Ukraine: A battle between two groups of the exploitative class and support for... Westernised, neo-Nazi forces by the "crowd"

The events in Ukraine in the last 10 months or so have been widely covered by the "international mass-media", but as in a number of other cases - Libya and Syria in particular - the picture they paint is greatly distorted. Let us try to put the record straight.

The political crisis in Kiev began in November of 2013. At that time the Ukrainian government led by President Victor Yanukovich announced it was postponing the signing of a document proclaiming association with the European Union. The idea to associate with the EU popular in Ukraine especially in the Western regions of the country. Many people naively thought it would economic prosperity to Ukraine. However, at the last moment Yanukovich government which initiated the process understood that it would bring disaster to the Ukrainian economy and damage its economic ties with Russia.

The decision not to sign the agreement with the EU coupled with anger at widespread corruption led to protests and demonstrations especially in Kiev's Independence Square (Maidan). 

However the demonstrations, which were initially peaceful, soon came to be dominated by anti-communist and anti-Russian fascist thugs. Bloody clashes followed. Police, especially the "Berkut" riot police were hit with stones, metal pipes and even shot at with firearms. 15 policemen and soldiers were killed before they were allowed to carry firearms. More lives were lost due to unidentified snipers.

From the very beginning, Washington supported the opposition, and was aware that the militants were seeking the forcible seizure of power. These fascist thugs raised above their heads banners of those Ukrainian nationalist organizations that were actively used by Nazi Germany in World War II. These organizations were responsible for the deaths of many thousands of Jews inhabiting the Nazi occupied territories, and also of Ukrainian partisans against fascism.

Under pressure from the West, on 21 February 2014, the government consented to sign an agreement with opposition leaders that included a return to the constitution of 2004 and curtailing the powers of the President. The agreement included the formation of a national unity government and an early Presidential election. Both the authorities and the opposition pledged to refrain from the use of force.

But on the following day, 22 February 2014, as soon as the government forces were pulled back, a violent seizure of power happened in Kiev. An organisation called the Right Sector, and other ultra-right forces, seized the buildings of the Verkhovna Rada (the Ukrainian Parliament), the Presidential Administration, the Ministry of the Interior and the Government.

Under physical pressure from the militants and their supporters, the Rada decided on the removal of the President, the Rada leadership and other officials.

One of the first decisions following the coup the adoption of a law to ban the Russian language in Ukraine despite the fact that it the mother tongue for many Ukrainian citizens. Five posts in the new government, including Defence Minister and Prosecutor-General were initially allocated to the ultra-right party Svoboda ("Freedom"). This despite the fact that three months earlier the European Parliament had passed stating that "racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic views go against the EU's fundamental values and principles" and appealed "to pro-democratic parties in the Verkhovna Rada not to associate with, endorse or form coalitions with this party"

The seizure of power by the national chauvinist and right-wing radical forces that are the ideological heirs of the accomplices of fascism during World War II was accompanied by a resurgence of anti-Communist hysteria. Physical terror was unleashed against functionaries and ordinary members of the Communist Party and their families. The premises of the Communist Party of Ukraine Central Committee and a number of regional and local committees were vandalised. The court in Kiev is now considering the demand by the Ministry of Justice to ban the Communist Party.

In the East and South of Ukraine there was active rejection of what was happening in Kiev. The people started to adopt measures to protect their own security and future.

This first became clearly visible in the Crimea. Crimea had been transferred from Russia to Ukraine in 1954 without the consent of its population. Even as early as December 2013 and January 2014 the Crimean Supreme Council (local parliament) had repeatedly called on the authorities to "prevent unconstitutional action by revenge-motivated bankrupt political forces who profess extreme nationalism". The people of Crimea then began forming self-defence groups. On 23 February, the day after the coup in Kiev a rally of 200 000 participants was held in the port city of Sevastopol to express "the people's will against fascism".

On 27 February the Supreme Council of Crimea proposed holding a referendum based on the statement: "The Autonomous Republic of Crimea is an independent state which is part of Ukraine on the basis of treaties and agreements ("for" or "against")". This referendum did not take place.

The Kiev authorities objected to the decision to hold a referendum and tried to disband the self-defence units. On 1 March, the new Prime Minister of Crimea, Sergey Aksenov, appealed to Russian President Vladimir Putin asking for assistance in ensuring peace and tranquillity in the Crimea. That same day, Putin asked permission from the Parliament of the Russian Federation to use armed forces on the territory of Ukraine. It was unanimously granted.

It should be remembered that Sevastopol had always been the main base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet and further that even when reinforcements were sent to Crimea, the strength of the Russian troops did not exceed the 25 000 prescribed by the 1997 agreement with Ukraine (It had been agreed after the dissolution of the Soviet Union that Russia would retain its naval base at Sevastopol in the Crimea).

On 6 March, the Supreme Council of Crimea decided to hold a referendum with new wording, which gave a choice between two possible options:

1) Are you for the reunification of the Crimea with Russia on a subject of the Russian Federation?

2) Are you for the restoration of the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea, 1992 and for the status of the Crimea as part of Ukraine?

On 16 March 83.1 % of voters participated in the referendum and 96.77 % supported reunification with Russia.

The Russian military supported the Crimean self-defence groups with the aim of preventing interference of the voting process and to maintain a peaceful environment in the Crimea. During this process they did not fire a single shot. On 18 March the agreement to reunify the Crimea with the Russian Federation was signed in the Kremlin by the leaders of Russia, Crimea and the city of Sevastopol.

Meanwhile in the East of Ukraine, in Donetsk, Kharkov and Lugansk, rallies began to gather in support of the federalisation of Ukraine. This not only due to dissatisfaction with what happened in Kiev, but also in fear of their fate as Russian speakers. In response, the new Ukrainian authorities announced a special operation against the "separatists". Once the Kiev authorities started punitive action against the "federalists" using heavy military equipment and aircraft the slogan changed from federalisation to independence from Ukraine. The sovereign Donetsk People's Republic was proclaimed on 7 April and the Lugansk People's Republic on 28 April. Referendums followed the month after and the absolute majority in both regions voted for independence.

Kiev forces began punitive operations in Eastern Ukraine. Using heavy artillery, including multiple rocket launchers, they attacked not only the armed forces but also residential neighbourhoods, causing hundreds of civilian casualties.

The West continued to support the Ukrainian coup authorities in its atrocious campaign. The USA policy on the Ukrainian crisis is motivated by its efforts to implement a unipolar world and to push Russia out of world politics. Washington strongly pushed European countries, Australia, Japan, and Canada to accede to sanctions against Russia.

On 17 July a Malaysian civil aircraft with passengers on board was shot down flying over Eastern Ukraine. Who shot at it has not yet been discovered. In spite of the fact that the self-defence units had no weapons to do it, the Western mass-media and governments immediately put blame on them and "Putin's missiles".

Many believe that the flight was brought down to bring events in Ukraine back to the centre of attention of the United States and its European allies. Indeed, it occurred when the West's attention on events in Ukraine had been diverted by the war in Gaza between Israel and the Palestinian Hamas, as well as the advance of militants from the "Islamic State" in Iraq. After this tragedy the mood immediately changed and new and more serious sanctions were introduced by the US and EU. 

The USA has tried to thwart Russia's efforts to settle the crisis in Ukraine a peaceful way. There was no positive response to Putin's decision to withdraw from the previously obtained approval for the use of Russian forces in Ukraine. Moreover, on 5 September when a protocol facilitated by Moscow was signed in Minsk providing for an immediate truce, the West's reaction was to impose a new wave of sanctions. In fact it looks like Washington is doing its best to provoke a war between the two countries.

From the very beginning of the current crisis in Ukraine, Moscow advocated negotiations for a peaceful solution, while providing the best possible multilateral assistance under the circumstances to those in the East of Ukraine fighting for their rights. In this struggle volunteers from Russia have been taking part, but no Russian regular troops.

As to the Kremlin's position on the orientation of Ukraine to join the EU it has been repeatedly voiced: the choice belongs to Ukraine itself; but Russia will take protective measures for the economic consequences of Ukraine's entry in the EU "which would harm our country".

Unexpectedly it seems that the same forces that criticised the previous government have come to understand some of the problems: while the agreement on the association has been signed and ratified, its implementation has been postponed till 2016 after the talks between Kiev, Moscow and Brussels.

The Ukrainian tragedy raises many questions for the left forces. Georgy Kryuchkov, a member of the Communist Party of Ukraine Central Committee put some of them in his article in the publication Pravda:

"Why, when the patience of the ‘bottom' to live in intolerable conditions of bandit capitalism restored in Ukraine ends and the ‘top' has proved unable to further rule, when hundreds of thousands took to the streets, their protests have not acquired anti-capitalist character? Why did the poor masses not an oppose exploitative regime but once again allowed themselves to be used as a ‘crowd' in a fierce battle between two groups of the exploitative class and actually helped the most reactionary, Westernised, neo-Nazi forces to take power?"

The weakness of the left forces can be seen in the South-East as well. Some local Communist Party organisers are among the leaders there but the composition of militia commanders is very diverse. For example a former Donetsk "Minister of Defence" calls himself a Russian "monarchist". Under the circumstances the Communist Parties, both in Ukraine and Russia, face the challenge to counterpoise internationalism to (if to use the

ANC term) "narrow nationalism" that often rises even among the left in critical situations.

Comrade Vladimir Shubin is the author of ANC: A view from Moscow (1999). He has served for a significant period of time at the Institute for African Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, and as a Researcher. During the liberation struggle he served as a high level representative of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and as Head of the Africa Section of the Party's International Department he worked closely with the ANC and attended its first Conference after unbanning. He also worked very closely with Zapu (Zimbabwe), Frelimo (Mozambique), MPLA (Angola) and Swapo (Namibia). He writes from Russia.

This article first appeared in Umsebenzi Online, the online journal of the SACP.

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter