On the ISA’s strategy against militarism and imperialism

 

By Michael Pröbsting, Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT), 14 March 2025, www.thecommunists.net

 

 

 

A few days ago, the International Socialist Alternative (ISA) published an article which summarises their strategy against militarism and imperialism. The only positive thing one can say about this document – titled “The Answer To War Cannot Be War” – is that it unmistakably illustrates the abyss between petty-bourgeois pacifism and Marxism. [1]

 

Of course, the ISA comrades are correct in denouncing the frantic armament of the Great Powers. Every decent person will agree on this. But one can expect a bit more from an organisation which claims to be Marxists and even Trotskyist.

 

Unfortunately, the ISA article limits itself to lament the fact that the imperialists act … imperialistically, i.e. that they rearm, spread chauvinism and wage wars. What a surprise after an epoch of 130 years of imperialism which saw two World Wars and numerous colonial and neo-colonial wars!

 

 

 

Reactionary wars and liberation wars

 

 

 

Worse, the ISA speaks indiscriminately only about “wars” and proclaim their advocacy of “peace”. They are completely unaware of the basic truth of Marxism that there exist wars of different character – reactionary wars and liberation wars. Reactionary wars are those between imperialist powers, imperialist wars against (semi-)colonial countries or wars by reactionary forces against the oppressed. Progressive wars are those which are waged either by oppressed people against imperialist or reactionary forces (e.g. semi-colonial countries against imperialist powers, oppressed nations against the ruling class, democratic forces against dictatorships, etc.), the civil war of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie or the war of a workers’ state against capitalist states.

 

This was also the approach of revolutionary Marxists like Leon Trotsky:

 

“We Bolshevik-Leninists absolutely reject and denounce the deceptive differentiation between a ‘defensive’ and an ‘offensive’ war. In a war between the capitalist states such a differentiation represents only a diplomatic cover to deceive the people. (…) The revolutionary proletariat distinguishes only between wars of oppression and wars of liberation. The character of a war is defined, not by diplomatic falsifications, but by the class which conducts the war and the objective aims it pursues in that war. The wars of the imperialist states, apart from the pretexts and political rhetoric, are of an oppressive character, reactionary and inimical to the people. Only the wars of the proletariat and of the oppressed nations can be characterized as wars of liberation. After its victory the armed insurrection of the proletariat against its oppressors is inevitably transformed into a revolutionary war of the proletarian state for the consolidation and extension of its victory. The policy of socialism does not and cannot have a purely ‘defensive’ character. It is the task of socialism to conquer the world.“ ^[2]

 

Sadly, the ISA is befuddled by their pacifist psalms. Hence, while the article talks about wars of Russia against Ukraine and of Israel against Gaza, it does not say one word about the necessity to support the armed resistance of the Ukrainian and Palestinian people. [3]

 

In contrast, they preach empty pacifist phrases like:

 

“Fighting for peace means fighting for socialism.”

 

“We workers in different countries must refuse to go to war with each other.”

 

“The only lasting peace is one that brings an end to class war and imperialist competition. When a world socialist system is established, based on common ownership and the building of prosperity for all, there will be no new wars.”

 

Unfortunately, a socialist system does not exist today and neither will it tomorrow. In fact, the struggle for socialism will take a number of years and it will not succeed without armed struggle against imperialist occupation, national oppression and the bourgeoise state apparatus. What shall the workers and oppressed do in the meanwhile? What shall they do today as they are facing a brutal onslaught by the Russian and Israeli invaders? Should they take up arms and defend their homeland? Yes or no? The RCIT and its comrades in Ukraine, Russia and Israel / Occupied Palestine say unequivocally: yes. In contrast, the ISA shamefully preaches pacifism and refuses to endorse the armed struggle of the oppressed peoples! [4]

 

Authentic Marxists insist that it is impossible to fight against war and imperialism without actively supporting the struggle of the oppressed peoples. Or to put it in the words of Trotsky’s Fourth International:

 

"The struggle against war and its social source, capitalism, presupposes direct, active, unequivocal support to the oppressed colonial peoples in their struggles and wars against imperialism. A ‘neutral’ position is tantamount to support of imperialism." ^[5]

 

 

 

A “peaceful road” to socialism?

 

 

 

The ISA’s failure to speak out this basic truth is inextricably linked to their petty-bourgeois theory that the working class could overthrow the capitalist system of rule by peaceful means. This absurd idea – refuted numerous times in the history of class struggle – is part of the inglorious tradition of their founding fathers, Ted Grant and Peter Taaffe. They have always claimed that it is “possible to carry though a peaceful change of society” by “winning a majority in elections”. [6]

 

Instead of getting seduced by such sententious sermons, ISA comrades should take the Marxist position to heart that socialists must unconditionally support the armed resistance of the Ukrainian and Palestinian people without lending political support to their (petty-)bourgeois leaderships like Zelensky or Hamas.

 

Naturally, support for just wars of national liberation is not sufficient. Marxists must combine such with a program of international solidarity (appealing to workers and soldiers of the opposite camp, global campaigns for workers boycott against the robber states, etc.) as well as a program for socialist transformation. [7] But the best program for socialism is completely useless without giving a clear answer to the ongoing war, i.e. that it is necessary to support the liberation struggle of the oppressed by any means necessary!

 

It is high time that the ISA sobers up from its lulling cocktail of cuddly socialism and enters the road of militant socialism!