Condemn the Dangerous Interference of Britain and the US/EU Powers in the Ukraine!

Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist), March 2, 2014

The situation in the Ukraine is becoming hourly more dangerous as the big powers of the United States and the European Union, including not least the British government, and utilising the UN and the Security Council, step up their intervention and destabilisation of that country.

These powers have been behind the myriad of factions which the Western media have described as the “peaceful protesters”, but who have actually been committing acts of violence, and have led to the flight of President Viktor Yanukovich. They have fostered and financed the growth of the neo-Nazi organisations, not necessarily to have them in power, but as pawns in their criminal game, and in order to nurture the atmosphere of chaos and violence which has prevailed.

The Ukraine has been brought to the brink of civil war, and the big powers, as is their wont, are now coming out in the open, and are particularly using the occupation of the Crimea by Russian troops as the pretext to intervene more directly. These powers are now brazenly using the slogans of “defence of territorial integrity and sovereignty” in order to ensure that the Ukraine is finally wrested away from alliance with Russia and is subjected to the neo-liberal “solutions” that are being imposed in the European Union and in North America.

The British government is to be condemned for its own participation in the dirty plots of the United States and the European Union against the people of the Ukraine. What right has Foreign Secretary William Hague to fly to Kiev and openly meddle in Ukraine’s affairs! Britain has no right to be there, and only shows the extent to which the British government is engaged up to the hilt in inter-imperialist rivalries. As the centenary of World War One approaches, it is a salutary lesson that Britain, Germany, Russia and other players are once more engaged in an extremely dangerous exercise in attempting to redivide Europe and Asia, not to mention Africa and other continents.

The Ukraine appears as a key strategic area for the big imperialist powers. It was a key target in the “colour revolutions”, in Ukraine’s case the so-called “Orange Revolution” of 2004. The US/EU imperialist powers have sought to strengthen their hold of the European Union of the monopolies and expand this power eastwards in their big power rivalry with Russia and China. They are now seizing their opportunity, meanwhile accusing Russia of being the aggressor.

Ukraine is a large country three times the size of Britain with a population of 46 million. Although formerly known as the bread-basket of the Soviet Union, it is a highly industrialised country, through which crucially Russian gas is exported via a maze of pipelines.

The US, Britain and the EU are now hypocritically confronting Russia and demanding that the people of Ukraine be allowed to decide their own future, precisely what these big powers themselves have ensured has been thwarted. It is a dirty criminal game of geo-politics that these powers are engaged in. The British government is up to this to the hilt and must cease its intervention forthwith. It is this intervention that has created such a dangerous situation and democratic forces in Britain must themselves take a stand in defence of the sovereignty of nations and countries and hold the government to account for its meddling in the sovereign affairs of other countries.

Activists of the Party are mobilising for the Celebration and Seminar marking the 35th anniversary of the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) focusing on the crucial necessity to build a Party of modern communism, a mass communist party, as what the times are calling for at this juncture of the 21st century.

Such a Party is at the centre of and pervades all of revolutionary life. The Party’s call for the 35th anniversary is one for all who are in motion, are looking to strengthen the organisation and resistance of the working class and people’s movements, to join in and contribute to the work of releasing that human power which will avert the danger of war and build a society with human beings at the centre.

What distinguishes the Party is its revolutionary ideology and its methods of work. It bases itself on solving the problems of the 21st century through unity in action starting from the concrete analysis of concrete conditions. Therefore it does not demand a peculiar affiliation as to a sect, but points out that the Party, utilising modern definitions, is the instrument for organising the working class to take up its historic role to save the day, and vest sovereignty in the people. In other words, how to empower the people as the decision-makers in society is a key problem taken up for solution. The Party has its vision for a new society, which is neither a truism nor a utopia, but, like the solution of any scientific problem, involves the practical application of sound theory.

In this respect, the Seminar organised on March 16 will set the scene for the work to learn from the example of John Buckle, the first general secretary of RCPB(ML), and the work to found the Party and lead the movements of the working class and people. This is extremely exciting work and the Party gives the call for all serious forces to become involved and join in.

On February 27, a public meeting entitled For A Future Without War took place in Newcastle in which around 25 people attended.

The meeting took up the aims of the anti-war movement in the wake of last year’s defeat of the government’s plan for an unprovoked military intervention on Syria and to stop all Britain’s military interventions and wars in the Middle East, Afghanistan, Africa and beyond.

During the speeches and discussion, the central question that was raised was what are the ideas, plans and vision to turn the situation around? The issue arises of turning the Syria vote in the House of Commons into permanent change to stop the interventionist policy of Britain, ending the militarisation of the economy and society. It was also highlighted that the anti-war movement is the main force that unites the people against war and is itself a movement that needs to be taken further into government as an anti-war government.

The meeting also raised the need for Britain to withdraw from NATO and that the dangerous NATO military alliance itself, which is intervening everywhere including now in Ukraine, must be dismantled. Discussion touched on the necessity to do work to oppose the disinformation on World War I and to affirm the lessons and work together to build a future without war.

The speakers were Lindsey German – Convenor of Stop the War Coalition, Clare Williams – Unison Northern Region, and Nick Megoran – Martin Luther King Peace Committee. Roger Nettleship chaired the meeting. The meeting was organised by: Newcastle Stop the War, Unison Northern Region and Newcastle University’s Martin Luther King Peace Committee.

February saw the campaign over Scottish independence hotting up. A conspicuous feature of the lead-up to the September referendum is how a concerted effort is being made from all quarters to ensure a defeat for the “Yes” campaign. The three big parties stand together as one over the issue, while both the EU and US are making interventions in an attempt to bolster the “No” campaign.

The past month has seen this particularly over the issue of the currency that would be used by an independent Scotland, the present proposal by the Scottish government being for a Sterling zone. In a speech on February 13, Chancellor George Osborne declared that “if Scotland walks away from the UK, it walks away from the pound,” which Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond rejected as “bluff, bluster and posturing”. This follows comments by governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney in January aimed at undermining the Scottish government’s case for a currency union. The big credit rating agencies are now also beginning to weigh in on the financial debate.

The establishment forces, not just in Britain but also from outside, are starting to bring out their heavy artillery. They know that unless they win this battle convincingly, they may yet lose the war. Their aim is for a crushing defeat for independence in the referendum, followed by a collapse in support for the SNP. However, though the “No” vote has a clear lead in the polls, it is hardly decisive. Indeed, the polls are beginning to show some signs of a shift in opinion, particularly since the tactlessly belligerent stand of the British government over the currency zone. A Survation poll in the Scottish Daily Mail on February 17-18 in the wake of George Osborne’s speech found support for independence increase from 32% in January to 38%, while the opposing side fell from 52% down to 47%.

Further, the very fact that the referendum is taking place, quite apart from the final outcome, is opening up long-standing issues of sovereignty, the national question and the constitution that the establishment élite would prefer to continue to be left unsaid. The implicit challenge to the Westminster system, the so-called mother of all parliaments, has the potential to send a shockwave through the Anglo-American world, the European Union and beyond.

The anachronistic United Kingdom is an integral part of the imperialist system of states. Its colonial past to which it still clings facilitates the monopolies in plundering the world. Its remnants of feudalism are particularly apt for concentrating power in the hands of the rich and imposing monopoly over public right.

Furthermore, Britain has traditionally been a pillar of stability. Alan Trench, professor of politics at the Ulster University, said in February: “It is quite extraordinary. This is happening in a country which was long regarded, and regarded itself, as a beacon of constitutional stability. So suddenly to have moved from stasis into a sequence of very febrile and interlocking debates is remarkable and may say something about just how unstable that apparent stability really was.”

This is a stability that was achieved via the historic compromise of the constitutional arrangements in which sovereignty is vested in the monarch in parliament, and its core is so rotten that even the prospect of a break-up of the Union inevitably throws such long-standing constitutional issues into relief. This is already apparent. Writing in The Times last year, Alex Salmond argued that a “democratic deficit” exists in Britain due to its absence of a written constitution. “Constitutions in the modern world are more than just a necessary defence of essential liberties but also an expression of citizens’ rights and responsibilities,” he said, indicating the right to higher education as an example, and stressing the role of the citizen participation in drafting a constitution. The issue of popular versus parliamentary sovereignty has even been raised in some quarters, particularly in the earlier legal debate over the status of the referendum.

The US has its own reasons to be concerned with the break-up of the United Kingdom. Back on October 31, 2012, the Washington Post carried an editorial claiming that Scotland would be “unable to contribute meaningfully to global security and its independence would significantly weaken America’s foremost ally”.

Writing in the Washington Poston January 7 this year, Lord George Robertson summarised the view of Anglo-American imperialism as follows:

“If Scotland’s separatist government gets its way in a referendum planned for September, the 300-year-old union of Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland – the United States’ oldest and closest ally – will be on the road to disintegration. The global balance would be substantially upset should one of the West’s key unions, and its second-biggest defence power, split up. The United Kingdom has always punched above its weight diplomatically and militarily. A breakup would have a serious effect on its role in the world – all the more so because Britain’s nuclear-deterrent base is in Scotland, and those advocating separation have pledged to expel it. With the United States and other countries viewing a possible British withdrawal from the European Union as negative, how much more disturbing would they find a breakup of the country itself?”

Meanwhile, in the EU, Spain has been particularly vocal in seeking to block Scottish independence. The Spanish government wishes to avoid any developments that open the door to independence for Catalonia and the Basque country from Spain. The Spanish and British governments and EU Commission president José Manuel Barroso have each insisted that an independent Scotland would have to re-apply for EU membership.

Independence movements exist in other big European powers, and the EU, as a union of the monopolies with an imperial aim, is resisting motion in this direction that could weaken these powers. Furthermore, the EU is concerned that a separation of Scotland from Britain would leave the concentration of eurosceptic opinion in the remainder of Britain, making its exist from the EU more likely.

Whatever the outcome of the referendum, the British establishment, system, arrangements, and party-dominated system lie exposed. It is up to the working class to take the lead over questions of democratic renewal, settling scores with representative democracy, a modern constitution and where political power lies. It is able to resolve these issues in such a way that opens the possibility of a new, free and equal union of modern, sovereign states, constituted according the rights held by virtue of being human and where sovereignty is vested in the people, with the progressive aim of developing these nations rather than the backward dream of rebuilding empires.