Anti-Imperialism and Ecosocialist Internationalism

– On the third anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine –

Introduction

The ideological discourse of anti-imperialism plays a prominent role within the left, both internationally and within the US, including within the Green Party US. In this essay, I consider what we mean when we talk about imperialism. What are the roles played by the drive for imperial expansion; and the omnipresent danger of war? This points to the centrality of inter-imperialist rivalries, especially between the US, Russia, and China. The internationalist focus of ecosocialism may help in developing a consistent anti-imperialist strategic perspective.

What do we mean when we talk about imperialism?

Imperialism is not new, but neither is it invariant over historical time. Broadly defined, it is the political and/or economic subjugation of one nation or people by another. Imperialism has a history that goes back millennia, as in classical Greece, Rome, and China. These empires expanded largely by the conquest of adjacent territory. Over centuries, imperialism evolved from the often slave-based extraction of raw materials, especially precious metals and other raw and agricultural commodities to its current form. Contemporary imperialism is now dominant, based on the export of capital from the center to the periphery in search of cheap labor, new markets, and (as ever) raw materials.

The US emerged from World War II (1939-1945) as the undisputed hegemon of the capitalist world, codified by the Bretton-Woods agreement (1944) and the subsequent creation of the International Monetary Fund (1945). The rise of international economic competition, first from Germany and Japan, challenged US hegemony. This was amplified by the US defeat in Vietnam (1975), along with the emergence of post-colonial states like India and Brazil. The oil crisis (1979) further weakened US hegemony. American imperial fortunes were revived with the collapse of the Soviet Union and its Eastern European bloc (1989-1991), once again placing the US in its dominant role. This was soon to be challenged by the restoration of market capitalism in Russia and the further development of market relations in China.

Drawing on the work of several influential Marxist thinkers, including V.I. Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg , and Ernest Mandel, among others, we can identify several key features that characterize contemporary imperialism. These include:

• The export of capital from the imperial centers to the colonial and neocolonial periphery, in search of cheaper labor, new markets, and relatively scarce raw materials.
• A tendency towards fusion of industrial and finance capital as part of a tendency towards monopolization. These tendencies are counterposed to varying degrees by the development of new technologies and the influence of state intervention.
• A tendency towards the division of the world into spheres of influence, enforced by both economic and military means. This leads inexorably to inter-imperialist rivalries, both economic and military, as well as to movements for national self-determination.
• Both imperialism and inter-imperialist rivalries are inherent in capitalism’s need for growth and expansion. This results in inter-imperialist wars as well as wars of national liberation and self-determination.
• The legacy of classical imperialism survives in reduced form. This includes both direct colonial rule and the restoration of former imperial boundaries.

The imperialist lineup

Many self-identified US anti-imperialists view the US as the leading (or perhaps only) imperialist power. It is sometimes referred to as “Empire,” to indicate its central position in the imperialist pantheon. Here I wish to bend the stick by considering the relation between the US and other imperial powers.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union and its allies, the US reinforced its dominant role within the world system. The US remains the most powerful imperial actor on the global stage, combining both relative economic and military strength. However, as a result of self-inflicted military setbacks in Afghanistan and Iraq along with the rise of competing economic powers, especially China, the balance of forces has been shifting during the current century.

While the US, along with its allies in NATO, Australia, Japan, and South Korea, remains the imperial hegemon, we should not underestimate the inter-imperialist rivalries between the US, Russia, and especially China.

Since his accession to power in 2000, Vladimir Putin’s foreign policies have centered around the restoration of Russia to its pre-revolutionary tsarist boundaries. The Russian state has been directly engaged in wars in Chechnya, Georgia, and Ingushetia, as well as Ukraine. Russia has deployed its military elsewhere as well, most noticeably in Syria, where it played a key role in defending the al-Assad regime against the popular movement following on the Arab Spring of 2011. In Africa, the Russian mercenary Wagner group has been active in the Central African Republic, Sudan, Libya, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger. As the assassination of Prigozhin bears witness, the Wagner Group can only function as an agent of Putin. We should bear in mind as well that the Russian military has the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world, along with advanced, hypersonic delivery systems.

It is China, not Russia, that has become the most important imperial rival to the US. Once seen by many on the left as a model for the development of socialism, the Chinese economy since the 1970s has been based principally on the capitalist market. The result has been the emergence of an economy as large as, or even larger than that of the US.  As with Russia, China seeks to restore its former imperial boundaries, as the Uighurs, the Tibetans, the Hong Kongers, and the Taiwanese, bear witness. Their vision extends beyond traditional boundaries, as evidenced by the Belt and Road initiative, along with direct investment in the global south.

What do we mean when we talk about ecosocialist internationalism?

Ecosocialism emerged as an ideological fusion of two complementary tendencies, environmentalism and socialism. Although not always made explicit, both of these had historically strong internationalist foundations.

Environmentalists have long understood that the solution to ecological threats, and especially climate change, can only be addressed effectively at an international level. Socialism, from its earliest years, recognized the need for international working class solidarity to displace capitalism. Socialist internationalist continuity was broken with the development of the theory and practice of socialism in one country, the Soviet Union. One of the historical legacies of this ideology has been the rise of what may be called campist anti-imperialism.

Fundamental principles of ecosocialism {and socialism more generally) include internationalism, democracy, self-determination, and the right to self-defense .We might note that these principles are not restricted to socialists. They may be found in the UN charter, and also within the Green Party.

Consistent with these principles, ecosocialist internationalists are at their best when they stand in solidarity with the world’s peoples, not necessarily with the states that rule over them. Borrowing from Hal Draper, we might call this anti-imperialism from below.

Ukraine: when inter-imperialist rivalry and national self-determination coincide

The full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, which began on February 24, 2022, has led to the most destructive European land war since 1945. It has exposed an ideological fissure within the left internationally. One result has been a worldwide debate within the left on how best to understand and respond to the Russo-Ukrainian war. To oversimplify, perhaps, it has pitted the self-identified anti-imperialists against the internationalists, both in terms of analysis and of action.

Many self-identified anti-imperialists subscribe solely to a proxy war interpretation of the Russo-Ukraine war. From this perspective, the war is viewed as principally or exclusively a war between US/NATO and Russia, erasing the right of the Ukrainian people to national self-determination. Those groups and individuals who hold this view, including many within the Green Party, among them some of its most prominent representatives, adhere to this position. From this perspective, the question of Ukraine is reduced to either a story of a CIA-inspired fascist coup in 2014, or a war of Russian self-defense against NATO expansion. Ukrainian self-determination is glossed over more or less entirely. Pacifism, a third ideological strand, is often conflated with anti-imperialism, but I will not pursue this further in this essay.

From an internationalist perspective, the campist view of Ukraine is incomplete, wrong, and dangerous, in my estimation.

Campism fails to take into account the imperialist nature of the Russian invasion and occupation. This was made clear by Putin prior to the invasion. Campism ignores the right of oppressed nations like Ukraine to self-determination and self-defense. It also falsely views Ukrainian popular resistance as a fascist, rather than a mass democratic resistance. I go into some of these points in greater detail elsewhere.

The alternative view is embodied in organizations like the Ukraine Solidarity Network and the European Network in Solidarity with Ukraine. They base their perspective on the right of nations to self-defense and self- determination. The online journal Commons is an important source for firsthand voices of Ukrainian socialists, feminists, environmentalists, and trade unionists.

How should ecosocialist internationalists determine their position when inter-imperialist rivalries conflict with the right of self-determination? In my view, we should take no sides in the inter-imperialist rivalry, but we stand for the right of oppressed nations to self-determination and national defense against imperialist subjugation, including the right to obtain arms from any source. Our support for the people of Ukraine should be independent of any political criticisms we might have of the policies of the Zelenskyy regime.

Conclusion

We are living through a period of renewed inter-imperialist rivalry, in some ways reminiscent of the years before World War I. Now, however, we live with the looming threat of thermonuclear weapons. As in that time, over a hundred years ago, the mass of the world’s people did not have a side among the contending imperial powers.

Understanding  the relation between anti-imperialism and ecosocialist internationalism is more than a matter of academic interest. Political parties seek to influence both public opinion and public policy based on our understanding of the world. How do we explain the almost instantaneous collapse of Syria’s al-Assad regime without considering the role of Russian imperialism in propping it up militarily? How do we relate to someone from Ukraine living under Russian occupation? What do we say to someone from Hong Kong or Taiwan about their annexation within the borders of the restored (and now capitalist) Chinese empire? How do we address the concerns of Venezuelan socialists about the recent election there?

Similar concerns exist within the US as well. Without understanding anti-imperialism from a global perspective, ecosocialists open themselves to the criticism that they may sound good on  YouTube, but their political specifics do not match their principles.