{"id":11600,"date":"2023-10-29T22:51:43","date_gmt":"2023-10-30T02:51:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.tempestmag.org\/v01_2020\/staging\/?p=11600"},"modified":"2023-11-02T00:27:23","modified_gmt":"2023-11-02T04:27:23","slug":"comprehending-the-russian-ukrainian-war","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tempestmag.org\/test02\/2023\/10\/comprehending-the-russian-ukrainian-war\/","title":{"rendered":"Comprehending the Russian-Ukrainian War"},"content":{"rendered":"

I<\/span>n his critique of ultra-left sectarianism, Lenin denounced a tendency to present quotes from Marx as the basis for settling on a tactical orientation to guide us through the complexities of our own time. He insisted<\/a> that \u201cwhat is most important, that which constitutes the very gist, the living soul, of Marxism\u201d is \u201ca concrete analysis of a concrete situation.\u201d That is certainly the case when we are considering realities so complex as the Russian-Ukrainian War.<\/p>\n

I have attempted such a \u201cconcrete analysis of a concrete situation\u201d in an 8900-word article entitled \u201cMaking Sense of the Russian Invasion of Ukraine<\/a>\u201d for the online publication Links: International Journal of Socialist Renewal<\/em>. In the final 2400 words of the article, I seek to relate the larger analysis of the invasion to previous Marxist theory and lessons from revolutionary history. I urge readers to consult the first 6500 words of the larger article. At the same time, I am hopeful that my review here of some of the relevant history and theory will be useful for those working to sort things out regarding these momentous developments.<\/p>\n

On Self-Determination<\/h4>\n

The approach advanced here, it should be admitted, is not an original contribution. It is grounded in the orientation that V.I. Lenin outlined in such works as \u201cThe Right of Nations to Self Determination<\/a>\u201d (1914) and \u201cThe Revolutionary Proletariat Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination<\/a>\u201d (1915). As the First World War erupted, some excellent revolutionaries\u2014including Rosa Luxemburg and some comrades in the Bolshevik party\u2014argued that all forms of nationalism are incompatible with working-class internationalism. Lenin sharply took issue with this conclusion. There are different forms of nationalism\u2014some worthy of support, others worthy of denunciation. A distinction must be made between the nationalism (to be opposed) of the imperialist nations and the nationalism (to be supported) of those countries oppressed by imperialism. As he put it in \u201cSocialism and War<\/a>\u201d (1915), revolutionaries must \u201cunequivocally demand that the socialists of the oppressing countries (of the so-called \u2018great\u2019 nations in particular) should recognize and defend the right of the oppressed nations to self-determination.\u201d<\/p>\n

After the overthrow of the tsar in early 1917, Lenin was sharply critical<\/a> of the Russian moderates of the Provisional Government for holding back from recognizing Ukraine\u2019s right to independence. \u201cRussia\u2019s revolutionary democrats, if they want to be truly revolutionary and truly democratic,\u201d Lenin insisted, \u201cmust regain for themselves, for the workers and peasants of Russia, the brotherly trust of the Ukrainian workers and peasants. This cannot be done without full recognition of the Ukraine\u2019s rights, including the right to free secession.\u201d He wryly commented that Russian \u201cfriendship\u201d could not be imposed on Ukrainians but could only be won by treating Ukrainians as equals and acknowledging their right to secede from Russia if they chose to do that.<\/p>\n