные марксисты не основывают свой анализ империалистических войн на таких критериях, как, какая сторона раньше была более экспансивной, какая сторона сильнее, имеет больше военной базы, более «демократична» и т. д. Это второстепенные вопросы по сравнению с главным вопросом: что? классовый характер данного государства и его цели? Эти вопросы являются решающими для подхода марксистов. В конфликте между соперничающими империалистическими державами социалисты не могут поддерживать ни одну из сторон, независимо от того, какая из них «более агрессивна» или «более демократична». В конфликте между империалистической и полуколониальной страной при прочих равных условиях социалисты защищают последнюю. Вот важнейшие выводы из программы революционного пораженчества, выработанной Лениным и Троцким! [15]

Однако следует также признать, что позиция РКРП имеет по крайней мере одно преимущество: она не пытается скрыть свою теорию империализма «меньшего зла» и открыто заявляет о своем подходе. Такой же комплимент нельзя сделать другим сталинистам и псевдотроцкистам.

 

Сталинская КПГ (Греция) и ее союзники: скрытая версия теории «меньшего зла»

 

Коммунистическая партия Греции (КПГ) — крупная партия, которая постоянно получает от 5 до 8% голосов на выборах. Это также ключевая сила в международной сталинистской среде, поскольку она была инициатором так называемого Международного совещания коммунистических и рабочих партий . Это свободный союз, который проводит ежегодные конференции с 1998 года. Стороны, участвующие в этой конференции, принимают совместные декларации. Некоторые из этих организаций издают журнал « Международное коммунистическое обозрение» и составляют рабочую группу . Хотя эти структуры существуют на весьма федералистской и расплывчатой основе, тем не менее иногда им удается инициировать совместные заявления по важным мировым политическим событиям.

Хотя она часто играет воинствующую роль в классовой борьбе (в сочетании с диким сектантством по отношению к другим левым силам), она также занимает реакционную позицию, продвигая греческий шовинизм против соседних государств (например, Турции, Македонии) или поддерживая диктатуру Асада в подавление восстания сирийского народа с 2011 г. [16]

Однако, как мы отмечали в другом месте, КПГ в последнее время заняла более прогрессивную позицию в отношении своего подхода к российскому империализму. Он решительно осудил военную интервенцию Москвы в Казахстане в январе этого года. [17] И когда началась война на Украине, она тоже ее осудила. Более того, уже несколько месяцев он публично характеризует Россию как «империалистическое государство». [18] Примечательно, что КПГ даже атаковала вышеупомянутую РКРП в полемической статье за « ее поддержку империалистического российского вторжения в Украину». « [19]

Однако, несмотря на такую доброжелательную критику, сама КПГ придерживается другой, более скрытой версии теории империализма «меньшего зла». Хотя она осуждает и НАТО, и Россию как империалистическую, осуждая вторжение Путина, она, тем не менее, направляет большую часть своей критики и своей публичной деятельности против НАТО. Хуже того, он даже инициирует бойкот военной помощи Украине, т.е. намеренно ослабляет сопротивление украинского народа и его способность дать отпор попыткам Путина колонизировать страну. [20]

Отсюда, по сути, хотя КПГ формально признает империалистический характер России, она отказывается защищать полуколониальные страны — вроде Украины, вроде Сирии — которые находятся под ударом той же власти. Таким образом, его политические последствия показывают, что КПГ рассматривает Россию как «меньшее зло» империализма.

 

IMT Алана Вудса: де-факто версия теории империализма «меньшего зла»

 

Так называемая « Международная марксистская тенденция » (IMT), возглавляемая Аланом Вудсом и его группой, фактически придерживается аналогичной теории империализма «меньшего зла». Как мы показали где-то еще, она, признавая иногда, мимоходом, факт, что Россия есть империалистская держава, обычно «забывает» упомянуть об этом факте в своих статьях. [21] Большинство его документов об украинской войне сосредоточены на осуждении… западного империализма и даже не упоминают об империалистическом характере России.

Версия IMT теории империализма «меньшего зла» построена на концепции, согласно которой американский империализм является гораздо более опасным врагом, чем его российский соперник. Он неоднократно называет США « самой контрреволюционной силой на планете » в своих основных документах по войне на Украине . [22] Смысл этой формулы очевиден: даже если бы Россия могла быть империалистической державой, она была бы « менее контрреволюционной силой на планете », чем США!

Основываясь на такой ревизионистской концепции « более » и « менее контрреволюционных » великих держав, совершенно очевидно, что руководство ММТ строго выступает против любой поддержки украинского народа и его оборонительной войны против путинского вторжения. Они считают и Россию, и украинский народ одинаково реакционными. « Мы не можем поддерживать ни одну из сторон в этой войне, потому что это реакционная война с обеих сторон. [23]

По оценке IMT, война на Украине — это всего лишь « война по доверенности американского империализма », т. е. украинский народ сопротивляется попытке Путина колонизировать их страну только потому, что он служит Вашингтону. [24] В конце концов, ММТ считают НАТО главным реакционным фактором в войне на Украине; они считают Украину — полуколониальную страну — недостойной защиты от вторжения великой державы; иными словами, фактически он характеризует российский империализм как «меньшее зло» по сравнению с США и Западной Европой.

Символом такого постыдного подхода стало участие представителя ММТ России в качестве спикера на недавно прошедшей конференции, выступавшей за поддержку России в войне на Украине! [25]

Фактически лидеры ММТ продолжают ту же линию, которая привела их к поддержке так называемых «народных республик» на Донбассе в их войне против киевского правительства в 2014/15 гг. [26] Они утверждали, что эти псевдогосударства были выражением

восстания рабочего класса, в то время как на самом деле они были марионетками русского империализма, основанного на военной мощи тысяч русских солдат, вмешавшихся в гражданскую войну. [27]

Не без иронии, кстати, ММТ отрицает прокси-характер так называемых «народных республик» на Донбассе в 2014/15 гг., несмотря на общеизвестное присутствие до 16 000 российских солдат (не говоря уже о об артиллерии и танках, которые прислала Москва). [28] Однако в то же время ММТ осуждает Украину как «марионетку» империализма США, несмотря на то, что на местах находится не более нескольких сотен западных советников и агентов!

Пророссийский оппортунизм ММТ зашел так далеко, что даже восхвалял такого военачальника, как покойный Алексей Мозговой (командир так называемой « Бригады-призрака »), как своего рода коммунистического героя из-за его « высказываний в пользу классовой войны» народа против олигархов. [29] Заметим попутно, что упомянутая выше сталинская РКРП также называла этого деятеля « стихийным коммунистом ».

Как мы где-то показали, Мозговой на самом деле был красно-коричневой фигурой, смешавшей классовую риторику с великорусским шовинизмом и антисемитизмом, обличая « еврейских нацистов » за планы « построить новый Израиль на Украине » и за ведение « еврейского террора после победившей в Украине еврейской революции [под этим он имел в виду восстание Евромайдана в феврале 2014 г., ред.] » [30]

 

Выводы

 

В конце этого эссе мы подытожим наши основные выводы в нескольких тезисах.

1.           Теория империализма «меньшего зла» неверна в принципе. Есть более сильные и более слабые, более крупные и более мелкие империалистические государства. Ни один из них не является «меньшим злом». Все они враги рабочего класса и угнетенных народов. Народы Афганистана и Ирака, страдающие от многолетней войны и оккупации США, а также народы Чечни и Сирии, замученные Россией, являются свидетелями одинаково преступного характера империалистических держав Востока и Запада.

2.           Недопустимо, чтобы социалисты оказывали поддержку в какой бы то ни было форме тому или иному из этих империалистических государств. Это могло привести только к политическому подчинению рабочих и угнетенных монополистической буржуазии в той или иной стране. Марксисты характеризуют такую политику как социал-империализм , который проводился социал-демократией со времен Первой мировой и сталинизмом с 1930-х годов.

3.           РКИТ выступает за программу революционного пораженчества . Это значит, что в конфликтах между великими державами мы не поддерживаем ни ту, ни другую. Оба являются врагами, и рабочий класс должен противостоять всему этому.

4.           В случае нападения великой державы на угнетенный народ программа революционного пораженчества при прочих равных условиях обязывает социалистов защищать последний от империалистического агрессора и открыто выступать за поражение империалистического агрессора.

5.           Таким образом, РКИТ безоговорочно осуждает теорию «меньшего зла» империализма. Мы категорически отвергаем позицию, отстаиваемую различными сталинскими и псевдотроцкистскими силами, такими как РКРП (Россия), КПГ (Греция) или ММТ Алана Вудса, о том, что Россия представляет

собой такое «меньшее зло» империалистической державы. Этот тезис неверен и служит только предлогом для принижения реакционной роли русского империализма. Практическими последствиями этой ревизионистской теории являются либо открытая поддержка ее реакционных агрессивных войн (РКРП), либо, по крайней мере, осуждение законного сопротивления угнетенных людей, как в Сирии или на Украине (КПГ, ИМТ).

 

 

1) The RCIT has published numerous documents about capitalism in Russia and its rise to an imperialist power. The most important ones are several pamphlets by Michael Pröbsting: The Peculiar Features of Russian Imperialism. A Study of Russia’s Monopolies, Capital Export and Super-Exploitation in the Light of Marxist Theory, 10 August 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/the-peculiar-features-of-russian-imperialism/; by the same author: Lenin’s Theory of Imperialism and the Rise of Russia as a Great Power. On the Understanding and Misunderstanding of Today’s Inter-Imperialist Rivalry in the Light of Lenin’s Theory of Imperialism. Another Reply to Our Critics Who Deny Russia’s Imperialist Character, August 2014, http://www.thecommunists.net/theory/imperialism-theory-and-russia/; Russia as a Great Imperialist Power. The formation of Russian Monopoly Capital and its Empire – A Reply to our Critics, 18 March 2014 (this pamphlet contains a document written in 2001 in which we established for the first time our characterisation of Russia as imperialist), http://www.thecommunists.net/theory/imperialist-russia/; see also these essays: Russian Imperialism and Its Monopolies, in: New Politics Vol. XVIII No. 4, Whole Number 72, Winter 2022, https://newpol.org/issue_post/russian-imperialism-and-its-monopolies/; Once Again on Russian Imperialism (Reply to Critics). A rebuttal of a theory which claims that Russia is not an imperialist state but would be rather “comparable to Brazil and Iran”, 30 March 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/once-again-on-russian-imperialism-reply-to-critics/. See various other RCIT documents on this issue at a special sub-page on the RCIT’s website: https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/china-russia-as-imperialist-powers/.

2) See e.g. these pamphlets by Michael Pröbsting: Putin’s Poodles (Apologies to All Dogs). Putins Pudel. The pro-Russian Stalinist parties and their arguments in the current NATO-Russia Conflict, 9 February 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/nato-russia-conflict-stalinism-as-putin-s-poodles/; Servants of Two Masters. Stalinism and the New Cold War between Imperialist Great Powers in East and West, 10 July 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/servants-of-two-masters-stalinism-and-new-cold-war/; by the same author: Stalinist and “Trotskyist” Supporters of Chinese Imperialism under the Fig-Leaf of “Anti-Imperialism”. A commentary on the statement “No to U.S. war threats against China!” by the “United National Antiwar Coalition” in the U.S., 4 April 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/stalinist-and-trotskyist-supporters-of-chinese-imperialism-under-the-fig-leaf-of-anti-imperialism/; One-sided and Naïve … at Best! A joint call by the friends of Chinese imperialism and the daydreamers of well-meaning global capitalism, 31 March 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/joint-call-by-friends-of-chinese-imperialism-and-the-daydreamers/

3) Claudio Katz: Is Russia an imperialist power? Part I, https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-part/; Part II, https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-part-2/; Part III: https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-part-3/; Part IV, https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-benevolent/. This essay has been reproduced on various websites. The Spanish original can be also viewed on Katz’s website (https://katz.lahaine.org). We will publish a reply to this essay in the near future.

4) See e.g. RCIT: Theses on Revolutionary Defeatism in Imperialist States, 8 September 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/theses-on-revolutionary-defeatism-in-imperialist-states/

5) Since the RKRP suffered several splits in the last period, it is difficult to say if it still the second-largest Stalinist party.

6) For our critique of the KPRF see e.g., in addition to the two pamphlets mentioned above in footnote 2, Michael Pröbsting: “Socialism” a la Putin. On a telling dialogue between the Stalinist party leader and the Russian President, 13 July 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/europe/socialism-a-la-putin/; by the same author: The Popular Uprising in Kazakhstan and Putin’s Patriotic “Communists”. The Stalinist KPRF of Gennady Zyuganov supports the bloody crackdown of the protests and the imperialist intervention of Russian troops, 8 January 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/kazakhstan-and-putin-s-patriotic-communists

7) See chapters VIII and XVI in Michael Pröbsting: Anti-Imperialism in the Age of Great Power Rivalry. The Factors behind the Accelerating Rivalry between the U.S., China, Russia, EU and Japan. A Critique of the Left’s Analysis and an Outline of the Marxist Perspective, RCIT Books, Vienna 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/anti-imperialism-in-the-age-of-great-power-rivalry/

8) Viktor Tyulkin: Some words on the Russian imperialism, 09.10.2017, https://rkrp-rpk.ru/2017/10/09/%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BA%D0%BE-%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2-%D0%BE-%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC-%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BB/ (our translation)

9) RKRP: Перспектива для Донбасса - Заявление коммунистических и рабочих партий Донбасса, России и Украины, 19.2.2022 http://www.solidnet.org/article/RCWP--00001/ (our translation)

10) RKRP: Нет фашизму, нет империалистической войне! О вооружённой фазе конфликта между РФ и Украиной, Заявление Политсовета ЦК РКРП-КПСС, 25.2.2022 http://www.solidnet.org/article/Russian-CWP--00003/ (our translation). The party leadership polemized against opponents who recognized the reactionary nature of Putin’s war. “[T]hey say, there are only imperialists around, which means "a plague on both your houses." At the same time, Comrade Batov somehow immediately forgot the assessments already given earlier and the position of the party worked out on the previous events in the Donbass. The fact that in order to fight fascism it is possible and necessary to use the contradictions of the imperialists, incl. aid to bourgeois Russia. (…) And meanwhile, we repeat, the party has not only declared that it stands for the recognition of the DPR and LPR, but also believes that in order to fight fascism, it is possible and necessary to make alliances even with bourgeois forces. This, of course, does not exclude the possibility that the military campaign of assistance to the Donbass from Russia will develop into a truly completely aggressive war.” (Комментарий первого секретаря ЦК РОТ ФРОНТа тов. Тюлькина, 5.3.2022, https://aloban75.livejournal.com/6049225.html [our translation]) One month later, the RKRP noted with satisfaction: "I would say that the Russian Federation has come to a key moment, the territory of Donbass has almost been liberated, which we consider a positive component in this military operation. The military power of Ukraine is significantly suppressed. Putin and the government need to think about how to emerge victorious from the war. (…) It's time for bidding. Under the conditions that have been created, the positive component is only in the recognition of the Crimea and Donbass, and, well, a little in demilitarization.” (Stepan Malentsov on Ukraine war: "The fundamental solution of the problem is only on the path of socialism", March 21, 2022, http://www.idcommunism.com/2022/03/stepan-malentsov-on-ukraine-war-the-solution-of-the-problem.html#more)

11) Examples of such “Trotskyists” are the Argentinean PO and its affiliates (like DIP, EEK, etc.), the PTS/FT, Alan Woods’ IMT, Peter Taaffe’s CWI, various Stalinophile groups of the so-called Spartacist family, etc. See on this . Michael Pröbsting: Closet Putinistas. On the Ukraine War and the inter-imperialist rivalry: a reply to a polemic of the Partido Obrero (Argentina), 7 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/ukraine-war-closet-putinistas-reply-to-po-argentina/; by the same author: Ukraine War: Stalino-“Trotskyist” Chamber of Horrors. On a recently held “anti-war” conference organised by some “Trotskyists” as well as Russian Stalinist parties, 29 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/stalino-trotskyist-chamber-of-horrors/; Ukraine War: The Outcome of the Stalino-“Trotskyist” Conference. On the official conference declaration in support of Russian imperialism and on some “Trotskyists” participants (IMT, OKDE Spartakos), 13 July 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/ukraine-war-outcome-of-stalino-trotskyist-conference/; No to Workers Boycott against Russia but Yes to Boycotting the Ukraine? On the support of the PTS/FT for boycott actions against arms shipments for the Ukraine, 26 March 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/pts-ft-workers-sanctions-against-ukraine/; The IMT and the Ukraine War: A Shameful Betrayal. Alan Woods and the IMT fail to defend the Ukrainian people against the Russian invasion and effectively refuse to recognize Russia’s imperialist character, 2 March 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/the-imt-and-the-ukraine-war-a-shameful-betrayal/; NATO-Russia Conflict: The Anglo-Saxon ‘Marxist’ Tendency. On the IMT’s confusion about the role of Russian imperialism, 31 January 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/nato-russia-conflict-the-anglo-saxon-marxist-tendency/

12) V. I. Lenin: The Conference of the R.S.D.L.P. Groups Abroad (1915); in CW 21, p. 159

13) V.I. Lenin:  Socialism and War (1915); in: CW 21, p. 301

14) V.I. Lenin:  Socialism and War (1915); in: LCW 21, p. 303

15) For a more detailed elaboration see e.g. the book by Michael Pröbsting: Anti-Imperialism in the Age of Great Power Rivalry. The Factors behind the Accelerating Rivalry between the U.S., China, Russia, EU and Japan. A Critique of the Left’s Analysis and an Outline of the Marxist Perspective, RCIT Books, Vienna 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/anti-imperialism-in-the-age-of-great-power-rivalry/

16) See on this e.g. the pamphlet by Michael Pröbsting: Syria and Great Power Rivalry: The Failure of the „Left“. The bleeding Syrian Revolution and the recent Escalation of Inter-Imperialist Rivalry between the US and Russia – A Marxist Critique of Social Democracy, Stalinism and Centrism, 21 April 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/syria-great-power-rivalry-and-the-failure-of-the-left/; by the same author: Stalinism: Assad’s Best Friends Forever. A commentary on a joint international initiative of Stalinist parties, 3 July 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/africa-and-middle-east/stalinism-is-assad-s-best-friends-forever/; Stalinist Chauvinism: The Example of the Greek KKE. Is “Defending the Sovereign Rights of Greece” against Turkey and Macedonia Legitimate? Marxist Internationalism versus Bourgeois Social-Chauvinism, 12 November 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/the-greek-kke-and-stalinist-chauvinism/

17) See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: Kazakh Uprising and Stalinism: Marital Row or Serious Divisions? The revolutionary events in Kazakhstan and Russia’s military intervention provoke deep divisions between various Communist Parties, 12 January 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/kazakh-uprising-and-stalinism-marital-row-or-serious-divisions/

18) See e.g. Michael Pröbsting: A Progressive Step Towards Anti-Imperialism. Some Stalinist parties refuse to support Russian or EU imperialism in the current NATO-Russia conflict, 17 February 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/kke-and-nato-russia-conflict/

19) KKE: On the stance of the RCWP on the imperialist war in Ukraine, article of the International Relations Section of the CC of the KKE, in: “Rizospastis”, 29 April 2022, http://www.solidnet.org/article/CP-of-Greece-On-the-stance-of-the-RCWP-on-the-imperialist-war-in-Ukraine/; KKE: On the unacceptable stance of the RCWP towards KKE, 03.06.2022, http://www.solidnet.org/article/CP-of-Greece-On-the-unacceptable-stance-of-the-RCWP-towards-KKE/

20) See e.g. The KKE denounces the sending of weapons to Ukraine by the Greek government, 09.06.2022, http://www.solidnet.org/article/CP-of-Greece-The-KKE-denounces-the-sending-of-weapons-to-Ukraine-by-the-Greek-government/

21) See e.g. Michael Pröbsting: The IMT and the Ukraine War: A Shameful Betrayal. Alan Woods and the IMT fail to defend the Ukrainian people against the Russian invasion and effectively refuse to recognize Russia’s imperialist character, 2 March 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/the-imt-and-the-ukraine-war-a-shameful-betrayal/; Introductory Notes on the Russian Translation of this, 14 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/the-imt-and-the-ukraine-war-a-shameful-betrayal/#anker_3

22) IMT: The Ukrainian war: an internationalist class position, 01 March 2022, http://www.marxist.com/the-ukrainian-war-an-internationalist-class-position-imt-statement.htm; Alan Woods: The Ukrainian conflict: is this the start of World War III? 28 February 2022 https://www.marxist.com/the-ukrainian-conflict-is-this-the-start-of-world-war-iii.htm

23) Ibid

24) Jorge Martín: Western imperialism turns to pessimism in Ukraine, IMT, 13 June 2022, https://www.marxist.com/western-imperialism-turns-to-pessimism-in-ukraine.htm

25) See on this the above-mentioned articles on the Stalino-“Trotskyist” conference.

26) See on this e.g. Peter Mikhailenko: Perspectives for the People’s Republics: The external and domestic struggle of the left and progressive forces, IMT, 15 December 2014, https://www.marxist.com/perspectives-for-the-peoples-republics-the-external-and-domestic-struggle-of-the-left-and-progressive-forces.htm

27) See on this RCIT: “Self-Determination for Donbass”: A Reactionary Slogan in the Service of Russian Imperialism. On the historical, theoretical, and political reasons why this slogan is contrary to the Marxist program of national self-determination as well as to the interests of the current national liberation struggle of the Ukrainian people, 27 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/theses-on-donbass/; Petr Sedov: On the Donbass Uprising in Spring 2014. A necessary correction of our assessment of the early phase of the “anti-fascist” Uprising in the Eastern Ukraine, RCIT Russia, July 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/reconsidering-the-donbass-uprising-in-spring-2014/; Michael Pröbsting: The Uprising in East Ukraine and Russian Imperialism. An Analysis of Recent Developments in the Ukrainian Civil War and their Consequences for Revolutionary Tactics, 22.October 2014 https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/ukraine-and-russian-imperialism/

28) The figure of 3-4,000 Russian volunteers and 9-12,000 regular soldiers has been reported in Western media (see Wikipedia: War in Donbas (2014–2022), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas_(2014%E2%80%932022). This seems to us to be a realistic assessment since, in April 2017, the Union of the Committees of Soldiers’ Mothers of Russia estimated that 1,500 Russian soldiers and other fighters had been killed. (See Sabine Fischer: The Donbas Conflict. Opposing Interests and Narratives, Difficult Peace Process, SWP Research Paper 2019/RP 05, 17.04.2019, p. 9, https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2019RP05/)

29) Ben Gliniecki: Ukraine after the ceasefire: contradictions pile up, 26 Feb 2015, IMT, https://www.socialist.net/ukraine-after-the-ceasefire-contradictions-pile-up.htm

30) Quoted in: Дневник комбрига. Алексей Мозговой, 22.06.2016, http://rusdozor.ru/2016/06/22/dnevnik-kombriga-aleksej-mozgovoj/ (our translation)

 

러시아와 “차악” 제국주의 이론

- 러시아의 제국주의적 성격을 형식적으로 인정하지만 그에 따른 정치적 결론은 거부하는 스탈린주의 조직들과 사이비 트로츠키주의자들 대하여

 

미하엘 프뢰브스팅, 혁명적 공산주의인터내셔널 동맹 (RCIT) 국제서기, 2022 7 28, www.thecommunists.net

 

 

 

Download
KOR trans of Russia and the Theory of Le
Adobe Acrobat Document 177.0 KB

차례

1. 들어가며

2. “차악 제국주의 이론의 원조: 러시아 공산주의노동자당

3. 레닌의 국제주의·반제국주의 스탈린의 계급협조주의 차악

4. 혁명적 패전주의 악랄한 제국주의 진영에 줄서기

5. 그리스공산당과 맹우들: 은밀한 차악

6. IMT 사이비 트로츠키주의자들의 반동적인 제국주의

7. 맺음말

 

* * * *

 

1. 들어가며

우리는 러시아가 1990년대 자본주의 복고의 혼란기를 극복하고 나서 금세기 초에 제국주의 열강이 되었다고 여러 동안 주장해 왔다.[1] 이래로 안타깝게도, 대부분의 사회주의자들은 문제를 오히려 추상적-이론적 문제로 취급했다. 실제로 주제는 많은 관심을 끌지 못했다. 그러나 이것은 푸틴이 우크라이나를 침공한 2 24 이후로 바뀌었다. 이제 많은 사람들이 주제가 실제로 일급의 현실 중요성을 갖는 이론 문제라는 것을 인정한다!

보통, 러시아의 제국주의적 성격을 부인하는 유파들은 스탈린주의 당들 아니면 중남미 볼리바르주의 당들로서, 그들에게 주제는 모스크바 (그리고 베이징) 지지하는 구실이 된다.[2] 최근 중남미에서 알려진 진보 경제학자 클라우디오 카츠는 러시아가 제국주의 열강이 아니라, “미국에 의해 괴롭힘을 당하는 ()주변부 나라이자, “태동 중에 있는 ()패권 제국이라는 이론을 개발해냈다.[3]

여기서 우리는 수정주의 이론을 다시 다루진 않을 것이다. 여기서는 그와는 다른 이론에 대해 논의하고자 한다. 그것은 차악 제국주의론이라고 명명할 있는 이론인데, 하지만 실천적 결론에서는 러시아 제국주의를 부인하는 유파들과 비슷한 결론에 도달한다.

그러한 차악 제국주의 이론의 주창자들은 러시아 (또는 중국) "제국주의" 성격규정 하는 것을 형식적으로는 인정하지만, 여전히 라이벌 서방/나토보다 위험하다고 간주한다. 결과, "차악" 이론의 지지자들은 자신들의 러시아 제국주의 규정으로부터 정치적·전술적 결론을 끌어내길 거부한다. 혁명적 패전주의 정책을 거부한다.[4]

 

2. “차악 제국주의 이론의 원조: 러시아 공산주의노동자당

빅토르 튤킨이 이끄는 러시아의 공산주의노동자당” (RKRP-RPK, 이하 공노당) 서방 러시아의 충돌에서 러시아를 서방에 비해 악랄한 제국주의로 간주한다. 공정하게 말해서 당이 차악 제국주의 이론의 창시자라고 해야 것이다. 공노당은 적어도 최근까지 주가노프의 러시아연방공산당(KPRF) 이어 러시아에서 번째로 스탈린주의 당이다.[5] 러시아연방공산당은 연방의회에서 1야당이지만, 푸틴 정권의 시녀로 봉사한다. 대러시아 배외주의를 앞장서서 창도하며 러시아 제국주의의 충성스런 근위대 역할을 한다.[6]

그에 비해 공노당은 주가노프 식의 그런 부끄러운 - 동맹 루스키 미르 (러시아 세계)” 사회주의에는 거리를 둔다. 공노당은 푸틴 정권에 대해 보다 비판적인 입장을 취한다. (공노당에게는 이것이 확실히 쉬운데, 러시아연방공산당과는 달리 공노당은 국가기구에서 어떠한 자리도 잃을 필요가 없기 때문이다). 게다가, 우리가 <<강대국 패권쟁투 시대에 반제국주의>> 책자에서 설명한 바와 같이 공노당은 러시아의 제국주의적 성격을 명시적으로 인정하고 있다.[7]

푸틴의 대외정책은 러시아 자본의 이익과 연결되어 있다. 러시아 제국주의는 아직 젊다. 그럼에도 러시아 제국주의는 안착해 있고 식욕도 좋다. 러시아 제국주의는 세계무대에서 미국과 EU 같은 훨씬 크고 경험이 많은 적수들과의 경쟁에 직면해 있다.... 제국주의 나라로서 러시아와 중국은 모종의 연합을 (브릭스를 포함하여) 형성하고 있다.”[8]

"동시에 우리는 러시아연방으로부터의 도움은 받아들여질 있고 받아들여져야 하지만, 제국주의 러시아는 소련이 아니며, 블라소브 [나치 독일에 부역한 소련 장성] 파는 반데라 파보다 나을 것이 없다고 처음부터 설명했고, 지금도 설명하고 있다."[9]

2 24 푸틴의 우크라이나 침공이 시작되자, 공노당 지도부는 "키예프 나치에 의한 파쇼적 침략에 맞서 돈바스 인민공화국을 돕는다" 명분으로 침공 지지를 내걸었다. 개전 직후 공식 성명에서 공노당은 다음과 같이 선언했다.

다시 , 돈바스 공화국들을 승인한 점에 대해 말하자면, 우리는 그것이 늦었고, 그것도 매우 매우 늦었지만, 것보다 훨씬 낫다는 점을 밝혀둔다. 우리 공산주의노동자당은 이들 공화국의 선포 시작 시점부터 조치를 지지했을 뿐만 아니라, 또한 러시아연방의 부르주아 당국에게 조치를 받아들여 키예프 나치에 의한 파쇼적 침략에 맞서 돈바스 인민공화국들을 지지할 것을 요구했다. 물론 당국과 푸틴이 취하고 있는 러시아연방의 군사개입 목표는 나치의 보복으로부터 사람들을 구한다는 인도주의적인 것으로 선언되고 있다. 실제로는, 갈등의 근원은 미국·EU 러시아 간의 제국주의 상호 모순으로, 여기에 우크라이나가 끌려 들어간 것이다. 세계 최강 제국주의의 목표는 경쟁자 러시아를 약화시키고 유럽 시장 공간에서 영향력을 확대하는 것이다.... 계급적 관점에서 , 미국과 EU 지배권력은 물론 러시아의 지배권력도 돈바스의 근로인민이나 또는 러시아와 우크라이나의 근로인민에 대해 전혀 신경 쓰지 않는다. 우리는 전쟁에서 러시아 국가의 진정한 목표가 전적으로 제국주의적이라는 것을, 세계시장 경쟁에서 제국주의 러시아의 지위를 강화하는 것이라는 것을 의심하지 않는다. 그러나 오늘 이러한 러시아의 투쟁은 돈바스 인민이 반데라 파시즘을 격퇴하는 어느 정도 도움이 되므로, 지역의 공산주의자들은 러시아의 투쟁이 돈바스와 우크라이나에서 파시즘과 싸우는 것인 투쟁을 부정하지 않고 허용, 지지한다. 그리고 파시즘과의 싸움을 엄폐물로 하여 러시아 제국주의 동맹들의 확대 강화가 이루어질 때는 자국 정부의 행동에 단호히 반대한다. 러시아의 무력 개입이 징벌자들의 보복으로부터 돈바스 인민을 구하는 도움이 되는 , 우리는 목표에 반대하지 않을 것이다. 특히, 우리는 상황 파시스트 키예프 정권에 대해 무력을 사용할 필요가 있다면, 이것이 근로인민의 이익에 부합하는 러시아의 무력 개입을 받아들일 있다고 본다.”[10]

우리는 공노당 유형의 스탈린주의자들이 주가노프 식의 비속한 "루스키 미르" 배외주의와는 거리를 두고 있다는 것을 알고 있다. 그들은 보다 "맑스주의적"으로 들리는 정책을 추구하고 푸틴 정권의 계급적 성격을 인식하며, 나아가 러시아의 제국주의적 성격까지도 인정한다. 이것은, 나온 김에 지적하자면 많은 소위 "트로츠키주의자"들이 지금에까지 도달치 못한 통찰이다![11] 그러나 이들 공노당 형의 스탈린주의자들은 "파시스트" 우크라이나와 서방 제국주의에 대항하여 제국주의 열강 러시아에 대한 지지를 내걸고 있기 때문에 그러한 올바른 인식을 전형적인 스탈린주의 정책과 결합한다.

 

3. 레닌의 국제주의·반제국주의 스탈린의 계급협조주의 차악

물론, 제국주의 열강을 적으로 하여 (심지어는 우크라이나와 같은 반식민지 나라를 적으로 하여) 다른 제국주의 열강을 지지하는 그러한 계급 협조주의 정책은 철저히 반동적이며 레닌/볼셰비키의 원칙과는 아무런 관련이 없다. 1 세계대전에서 러시아 맑스주의자들은 제국주의 열강들 충돌에서 열강을 "민족적 권리" "민주주의" 구실로 (또는 해당 열강이 작다는 이유로) ‘전술적 지지를 주는 것을 강하게 규탄했다.

어느 쪽이 먼저 군사 공격을 가했는가, 혹은 어느 쪽이 최초 선전포고를 했는가 하는 문제는 사회주의자의 전술 결정에 어떤 의미도 주지 못한다. 조국방어, 적의 침략에 대한 반격, 방어전 따위와 같은 쌍방의 문구들은 인민을 기만하는 말에 불과하다.”[12]

"100명의 노예를 소유하고 있는 노예주가 200명의 노예를 소유하고 있는 노예주에 대항하여 보다 정당한 노예 재분배를 내걸고 전쟁을 하고 있다고 상상해 보자. ‘방어적 전쟁이나 조국방어 위한 전쟁이란 용어를 이러한 경우에 갖다 붙인다면 이는 분명히 역사적으로 오류이며, 현실에서 그것은 교활한 노예주가 평범한 사람들과 속인들, 무지한 사람들을 상대로 벌이는 순전한 사기극이다. 바로 이런 식으로 오늘날 제국주의 부르주아지는 전쟁, 노예제를 강화할 목적으로 수행되고 있는 노예주들 간의 전쟁에서 민족 이데올로기와 조국방어라는 용어를 가지고 인민을 기만하고 있다.”[13]

부르주아적 정의와 민족적 자유 (또는 민족의 생존권)라는 관점에서 보면 독일이 영국·프랑스와 대비하여 절대적으로 옳다고 생각될 것이다. 왜냐하면 독일은 식민지에 대한 접근이 차단되어 있기 때문에, 그리고 독일의 적들은 독일보다 헤아릴 없이 많은 민족들을 억압하고 있기 때문에, 또한 독일의 동맹국 오스트리아에게 억압받고 있는 슬라브인들은 그야말로 민족들의 감옥이라 있는 차르 치하 러시아의 슬라브인들보다 의심할 없이 훨씬 많은 자유를 누리고 있기 때문에. 그러나 독일은 민족들의 해방이 아니라 민족들의 억압을 위해 싸우고 있다. 보다 젊고 보다 강한 강도 (독일) 늙고 너무 처먹어서 비만한 강도를 강탈하도록 돕는 것이 사회주의자의 일은 아니다. 사회주의자는 이들 강도 모두를 타도하기 위해 이들 간의 싸움을 이용해야 한다.”[14]

이러한 국제주의·반제국주의 정치는 또는 제국주의 열강에 지지를 주는 (또는 반대하길 거부하는) 개량주의 당들의 정치와는 정반대였다. 알려진 바와 같이, 1 세계대전 동안 영국·프랑스·미국의 사민주의자들은 독일·오스트리아·터키의 "반동 군주제" 적으로 하여 자국 부르주아지를 들었다. 독일 사민주의자들은 같은 민족-개량주의 논리를 사용하여, "타타르 러시아인들" 맞서 "문화적으로 우월한 조국" 방어해야 한다고 주장했다.

1930년대부터 스탈린주의는 정치적 방법에 맛을 들인 나머지, 제국주의 진영을 적으로 하여 제국주의 다른 진영과의 동맹을 제창했다. 1935년부터 1939년까지 스탈린주의는 반동”, “파쇼 제국주의 국가들에 맞서 민주”, “반파쇼 제국주의 국가들을 것을 제창했다. 모스크바의 대외정책 이해관계가 바뀌자 위선적인 양두구육 이데올로기 전체가 물구나무섰다. 1939-1941 히틀러-스탈린 조약 기간 동안 스탈린주의자들의 포화는 금권정치 서방 제국주의에 과녁이 맞추어진 반면, "평화 애호" 나치 독일에 대해서는 훨씬 조심스럽게 대했다. 실제로 모스크바는 다수의 독일·오스트리아 공산주의자들을 게슈타포에게 넘겨주었다.

( 중에는 오스트리아 공산당의 창건자 프란츠 코리초너와 독일 공산당의 마르가레테 부버-노이만도 있었다). 프랑스, 덴마크 등의 스탈린주의 당들은 독일 점령군에게 접근하여 협력 가능성을 모색했다. 시기에 스탈린주의는 영국·프랑스를 민주”, “반파쇼 국가에서 다시 아시아·아프리카 인민들을 억압하는 "잔인한 식민 지배자들"이라고 비난했다.

그리고는 1941 6 나치가 (스탈린과 몰로토프를 경악시키며) 소련을 침공하자 다시 모든 것이 바뀌었다. 영국·프랑스는 이상 억압적인 제국주의자가 아니라 민주 반파쇼 동맹군으로 간주됐다. 정치적 위선과 이데올로기적 혼란과 무원칙한 책략은 확실히 스탈린주의의 전매특허였다!

 

4. 혁명적 패전주의 악랄한 제국주의 진영에 줄서기

오늘, 공노당은 같은 방법을 조건에 적용한다. 그들은 러시아 제국주의 "우연히" 이들 "맑스-레닌주의자들" 모국인 러시아 제국주의 " " 대항하는 "차악"이라고 선언한다. 이는 사실상 그들이 서방 강대국들뿐만 아니라 반식민지 우크라이나 (편리하게 "파시스트" 비방 받고 있는)까지도 적으로 하여 제국주의 러시아를 지지한다는 것을 의미한다.

모든 것이 처음부터 끝까지 반동적인 허튼소리임은 말할 필요도 없다. “(부르주아) 민주주의 파시즘 지지의 기준이라면 공노당은 미국·서유럽을 들어야 것이다. 나라들이 푸틴 러시아보다는 확실히 부르주아 민주주의이므로! 물론, 우크라이나에 극우익들이 떼거리 있다. 그러나 러시아도 마찬가지다. 아니, 러시아에서 오히려 그러한 극우 세력들이 지배적인 지위에 있다. “푸틴의 라고 일컬어지는 파시스트 대부 알렉산드르 두긴과 그의 "유라시아주의" 운동을 보라. 악명 높은 전직 FSB(연방보안국) 장교로서 준군사 운동 지도자 이고르 기르킨 (스트렐코프) 보라. 대러시아 군주제주의자 올리가르히로서 푸틴의 측근인 콘스탄틴 말로페예프 소유의 극우 언론 차르그라드TV 있다.

그러나 이들 우익 세력들에 대해 공노당 지도부가 맑스주의 이론을 과학적 지침으로 삼아 평가, 규정할 것이라고 상상한다면, 그것은 순진한 공상이다. 오히려 이들 스탈린주의자들은 철학은 신학의 시녀라는 과학과 이성적 사고는 교리에 종속되어야 한다는 원칙을 선포한 중세 가톨릭교회의 악명 높은 방법을 따르고 있다.

진정한 맑스주의자들은 제국주의 전쟁에 대한 분석을, 전쟁 전에 어느 측이 팽창적이었는지, 어느 측이 강한지, 군사 기반이 많은지 등과 같은 기준에 근거하지 않는다. 이것들은 부차적인 문제들로, 쟁점은 따로 있다. 해당 국가의 계급적 성격과 전쟁 목표는 무엇인가? 문제가 맑스주의자들에게 결정적인 기준이다. 제국주의 열강 간의 충돌에서 사회주의자들은 어느 측이 " 공격적"인가, 어느 측이 " 민주"인가에 관계없이 진영 어느 진영도 지지할 없다. 제국주의 국가와 반식민지 나라 간의 충돌에서, 다른 조건이 같다면, 사회주의자들은 후자를 방어한다. 이러한 방침들이 레닌과 트로츠키가 정립한 바의 혁명적 패전주의 강령에서 도출되는 가장 중요한 결론들이다.[15]

그런데 공노당의 입장은 적어도 가지 이점은 포함하고 있다. "차악" 제국주의론을 숨기려고 애쓰지 않고 공공연하게 밝히고 있다는 점이다. 다른 스탈린주의자들과 사이비 트로츠키주의자들에게는 같은 칭찬을 수가 없다.

 

5. 그리스공산당과 맹우들: 은밀한 차악

그리스공산당(KKE) 선거에서 항상적으로 5~8% 득표를 하는 상당 규모의 당이다. KKE 국제 스탈린주의 계에서 핵심 세력으로서, 소위 공산당·노동당 국제회의 발기인이이자 주도 당이다. 공산당·노동당 국제회의 1998년부터 연례 회의를 여는 느슨한 연합체다. 회의에 참석하는 당들은 공동선언을 채택한다. 일종의 대변지도 내고 실무 운영진도 구성하고 있다. 이들 구조가 매우 연방주의적이고 느슨한 기반 위에 존재하지만, 그럼에도 불구하고 때때로 중요한 세계정치 사안에 대한 공동성명을 발의한다.

KKE 계급투쟁에서 전투적 역할을 하는 (다른 좌파세력들을 향한 거친 종파주의와 결합된) 경우가 종종 있지만, 이웃 국가들 (튀르키예, 마케도니아 같은) 대한 그리스 배외주의를 고취하는 앞장서는, 또는 2011 이래 시리아 민중의 봉기를 아사드 독재가 진압하는 것에 지지를 보내는 , 반동적 입장을 취해왔다.[16]

그러나 우리가 차례 언급했듯이, KKE 최근 러시아 제국주의에 대한 태도와 관련하여 보다 진보적인 입장 쪽으로 나아가고 있다. 올해 1 카자흐스탄에 대한 러시아의 군사 개입을 강하게 비난했다.[17] 그리고 우크라이나에 대한 침공이 시작되었을 이에 대해서도 규탄했다. 나아가 전부터는 공개적으로 러시아를 "제국주의 국가" 성격규정 하고 있다.[18] 놀랍게도, KKE 상기한 러시아 공노당이 "제국주의 러시아의 우크라이나 침공을 지지한다" 하여 공노당을 공격하기까지 했다.[19]

그러나 이러한 반가운 태도에도 불구하고 KKE 자신은 다른 버전, 보다 은폐된 버전의 "차악" 제국주의론을 추구한다. 나토와 러시아 모두를 제국주의라고 비난하고 푸틴의 침략을 규탄하지만, 그럼에도 불구하고 그들의 비판과 반대 활동 대부분을 나토 쪽에 쏟는다. 설상가상으로, KKE 우크라이나 군사 원조에 대한 보이콧 캠페인을 펼치기까지 한다. 의도적으로 우크라이나 인민의 저항을 약화시키고, 푸틴의 우크라이나 식민지화 시도에 맞선 반격 능력에 타격을 가하고 있는 것이다.[20]

KKE 러시아의 제국주의적 성격을 형식적으로 인정하지만 이와 같이 핵심 본질에서는, 바로 동일한 제국주의 강대국 (러시아) 공격을 받고 있는 반식민지 나라들 우크라이나와 시리아 같은 방어하길 거부하고 있는 것이다. 사실상, KKE 러시아를 악랄한 제국주의, "차악" 제국주의로 보고 있다는 방증이다.

 

6. IMT 사이비 트로츠키주의자들의 반동적인 제국주의

앨런 우즈와 그의 그룹이 이끄는 "국제맑스주의경향"(IMT) 사실상 "차악" 제국주의론을 추구한다. IMT 가끔씩 러시아가 제국주의 열강이라는 사실을 인정하지만, 보통 그들의 기사·논설들에서는 사실을 언급하는 것을 "잊는다".[21] 우크라이나 전쟁에 관한 IMT 문서 대부분은 서방 제국주의를 비난하는 초점을 맞추고 있고, 러시아의 제국주의적 성격에 대해서는 말도 꺼내지 않는다.

"차악" 제국주의론의 IMT 버전은 제국주의가 러시아 제국주의보다 훨씬 악랄한 적이라는 개념에 기반을 두고 있다. IMT 우크라이나 전쟁에 관한 조직의 주요 문서에서 미국을 "지구상에서 가장 반혁명적인 세력"이라고 반복해서 부르고 있다.[22] 정식(定式) 의미는 분명하다. 러시아가 제국주의 열강일지라도, 미국보다는 "지구상에서 반혁명적인 세력"이라는 것이다!

"" " 반혁명적인" 강대국들이라는 그러한 수정주의적 개념에 근거할 , IMT 지도부가 푸틴의 침공에 대항하여 우크라이나 인민과 그들의 방위전쟁을 지지하는 것에 엄격하게 반대하는 것은 필연적이다. IMT 지도부는 러시아 제국주의나 우크라이나 인민이나 모두 똑같이 반동적이라고 간주한다. " 전쟁은 양측 모두에서 반동적인 전쟁이기 때문에 우리는 전쟁에서 어느 측도 지지할 없다."[23]

IMT 평가에 따르면, 우크라이나 전쟁은 제국주의의 대리전 불과하다. 우크라이나 인민이 그들의 나라를 식민지화 하려는 푸틴의 시도에 저항하고 있는 것은 다름 아니라 그들이 워싱턴의 종복이기 때문이라는 것이다.[24] 결국, IMT 나토를 우크라이나 전쟁의 반동 요인으로 간주한다. 반식민지 나라 우크라이나를 강대국의 침략에 대항하여 방어할 가치가 없다고 보고 있는 것이다. 달리 말하면, 사실상 IMT 러시아 제국주의를 미국·서유럽에 비해 "차악"으로 성격규정 하고 있다.

이런 뜨거운 접근법은, 우크라이나 전쟁에서 러시아에 대한 지지를 홍보하고 판촉 캠페인을 벌인 최근 국제회의에 IMT 러시아 지부 대표가 연사로 참여한 것에서도 고스란히 나타났다.[25]

실제로, IMT 지도부는 2014/15 돈바스의 자칭 "인민공화국"들이 키예프 정부와 벌인 전쟁에서 전자를 지지했는데, 지금 동일한 노선을 이어가고 있는 것이다.[26] IMT 지도부는 자칭 인민공화국들을 노동자계급 반란의 표현이라고 주장했지만, 실제로는 내전에 개입한 러시아 군인 수천 명의 군사력에 기반한, 러시아 제국주의의 대리인(proxy)이었다.[27]

16,000명에 이르는 러시아 군인이 주둔해 있었던 알려진 사실에도 불구하고, 2014/15 돈바스의 자칭 "인민공화국"들의 대리인 본질을 IMT 부인하는 것은 아이러니한 일이다.[28] 이와 같이 부인하는 한편에서 IMT 우크라이나를 제국주의의 대리인이라고 비난한다. 서방 군사고문단 수백 명이 현지에 들어와 있었다는 점을 들어!

IMT 친러 기회주의가 어디까지 나아갔나 보자면, 알렉세이 모즈고보이 (소위 유령여단 사령관) 같은 군벌을, “올리가르히에 대한 인민 계급전쟁에 찬성하는 발언 했다고 하여 공산주의 영웅으로 치켜세울 정도로까지 나아갔다.[29] 우리는 상기한 공노당도 인사를 "자생적 공산주의자" 불렀다는 것을 밝혀둔다.

우리가 다른 기사들에서 보여주었듯이, 모즈고보이는 실제로는, 계급적 언사를 대러시아 배외주의 반유대주의와 혼합시킨 - 동맹 주창자다. 그는 "유대인 나치" "우크라이나에 새로운 이스라엘을 건설할 계획" 하에 "우크라이나에서 유대 혁명을 이룬 유대 테러" 벌일 것이라며 우크라이나 배외주의를 고취했다. [여기서 모즈고보이가 말하는 유대 혁명 2014 2월의 유로마이단 시위를 가리키는 것이다. - 인용자][30]

 

7. 맺음말

우리의 주요 결론을 개의 테제로 요약해보겠다.

1. "차악" 제국주의론은 원칙적으로 틀린 이론이다. 강한 제국주의 국가와 약한 제국주의 국가가, 제국주의 국가와 작은 제국주의 국가가 있다. 그들 "차악" 없다. 어느 측도 차악 아니다. 그들은 모두 노동자계급·피억압인민의 적이다. 미국에 의한 수년간의 침략전쟁과 점령으로 고통 받고 있는 아프간과 이라크의 인민들이나, 러시아에 의한 침략전쟁과 점령으로 유린당하고 있는 체첸과 시리아의 인민들이나 모두가 제국주의 열강의 똑같이 범죄적인 성격을 증언한다.

2. 사회주의자들이 어떤 형태로든 이들 제국주의 국가 어느 하나에 지지를 주는 것은 허용되지 않는다. 이는 노동자의 정치적 종속을 초래하고 이들 국가의 독점 부르주아지에게 억압받는 것으로 결과할 수밖에 없다. 맑스주의자들은 이러한 정책을 사회배외주의로 성격규정 한다. 1 세계대전 이래로 사민주의가 실행했고, 1930년대 이래로는 스탈린주의가 이어받아 실행에 옮긴 사회배주의 정책 말이다.

3. RCIT 혁명적 패전주의 강령을 제창한다. 이는 강대국 충돌에서 어느 측도 지지하지 않는다는 것을 의미한다. 양측 모두 적이고, 노동자계급은 이들 모두에 반대해야 한다.

4. 피억압 인민을 적으로 강대국의 공격 시에 혁명적 패전주의 강령은, 다른 조건이 같다면, 사회주의자들에게 제국주의 침략자에 맞서 피억압 인민을 방어하고 제국주의 침략자의 패배를 공공연하게 내걸 것을 요구한다.

5. 그러므로 RCIT "차악" 제국주의론을 유보 없이 비난하는 바다. 우리는 러시아가 그러한 차악 제국주의 열강이라며 (‘비판적’) 지지를 주는 각종 스탈린주의 사이비 트로츠키주의 세력들 공노당(러시아), KKE(그리스), IMT 같은 입장을 단호히 배격한다. 입장은 러시아 제국주의의 반동적 역할을 경시하는 구실로 봉사할 뿐이다. 수정주의 이론의 실천적 결론은 러시아 제국주의의 반동적 침략전쟁에 대한 공공연한 지지 (공노당)이거나, 아니면 시리아나 우크라이나에서처럼 피억압 인민의 정당한 저항에 대한 적대와 비난 (KKE, IMT)이거나 이다.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

[1] RCIT 러시아 자본주의와 러시아의 제국주의 강대국 부상에 대한 많은 문서를 발표했다. 다음을 보라. 미하엘 프뢰브스팅, <러시아 제국주의의 특색> https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/the-peculiar-features-of-russian-imperialism/#anker_6; 노동자혁명당(), <레닌 제국주의론 관점에서 러시아 제국주의의 특색>, 2021 10, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/05/blog-post_61.html; Michael Pröbsting: Lenin’s Theory of Imperialism and the Rise of Russia as a Great Power. On the Understanding and Misunderstanding of Today’s Inter-Imperialist Rivalry in the Light of Lenin’s Theory of Imperialism. Another Reply to Our Critics Who Deny Russia’s Imperialist Character, August 2014, http://www.thecommunists.net/theory/imperialism-theory-and-russia/; Russia as a Great Imperialist Power. The formation of Russian Monopoly Capital and its Empire A Reply to our Critics, 18 March 2014, in: Revolutionary Communism No. 21, http://www.thecommunists.net/theory/imperialist-russia/; Russian Imperialism and Its Monopolies, in: New Politics Vol. XVIII No. 4, Whole Number 72, Winter 2022, https://newpol.org/issue_post/russian-imperialism-and-its-monopolies/ ( 논문은 다음 잡지에도 실렸다. International Viewpoint, 21. April 2022, https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article7618); Once Again on Russian Imperialism (Reply to Critics). A rebuttal of a theory which claims that Russia is not an imperialist state but would be rather “comparable to Brazil and Iran”, 30 March 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/once-again-on-russian-imperialism-reply-to-critics/. 문제에 관한 여러 다른 RCIT 문서들이 다음의 RCIT 웹사이트 상의 별도 하위 페이지에 있다. https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/china-russia-as-imperialist-powers/.

[2] 다음 팜플렛들을 보라. 미하엘 프뢰브스팅, <푸틴의 푸들들 - 나토-러시아 분쟁에서 친러 스탈린주의 당들>, 2022 2 9, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/05/blog-post_7.html/; <주인을 섬기는 시종 - 스탈린주의와 제국주의 신냉전>, 2021 7 10, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/05/blog-post_24.html/; 같은 저자, Stalinist and “Trotskyist” Supporters of Chinese Imperialism under the Fig-Leaf of “Anti-Imperialism”. A commentary on the statement “No to U.S. war threats against China!” by the “United National Antiwar Coalition” in the U.S., 4 April 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/stalinist-and-trotskyist-supporters-of-chinese-imperialism-under-the-fig-leaf-of-anti-imperialism/; <중국 제국주의의 벗들은 어떻게 착한 글로벌 자본주의 꿈꾸고 있는가>, 2021 3 31, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/05/blog-post_15.html/

[3] Claudio Katz: Is Russia an imperialist power? Part I, https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-part/; Part II, https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-part-2/; Part III: https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-part-3

/; Part IV, https://katz.lahaine.org/is-russia-an-imperialist-power-benevolent/. 논문은 여러 웹사이트에 게재됐다. 스페인어 원문은 Katz 다음 웹사이트 상에서도 있다. (https://katz.lahaine.org). 우리는 조만간 논문에 대한 답변을 것이다.

[4] 다음을 보라. RCIT, <제국주의 국가에서의 혁명적 패전주의에 관한 테제>,2018 9 8, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/05/blog-post_9.html/

[5] 지난 시기에 공노당이 차례 분열을 겪어서 지금도 째로 스탈린주의 당이라고 있는지는 불확실하다.

[6] 러시아연방공산당에 대한 우리의 비판으로는, 위의 [2]에서 언급한 팜플렛 외에 다음을 보라. 미하엘 프뢰브스팅, <푸틴 · 주가노프 식의 사회주의” - 대통령에게 바치는 애국 스탈린주의 지도자의 어용 어릿광대 퍼포먼스, 2022 7 13, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/07/blog-post_17.html/; 같은 저자, <카자흐스탄 민중봉기와 푸틴의 애국적 공산주의자들”>. https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/kazakhstan-and-putin-s-patriotic-communists

[7] 다음 책의 8장과 16장을 보라. 미하엘 프뢰브스팅, <<강대국 패권쟁투 시대에 반제국주의>>, 2019, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/06/blog-post_9.html/

[8] Viktor Tyulkin: Some words on the Russian imperialism, 09.10.2017, https://rkrp-rpk.ru/2017/10/09/%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BA%D0%BE-%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2-%D0%BE-%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC-%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BB/ (영역은 필자)

[9] RKRP: Перспектива для Донбасса - Заявление коммунистических и рабочих партий Донбасса, России и Украины, 19.2.2022 http://www.solidnet.org/article/RCWP00001/ (영역은 필자)

[10] RKRP: Нет фашизму, нет империалистической войне! О вооружённой фазе конфликта между РФ и Украиной, Заявление Политсовета ЦК РКРП-КПСС, 25.2.2022 http://www.solidnet.org/article/Russian-CWP00003/ (영역은 필자). 지도부는 푸틴 전쟁의 반동적 성격을 인정하는 반대파와 다음과 같은 논쟁을 했다. "그들은 주변에 제국주의자들만 있을 뿐이라고 말한다... 동시에 바토프 동지는 이전 돈바스 사태에 대해 이미 제출된 평가와 당의 입장을 곧바로 잊은 같다. 파시즘과 싸우기 위해서는 제국주의자들의 모순을 (부르주아 러시아의 도움을 포함하여) 이용하는 것이 가능하고 필요하다.... 한편, 반복해서 말하지만, 당은 DPR(도네츠크인민공화국) LPR(루한스크인민공화국) 승인을 지지한다고 선언했을 뿐만 아니라, 파시즘과 싸우기 위해서는 부르주아 세력과도 동맹을 맺는 것이 가능하고 필요하다고 믿고 있다. 물론 이는 러시아의 돈바스 지원 군사 작전이 정말 완전히 공격적인 전쟁으로 발전할 가능성을 배제하지 않는다." (Комментарий первого секретаря ЦК РОТ ФРОНТа тов. Тюлькина, 5.3.2022, https://aloban75.livejournal.com/6049225.html [영역은 필자]) 공노당은 만족감을 가지고 다음과 같이 썼다. "러시아연방에 중요한 순간이 왔다. 군사 작전에서 우리가 긍정적인 요소로 간주하는 돈바스 영토의 해방이 거의 완수되었다. 우크라이나의 군사력은 상당히 진압됐다. 푸틴과 정부는 어떻게 전쟁에서 승리해서 떠오를지 고민해야 한다.... 결단을 내려야할 시간이다. 이제까지 조성되어온 조건하에서 긍정적인 요소는 크림 반도 돈바스의 승인과, 다음으로 탈군사화에 있다." (스테판 맬렌초프, <문제의 근본적인 해결책은 오직 사회주의로 가는 길에 있다>, March 21, 2022, http://www.idcommunism.com/2022/03/stepan-malentsov-on-ukraine-war-the-solution-of-the-problem.html#more)

[11] 그러한 트로츠키주의자들 예로는 아르헨티나 PO(“노동자당”) 가맹 조직들 (DIP, EEK, etc.) PTS/FT, 앨런 우즈의 IMT, 피터 타페의 CWI, 소위 스파르타시즘 페밀리 소속의 여러 스탈린 애호 그룹들 등이 있다. 이에 대해서는 다음을 보라. Michael Pröbsting: Closet Putinistas. On the Ukraine War and the inter-imperialist rivalry: a reply to a polemic of the Partido Obrero (Argentina), 7 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/ukraine-war-closet-putinistas-reply-to-po-argentina/; 같은 저자: Ukraine War: Stalino-“Trotskyist” Chamber of Horrors. On a recently held “anti-war” conference organised by some “Trotskyists” as well as Russian Stalinist parties, 29 June 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/stalino-trotskyist-chamber-of-horrors/; Ukraine War: The Outcome of the Stalino-“Trotskyist” Conference. On the official conference declaration in support of Russian imperialism and on some “Trotskyists” participants (IMT, OKDE Spartakos), 13 July 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/ukraine-war-outcome-of-stalino-trotskyist-conference/; <러시아에 대한 노동자 보이콧에는 반대, 그러나 우크라이나를 보이콧 하는 것에는 찬성?>, 2022 3 26, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/06/blog-post_68.html; <"가장 악랄한 제국주의" " 악랄한 제국주의"?: 부끄러운 배신의 논리>, 2022 3 2, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/05/blog-post_561.html; NATO-Russia Conflict: The Anglo-Saxon ‘Marxist’ Tendency. On the IMT’s confusion about the role of Russian imperialism, 31 January 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/nato-russia-conflict-the-anglo-saxon-marxist-tendency/

[12] 레닌 <러시아 사회민주노동당 재외지부 회의>, 레닌전집 59 (“2인터내셔널의 붕괴”), 양효식 옮김, 아고라, 111

[13] 레닌 <사회주의와 전쟁>, 레닌전집 60 (“사회주의와 전쟁”), 양효식 옮김, 아고라, 32

[14] 레닌 <사회주의와 전쟁>, 35-6

[15] 보다 상세한 설명으로는 다음을 보라. 미하엘 프뢰브스팅, <<강대국 패권쟁투 시대에 반제국주의>>, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/06/blog-post_9.html/

[16] 이에 대해서는 다음 팜플렛을 보라. Michael Pröbsting: Syria and Great Power Rivalry: The Failure of the „Left“. The bleeding Syrian Revolution and the recent Escalation of Inter-Imperialist Rivalry between the US and Russia A Marxist Critique of Social Democracy, Stalinism and Centrism, 21 April 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/syria-great-power-rivalry-and-the-failure-of-the-left/; 같은 저자, <아사드의 스탈린주의 치어리더들 - 국제 스탈린주의 당들의 공동성명에 대한 논평>, 2019 7 3, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/05/blog-post_77.html/; Stalinist Chauvinism: The Example of the Greek KKE. Is “Defending the Sovereign Rights of Greece” against Turkey and Macedonia Legitimate? Marxist Internationalism versus Bourgeois Social-Chauvinism, 12 November 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/the-greek-kke-and-stalinist-chauvinism/

[17] 이에 대해서는 다음을 보라. 미하엘 프뢰브스팅, <카자흐스탄 봉기에 대한 스탈린주의: 부부싸움인가, 심각한 분열인가? - 카자흐스탄의 혁명적 사태와 러시아의 군사개입이 각종 공산당들 간의 깊은 분열을 불러일으키다>, 2022 1 12, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/05/blog-post_272.html/

[18] 다음을 보라. Michael Pröbsting: A Progressive Step Towards Anti-Imperialism. Some Stalinist parties refuse to support Russian or EU imperialism in the current NATO-Russia conflict, 17 February 2022, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/kke-and-nato-russia-conflict/

[19] KKE: On the stance of the RCWP on the imperialist war in Ukraine, article of the International Relations Section of the CC of the KKE, in: “Rizospastis”, 29 April 2022, http://www.solidnet.org/article/CP-of-Greece-On-the-stance-of-the-RCWP-on-the-imperialist-war-in-Ukraine/; KKE: On the unacceptable stance of the RCWP towards KKE, 03.06.2022, http://www.solidnet.org/article/CP-of-Greece-On-the-unacceptable-stance-of-the-RCWP-towards-KKE/

[20] 다음을 보라. The KKE denounces the sending of weapons to Ukraine by the Greek government, 09.06.2022, http://www.solidnet.org/article/CP-of-Greece-The-KKE-denounces-the-sending-of-weapons-to-Ukraine-by-the-Greek-government/

[21] 다음을 보라. 미하엘 프뢰브스팅, <"가장 악랄한 제국주의" " 악랄한 제국주의"?: 부끄러운 배신의 논리>, 2022 3 2, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/05/blog-post_561.html; <제국주의 차악론: 프롤레타리아 혁명에 대한 배신자 논리>, 2022 6 14, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/07/blog-post_6.html

[22] IMT: The Ukrainian war: an internationalist class position, 01 March 2022, http://www.marxist.com/the-ukrainian-war-an-internationalist-class-position-imt-statement.htm; Alan Woods: The Ukrainian conflict: is this the start of World War III? 28 February 2022 https://www.marxist.com/the-ukrainian-conflict-is-this-the-start-of-world-war-iii.htm

[23] 같은

[24] Jorge Martín: Western imperialism turns to pessimism in Ukraine, IMT, 13 June 2022, https://www.marxist.com/western-imperialism-turns-to-pessimism-in-ukraine.htm

[25] 이에 대해서는 상기한 스탈린주의-“트로츠키주의 회의에 대한 기사를 보라.

[26] 이에 대해서는 다음을 보라. Peter Mikhailenko: Perspectives for the People’s Republics: The external and domestic struggle of the left and progressive forces, IMT, 15 December 2014, https://www.marxist.com/perspectives-for-the-peoples-republics-the-external-and-domestic-struggle-of-the-left-and-progressive-forces.htm

[27] 이에 대해서는 다음을 보라. RCIT 테제, <“돈바스 자결”: 러시아 제국주의에 봉사하는 반동 슬로건 - 슬로건이 맑스주의 민족자결 강령에 반하는지, 그리고 우크라이나 인민의 민족해방투쟁의 이익에도 반하는지, 역사적·이론적·정치적 이유에 대하여>, 2022 6 27, https://blog.wrpkorea.org/2022/07/blog-post.html/; Petr Sedov: On the Donbass Uprising in Spring 2014. A necessary correction of our assessment of the early phase of the “anti-fascist” Uprising in the Eastern Ukraine, RCIT Russia, July 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/reconsidering-the-donbass-uprising-in-spring-2014/; Michael Pröbsting: The Uprising in East Ukraine and Russian Imperialism. An Analysis of Recent Developments in the Ukrainian Civil War and their Consequences for Revolutionary Tactics, 22.October 2014 https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/ukraine-and-russian-imperialism/

[28] 3-4 명의 러시아 자원병 9-12 명의 정규군 수치가 서방 언론에서 보도되었다. (다음을 보라. Wikipedia: War in Donbas (20142022), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas_(2014%E2%80%932022). 이는 현실적인 평가로 보인다. 2017 4월에 러시아 병사 어머니 위원회 연합은 1,500명의 러시아 군인과 밖의 전투원들이 전사한 것으로 추정했다. (다음을 보라. Sabine Fischer: The Donbas Conflict. Opposing Interests and Narratives, Difficult Peace Process, SWP Research Paper 2019/RP 05, 17.04.2019, p. 9, https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2019RP05/)

[29] Ben Gliniecki: Ukraine after the ceasefire: contradictions pile up, 26 Feb 2015, IMT, https://www.socialist.net/ukraine-after-the-ceasefire-contradictions-pile-up.htm

[30] 다음에서 인용. Дневник комбрига. Алексей Мозговой, 22.06.2016, http://rusdozor.ru/2016/06/22/dnevnik-kombriga-aleksej-mozgovoj/ (영역은 필자)