Little has brought out so nakedly and egregiously the bourgeois and anti-revolutionary nature of the so-called socialist and communist parties than the war in Ukraine. Many of these parties in Europe, some of which we will focus on here, have pledged their support neither for the Ukrainian war effort, nor the Russian – acting as if they are bravely defying their country’s official line (which generally consists of military and economic aid to Ukraine, staunch public support for the country, and the condemnation and sanctioning of Russia), they forge a path ostensibly between support to either actor in what they often correctly describe as an inter-imperialist war. However, the character of these exhortations against support for Ukraine is not the revolutionary defeatism which sums up the communist position on such conflicts. Rather, it takes the character of something less than Lazzari’s old formula of “neither support nor sabotage” in regards to the war effort. Using the language of humanitarian neutrality, rather than proletarian revolution, they argue against supporting either side, and for bourgeois peace – and frequently this neutrality is a veil beneath which tacit support is offered to their “side” in the war.

This attitude can be found across the parties and organizations which call themselves communist or socialist and which claim to represent the interests of the working class. Four examples from various European countries will be given here, to illustrate the widespread adoption of these views as regards the war in Ukraine.

The Communist Party of Spain (PCE) «calls for an immediate cessation of all military operations initiated by Russia in Ukraine, and will support all initiatives that promote a peaceful and definitive solution to resolve a shared security of Ukraine and Russia outside of military logic and responses». The same statement contains the practical demand that «Europe needs to move towards a Shared Security System that overcomes the logic of the cold war, initiates verifiable disarmament processes and manages to become a zone free of weapons of mass destruction. Spain should not be part of this conflict and should support intense diplomatic initiatives to put an end to Russian aggression and contribute to the construction of a Continental Shared Security System», as well as advocating for «an International Conference under the auspices of the UN and the OSCE [Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe] to build a Shared Security that gives security to Ukraine, Russia and all European people».

These positions and demands are not accompanied by any mention of, or indeed action tending towards, the authentically communist position – that of revolutionary defeatism, that the communist party must actively work against its own country’s effort in the imperialist war (a doctrine that can indeed be applied to military support for Ukraine, and not just to direct intervention in the conflict). Rather, the demands are merely for a negotiated peace between the warring parties. And their proposed methods for achieving this? – To leave it up to the bourgeois States themselves! These ostensible communists will support “all initiatives” which promote a negotiated end to the war, and this must be done through bourgeois mechanisms, as those are the forces in existence capable of bringing about such a settlement.

These forces will not, of course, work towards a peace beneficial to the working classes of Ukraine, Russia, and beyond, but will wrangle out a peace most advantageous to the international bourgeoisie, and the various bourgeoisies of those powers who are able to gain the upper hand in the war, and therefore in the peace conference. This position is not even a lack of sabotage of the war effort – it is undeniably aid to the final step of the war effort, the process of establishing the peace most advantageous to the victorious, or more victorious, bourgeoisie that can be found. But the PCE go even further, suggesting that the UN and OSCE, who are of course entirely bourgeois institutions, host the conference which is to bring about an end to the war. Is this party communist, or Wilsonian? And of course, we should not forget their advocacy of a “Continental Shared Security System”, which would ostensibly secure peace in Europe. It is not mentioned, of course, that security cooperation in Europe would lead to nothing more than an intensification of European imperialism – the bourgeois States of the continent will not act in a benevolent manner should peace be established, but rather, they would exploit the lack of danger on the continent to all the more viciously exploit and brutalise the rest of the world in the interests of European and international capital. All of this goes beyond Lazzari’s formula in its heinousness – the position of the PCE is nothing more than the capitulation of an ostensibly communist party, whose doctrine lacks any resemblance to revolutionary Marxism, to entirely bourgeois institutions and aims.

The reprehensible French Communist Party (PCF) goes even further than its Spanish comrades, demanding not just bourgeois negotiations, but sanctions! The party’s national council, in a declaration issued in March 2022, argued that «the economic sanctions taken by the EU and Western countries must be strong enough to twist the arm of Russian political power and its economic and financial backers, and compel Vladimir Putin to an unconditional ceasefire and peace negotiations. The sanctions must not target the Russian people without distinction». At least in their kindness they explain that they do not wish to starve the Russian populace into submission. Sadly, that is about the best that can be said for this position – the PCF demands not only negotiations, to be managed by the various bourgeois States, and therefore to establish a bourgeois peace, but actually call for sanctions “strong enough” to compel Putin’s regime to make peace. Clearly, this peace will be to the benefit of the Ukrainian, and generally Western, bourgeoisies, as the circumstances under which the war will be ended thanks to this plan will be forcibly created by the imperialist bloc of Europe, the US, and their allies and clients. This disgraceful position is a call to adhere to the war in all but the most explicit, directly military manners in which it is conducted, in a way that can only serve as an auxiliary to those military manners, facilitating the butchery of the proletariat on the battlefields of southern and eastern Ukraine. The PCF also makes similar demands about pan-European cooperation as the PCE, calling, due to the “failure” represented by the outbreak of war in Ukraine, «all European countries to jointly develop a common framework for pan-European cooperation and collective security». They also make a patriotic demand in favour of France’s bourgeois sovereignty, arguing that «the strategic independence of France, like that of all the member States of the European Union, must be defined and controlled within the framework of cooperation and partnership, the first aim of which must be the preservation of peace and collective security in Europe and internationally». Imagine that, a party calling itself communist, which aims to prop up the strategic independence of the imperialist European States!

Across the Channel, the Communist Party of Britain (CPB) also falls within the bourgeois camp, demanding that UN Peacekeepers be deployed to Ukraine in the wake of a ceasefire agreement (though only with the free consent of both Russia and Ukraine, of course!), and for OSCE observers to return to the country. While differing in specifics, this is much in line with the common position of the revisionist “communist” parties who have abandoned the workers’ revolutionary struggle, including the two parties discussed previously, in that its key focus is not for a transformation of the imperialist war into civil war, nor even for revolutionary defeatism, but rather for a peaceful solution to the conflict in Ukraine under the auspices of a bourgeois international security complex, whether that be organised by the UN, Europe, or any other international or supranational organisation or group of States. This line is found throughout the statement in question, as when the question of Britain specifically comes up, the suggestion made by the CPB is not in any manner connected with socialism or revolution – rather, the party asserts that «the British government should be using its permanent membership of the UN Security Council to work alongside China for peace and a negotiated settlement». This bizarre demand is comical in its deviation from any sort of Marxist viewpoint, merely hoping that the British State plays the role of mediator in the inter-imperialist war. This statement contains no positions resembling revolutionary defeatism or any other communist policy, and neither does any other communique of the CPB. For a party that was ostensibly formed against the revisionist tendencies of its predecessor (though of course both factions in the split were equally revisionist, each in their own right), this is an especially laughable position to take.

Meanwhile in Portugal, that country’s resident Stalinist party, the Portuguese Communist Party (PCP), has said little beyond what has already been discussed in relation to the parties above, condemning the EU’s response to the war while stating that the party «considers it urgent to return to the path of respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and the Final Act of the Helsinki Conference, of peace and cooperation among peoples». They also make the remark, almost amusing when coming from an ostensibly communist party, that the Portuguese State’s policy of support for Ukraine’s war effort runs «contrary to the interests of the Portuguese people and the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic». Oh, this boundless evil! How malevolent must these actions be if they violate the Portuguese constitution, apparently a document communists are bound to respect? These statements were, like all others, unaccompanied by anything resembling a call for an authentically communist policy towards the situation at hand.

These examples are common to the so-called communist parties of Europe which have mired themselves entirely in bourgeois electoralism (nevermind the Stalinism animating all of the parties discussed above) and have thus abandoned any pretence at revolutionary aspirations, or indeed a proletarian program of any kind. Rather, the views of these parties are entirely bourgeois, with merely the thinnest veil of pseudo-Marxist terminology strewn haphazardly over it. In their responses to and policies concerning the war in Ukraine, rather than anything resembling a revolutionary communist approach, we find only bourgeois aims, bourgeois language, and calls for bourgeois peace under bourgeois institutions.