Ukraine: Donetsk: miners give Kiev 48h ultimatum “stop war or we will take up arms”

The miners gave Kiev a two-day ultimatum to stop the war or else they would take up arms “to defend their land, wives and children”

The rally on Donetsk’s central Lenin Square initially attracted about 1,000 people. “But the miners from all major coal pits nearby Donetsk: Gorlovka, Enakievo, Snezhnoe, Topaz and Donetsk itself continued to arrive and finally the number of protesters reached estimated 10,000″ Itar-Tass reported
.
The same report quotes deputy coal industry minister of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), Konstantin Kuznetsov as saying: “Miners have given (the Kiev authorities) two days to stop the so-called antiterrorism operation. Unless that happens, they are taking up arms and are going to defend their land, wives and children.”



The miners chanted anti-war slogans: “No to war!” “Fascism won’t get through!” “Donbass!” and“Slavyansk is a hero city!”

Source: http://ukraineantifascistsolidarity.wordpress.com/2014/06/19/donetsk-miners-give-kiev-48h-ultimatum-stop-war-or-we-will-take-up-arms/

 

See Also :

http://democracyandclasstruggle.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/sergei-kirichuk-from-beginning-maidan.html

Long Live Comrade Sushil Roy ! by Harsh Thakor

                                                           Comrade Sushil Roy

Comrade Sushil Roy, veteran leader of the CPI(Maoist), passed away this morning while in a prison hospital. He was the seniormost leader of the CPI(Maoist), and a leader of the undivided CPI, and later MCC as well, before the formation of the CPI(Maoist). 

The septuagenarian Comrade Sushil Roy had been purposefully ill-medicated to deteriorate his health, but imperialism today is on the backfoot wherever his political descendants are advancing the people's war.

I met Comrade Sushil Roy in the AIMS hospital a couple of months ago. He was in a terrible condition but his mental powers were so strong that he made an amazing recovery for some time.

He battled death like a soldier.

Sadly his health had another reversal from the 1^st week of May.

Without doubt he was one of the greatest leaders ever in the Indian Communist Movement who illuminated the flame of Naxalbari and Maoism .

With the tenacity of a rock he led the C.P.I.(Maoist).After meeting him some of my views changed on the erstwhile Maoist Communist Centre of which Com Sushil was the former general secretary.Com Roy played a major role in the unification of the M.C.C.I with the C.P.I.(M.L.) Peoples War Group. 

He was a master of revolutionary dialectics which he put into practice and his experience played an invaluable role.He grasped Marxist-Leninist –Maoist politics with the mastery of a professor or a surgeon.

He defended the ideology  of the Maoist party, tooth and nail inspite of being sentenced to jail and critical health. He thwarted off all obstacles and all his life combined the qualities of a soldier with an architect .He refuted all those who tried to divided the Maoist party and were critical of the Unity in September 2004.It is ironical that Com Sushil Roy died just 4 months away from the 10^thanniversary of the formation of the C.P.I.(Maoist). In his journey he confronted the most turbulent of seas . He possessed the true soul of a revolutionary.

He explained me why the Chinese Communist party refrained from using the term ‘Maoism’.He stated that at that stage in history it would look like imposing leadership of the C.C.P. over the International Communist movement and exhibit  arrogance or chauvinism,as Comrade Mao Tse Tung was still alive.

In his view ‘Mao tse Tung Thought’ was only a synonymn of ‘Maoism’, which to him was morally an ism even during Comrade Mao’s lifetime. (during the Cultural Revolution period)
 

He elaborated the weaknesses  of the erstwhile C.P.I.(M.L.) Party Unity group.and the significance of the erstwhile Maoist Communist Centre. He  explained that the Krantikari Kisan commitees only partially functioned openly unlike other peasant associations like the Mazdoor Kisan Sangram Samiti of the C.P.I.(M.L.) Party Unity group. He  stated  that the M.C.C. did build open fronts of students,intellectuals(krantikari Budhijivee Sangh)  and cultural wings (krantikari Sanskritik Sangh) which had a significant mass base  but in the peasant movement mantained secret functioning structure.

In Sushil Roy’s view unlike the M.C.C.the C.P.I.(M.L.) Party Unity group only had floating armed squads or self defense squads and no stable military structure.

The M.C.C.I also formed a strong red army corpse in addition to village level defence corpses. ..Although not forming a complete peasant organization the Krantikari Kisan  Committees built revolutionary peasant  councils similar to the red army in  China.

The secret party structure was mantained with iron discipline.

Certain scholars like Bela Bhatia are critical of M.C.C's secret methods , favouring the open mass movements of I.P.F.and M.K.S.S. but they have never studied the work in the areas of the Revolutionary peasant councils of the M.C.C. in Aurangabad or Gaya.

It brilliantly combined underground mass movements with the meticulousness of a surgeon. Unlike the M.C.C.the C.P.I.(M.L.) Party Unity group only had floating armed squads or self defense squads and no stable military structure.Above all unlike Andhra Pradesh, Bihar had no history of Communist Movement. From 1969 to it's formation till 2004 before merging with the C.P.I.(M.L.) peoples war group it mantained the structure of the party with water tight discipline with no central commitee leader arrested and no military squad liquidated.

Probably it played the greatest role by any organization in the Communist revolutionary movement in Bihar,Jharkand and Bengal.

They may have been dubbed the 'jungle' party but still carried out agrarian revolutionary movement or land distribution more than any other revolutionary group in Bihar with the Krantikari Kisan Commitees.

Comrade Sushil Roy was a backbone to the Maoist party and to the very end displayed the true inner spiritual depth of a revolutionary.Although dead he will reverberate his spirit to light the torch of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

Comrade Sushil Roy Lal Salam!

Victory To The People's War!

Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!

Althought not in agreement with the line of the U.C.C.R.I. (M.L.) he admired Comrade D.V.Rao and Gundahar Murmu.

The following is the full version of the interview Shushil Roy gave to Indian Express, an English language daily recently.

Indian Express (IE): What relations do the CPI(Maoist) have with the Nepal Maoists? Is it still going strong?

Sushil Roy (SR): The CPI (Maoist) seeks, as part of its international responsibilities, to have fraternal relations with Maoists and all progressive forces struggling for the working classes all over the world. Nepal is one of them.

Notes regarding Cosmopolitanism and the National Question by Wilf Dixon

This contribution is from Comrade Wilf Dixon in response to the article by F.Chernov on Cosmopolitanism and Imperialism here

Racism, bourgeois nationalism and suspicion of, and hatred of other nationalities is used to weaken the class struggle of the proletariat. The ideology which most consistently serves the interests of the proletariat is proletarian internationalism. This must be the cornerstone of our policy on the national question, especially given that we seek to build a communist party in the British state consisting of the most advanced elements of the proletariat, closely bound up with the masses who if they are going to succeed in rallying the vast masses in making an assault capital, must be capable of resisting the jingoism and imperialist venom of the monopoly capitalist bourgeoisie.

      The national question is in essence a class question.  In rejecting the nationalism of its own bourgeoisie, the proletariat of an oppressor nation is clearing the way for building unity with those nations and peoples oppressed and specially oppressed by their ruling class and facilitating the class struggle against capitalism. But this cannot just be expressed in terms of resolutions and goodwill, it requires concrete actions and demonstrations of support for the demands of nations and oppressed peoples, including the demand for self-determination and separation from the oppressor state.  It is a unity built in struggle against a common enemy.  Lenin talks of giving direct assistance to the struggles of the oppressed peoples.

      The petty-bourgeois democrats who oppose racism and racist oppression, do so often from a position of moral indignation and outrage, often restricting themselves to the external forms of racism, terminology and language and are proud of their cosmopolitanism seeing this as the model of anti-racism. This results from their class position in bourgeois society and when faced with the revolt of the masses against their racist oppression,  they can react with fear and condemnation. For the working class of the oppressor nations the struggle against racism and national chauvinism  is a question of life or death, success or failure in its own struggle.

      I have made these points as my starting point because as communists working in the imperialist heartland they constitute the basis on which a party must be built. Racism and national chauvinism cannot be eliminated until the workers and oppressed peoples hold state power and can begin the process of re-educating and rebuilding society in its own image, but just as the outbreak of the first world war revealed the Achilles heel of the 2^nd international and opportunism and chauvinism took the place of proletarian internationalism, a Party that does not consistently struggle against opportunism and social chauvinism will never succeed in taking its place at the vanguard of the proletariat.

           Imperialist states often describe their domination of subject nations as a unifying force for the common good. This is not new. The British renamed the Empire on which the sun never sets as the British Commonwealth. The French regarded its possessions, most notably Algeria,  as part of France which much of French society regarded and still regards as the pinnacle of civilization. A view which underpins racism in French society which in many respects is stronger than in Britain. Defence of this outlook is a form of cosmopolitanism. But as far as it infects the working class movement it is better described as social chauvinism.

           

      Cosmopolitanism may describe the view that national interests, national struggles and the possibility (or impossibility) of genuine self-determination as outdated. But again as far as this relates to the outlook of communist or so-called left organisations in the imperialist countries, I believe these views are social chauvinist.  In essence they help to perpetuate and subjugate the oppressed nations and nationalities by denying the legitimacy, ideologically and in practice, of the peoples’ revolts against this special and national oppression. The working class movement of the oppressor nations must give direct assistance to these struggles to the extent that they weaken and sap the strength of the imperialist powers and hasten the day that imperialism will be destroyed in its heartland. Not all national movements, however, are progressive and the recent past has seen many cases of interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states, exploiting national contradictions for economic and political gain.

        

      On the the question of national nihilism. The national question of every country must be studied concretely and even  in imperialist nations and states, the question must be studied concretely and historically. Support for ones own nation in the first world war, it being an imperialist war, a war to decide which power or group of plunderers would get the lion’s share of colonial booty, was and is opportunist and social chauvinist. A united front with those nationalist forces prepared to resist the fascist axis in the second world, and for us here in Britain, in alliance with the Soviet Union after its invasion (I believe for Britain the war at its outset was an imperialist war) were correct.  Trotskyism found itself in alliance with fascism by denying the progressive nature of nations anti-fascist struggles.

       The struggle in Ireland for national unity which is a democratic task that needs to be completed will remain a progressive struggle until it is completed. Irish people are proud of their history of struggle and quite rightly so. The Welsh and Scots people have national demands which are being made and struggled for.  How these demands and struggles can be formulated in a programme for a communist party uniting the peoples struggle against the British state, is a matter of concrete study and struggle.

      There are certainly things that the English people, particularly the working class, can be proud of in their history. But I believe this should be concrete. Promoting general English pride in the present political and ideological environment and in the abstract, can only give a boost to national chauvinism and undermine educating the working class in the spirit of proletarian internationalism. However, I do not believe this is promoting national nihilism. 

      The day will come when the English will make a great contribution to throwing off the shackles of imperialism. Then I will feel proud to be English. Now I can only feel the shame of what British imperialism does in oppressing, exploiting and super-exploiting  the workers and oppressed in Britain and abroad. 

Historical Materialist Manifesto for Geographers 1984 by David Harvey

A thought provoking presentation by David Harvey in 1984 which touches on questions of geo -politics and geography and provides some useful background on the imperialist ideology of cosmopolitanism.The retreat to positivism reflected the cultural assault on Marxism in the 1950's  by Anglo/US imperialism


See Also:

http://democracyandclasstruggle.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/cosmopolitanism-and-imperialism-by-f.html

http://democracyandclassstruggle.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=limits+to+capital

Cosmopolitanism and Imperialism by F Chernov in Bolshevik 15th March 1949 - Introduction and Notes by Democracy and Class Struggle

Democracy and Class Struggle has written on many occasions about the cosmopolitan character not only of the "British " Left but the Post Second World War Left in general.

In fact we have found the RCPUSA a classic expression of this imperialist Anglo American supra-national ideology but they are not alone unfortunately. Promoting the cosmopolitan ideology of Anglo/American Imperialism is self defeating at best and counter revolutionary at worst.

The ideological struggle against cosmopolitanism has been falsely portrayed by the Ango/American bourgeoisie has only a Russian nationalist struggle of the 1940's,sometimes even as anti Semitism though the people originally criticized were not Jews or Zionists.

In fact the abuse of the term cosmopolitan by anti semites has led some comrades to use words like imperial universalism instead of cosmopolitanism but we reclaim the word and the concept it expresses has part of the ideology of the socialist and communist movement.

These are diversions to ensure that idea expressed in this concept are not studied and understood in the anti revisionist and anti imperialist struggle and we have to express our ideas through bourgeois terms.

Fascism makes use of words like international finance but we have heard no one say we should not use criticism of international finance has part of our critique of capitalism.

The article by F.Chernov sees cosmopolitanism has a global ideology of imperialism.

However the roots of the struggle against cosmopolitanism go back to Marx and Engels and Lenin and is part of the universal ideological struggle for socialism - a socialism that understands that the universal idea of socialism can be found in particularity of different nations.

For those that find the idea of the universal being found in the particular difficult I suggest you study Hugh MacDairmid in Scotland and Niclas Y Glais in Wales or Steinn Steinarr in Iceland as they are living examples of the idea.

This was what Mao Zedong meant when he called patriotism applied internationalism, it is  what the RCPUSA fails to grasp in its promotion of supra nationalism which in reality is promotion of ideology of US Imperialism. 

Has Comrade Chernov makes the point in the article below that 

"Cosmopolitanism and nationalism are not opposites, but are merely two sides of bourgeois-imperialist ideology"

While we agree with many of the ideas expressed by F Chernov in the article below we do not agree with the manner in which the Communist Party in the Soviet Union operated politically in the late 1940's.

Has we have pointed out before here the Communist Party of the Soviet Union did not operate politically on the basis of the Mass Line in late 1940's but by commandism and by 1949 the same year this article below was written, the arch revisionist Khruschev was already General Secretary of the Communist Party of The Soviet Union.

Concerning the battle against the imperialist ideology of cosmopolitanism we agree with Comrade Mao Zedong when writing on Where do correct ideas come from

"Generally speaking, those (ideas) that succeed are correct and those that fail are incorrect, and this is especially true of man’s struggle with nature.

In social struggle, the forces representing the advanced class sometimes suffer defeat not because their ideas are incorrect ! but because, in the balance of forces engaged in struggle, they are not as powerful for the time being as the forces of reaction; they are therefore temporarily defeated, but they are bound to triumph sooner or later"

Many people make the mistake of identifying globalism and one world government with neo-liberalism in the 1970's and 1980's but the ideology of cosmopolitanism was already firm on the agenda of Anglo/American Imperialism in the 1940's has F Chernov clearly demonstrates.

For those that think that F Chernov's statement about cultural cosmopolitanism serving enemy agents is hyperbole, then you need to read this here about the CIA sponsored Congress for Cultural Freedom founded around the same time has F Chernov's article.


The ideology of cosmopolitanism arises from the same manner of production of bourgeois society.

Cosmopolitanism is the negation of patriotism, its opposite. 

It advocates absolute apathy towards the fate of the Motherland. Cosmopolitanism denies the existence of any moral or civil obligations of people to their nation and Motherland.



The bourgeoisie preaches the principle that money does not have a homeland, and that, wherever one can "make money," wherever one may "have a profitable business", there is his homeland.



Here is the villainy that bourgeois cosmopolitanism is called on to conceal, to disguise, "to ennoble" the antipatriotic ideology of the rootless bourgeois-businessman, the huckster and the traveling salesman.



Harmful cosmopolitan ideology serves for the bourgeoisie and its agents as a very convenient ideological tool for excusing and covering up all kinds of antipatriotic actions, national treason and political double-dealing.

Marx showed that "bourgeois patriotism...degenerated into a complete sham after its financial, commercial, and industrial activity acquired a cosmopolitanist character" (Marx-Engels Archive, Vol. III (VIII), p. 355).



In the era of imperialism the ideology of cosmopolitanism is a weapon in the struggle of imperialist plunderers seeking world domination.

Even in the time of the first World War, defending the Bolshevik programme on the nationalities question, fighting for the right of nations for self-determination, 

Lenin wrote:

"Imperialism represents outgrowing by capital of frameworks for national states, it represents an expansion and exacerbation of national oppression on a new historical basis.



Hence it follows that in spite of guns, exactly this, that we must join the revolutionary struggle for socialism to a revolutionary programme on the question of nationality. (Works, 4th edition, Vol. 21, page 371-2.)

This Leninist position shows the indissoluble bonds of the revolutionary struggle for socialism with the defense of national sovereignty of nations.



Imperialism is inseparable from repression of national sovereignty of peoples and monstrous national oppression. In policies of the most severe exploitation of oppressed nations, in expansionist aspirations, the imperialist bourgeoisie hides the first sources of bourgeois-cosmopolitan preaching of national nihilism.

National sovereignty, the struggle of oppressed nations for their liberation, the patriotic feelings of freedom-loving peoples and above all the mighty patriotism of the Soviet people - these still serve as a serious obstacle for predatory imperialistic aspirations, they prevent the imperialists' accomplishing their plans of establishing world-wide domination.



Seeking to crush the peoples' will for resistance, the imperialist bourgeoisie and their agents in the camp of Right-wing socialists preach that national sovereignty purportedly became obsolete and a thing past its time, they proclaim the fiction of the very notion of nation and state independence.



The ruling cliques of nations, being the objects of American expansion go all out so as to spit upon and fault the yearning of the masses for the preservation of their national sovereignty, thus rendering aid to American imperialism.



Violently attacking the peoples' aspiration to protect their national sovereignty, their national independence, apologists of imperialism insolently declare "out of date" the peoples' aspiration for preservation or achievement of their national independence, or, in other words, their unwillingness to voluntary submit to the imperialist aggressors.



The preaching of national nihilism is knowingly and deliberately led by the ideologists of Anglo-American imperialism against the land of Socialism and the people's democracies. 

The people of people's democratic countries under the leadership of communists, with the support of the Soviet Union, bravely and steadfastly fight for their national independence.



In particular the Communist parties now serve in all countries of the world as the heirs and most consistent defenders of the better national traditions of peoples, as frontline fighters for liberty and independence of peoples. 

They lead national opposition to the aggressors and the expansionist aspirations of American imperialism.

Modern bourgeois cosmopolitanism is the ideological expression of aggressive imperialist policies of the reactionary bourgeoisie of the great capitalistic powers, directed towards the establishment of their world supremacy. 

The struggle for world domination, for the exploitation of the world by a handful of capitalist monopolies naturally and inevitably results from inequality in the economic and political development of capitalism in the era of imperialism.

"Global supremacy," Lenin observed, "is, in short, the maintenance of imperialist policies, the continuation of which is imperialist war." (Works, Vol. XIX, p. 201.)



American imperialism, in the current conditions, is revealed as the pretender for world domination. And this explains this fact, namely that the ideologists of American imperialism emerge today as the most violent propagandists of cosmopolitanism. 

Present day bourgeois cosmopolitanism is chosen by American imperialism as a weapon of the ideological struggle for world domination. 

With the help of American cosmopolitan propaganda, American imperialism directs the ideological preparation for the accomplishment of its expansionist, aggressive aspirations.



The ideology of bourgeois cosmopolitanism serves as a convenient cover for the subversive activity of spies and saboteurs, working at the behest of foreign intelligence services. 

In the guise of cosmopolitan phraseology, in false slogans about the struggle against "nationalist selfishness," hides the brutal face of the inciters of a new war, trying to bring about the fantastic notion of American rule over the world.



From the imperialist circles of the USA today issues propaganda of "world citizenship" and "universal government."

The true sense of this propaganda was unmasked by Comrade A.A. Zhdanov in his report at the conference of some representatives of Communist parties.

"Some of the directions of the ideological 'campaign' accompanying plans for the enslavement of Europe," said Comrade Zhdanov, "are an attack on the principle of national sovereignty, a call for the rejection of the sovereign rights of peoples and, set up in contrast to them, the idea of 'universal government'." 

The sense of this campaign consists of this, to enhance unchecked expansion of American imperialism, inconsiderately violating the sovereign rights of peoples, to represent the USA in the role of the standard-bearer of the laws of all mankind, and otherwise, to present those who resist American influence as followers of obsolete 'selfish' nationalism.



The patriotism of the popular masses serves as a powerful spiritual weapon of the workers in the struggle for liberty and national independence. Directed against patriotism, bourgeois cosmopolitanism pursues the goal of ideological disarmament of peoples opposing American imperialistic expansion.



With the aid of cosmopolitan propaganda, the bourgeoisie of Western countries and their agents in the persons of Blum, Bevin, and Schumacher and their like aspire to excuse their national treason, and to prepare ideologically the total surrender of these countries before American imperialism.

Editor's notes:

Blum -- Leon Blum, leader of French Socialist Party (aka social-fascist, social-imperialist, etc) before and after WW II.

Bevin -- Ernest Bevin, foreign minister of Britain's Labour government.

Schumacher -- Kurt Schumacher, leader of W. German Social Democratic Party


Comrade A.A. Zhdanov showed that bourgeois cosmopolitism and, in particular, 

the cosmopolitan idea of "one-world government" have a strikingly expressed anti-Soviet orientation.



"The co-opting of the idea of 'one-world government' by the bourgeois intelligentsia from a number of dreamers and pacifists," said Comrade Zhdanov, "is used not only as a tool to press for the ideological disarmament of peoples, who stand up for their independence from encroachments from the direction of American imperialism, but also as a slogan expressly opposed by the Soviet Union, which constantly and repeatedly defends the principle of true equal rights and the protection of the sovereign rights of all peoples, great and small."



Fed by the aggressive Anglo-American plans for world domination, present-day cosmopolitanism is nothing but the seamy side of unbridled Anglo-American bourgeois nationalism and racism.



Cosmopolitanism and nationalism are not opposites, but are merely two sides of bourgeois-imperialist ideology.



Cosmopolitanism always was and is merely a screen, a disguise for nationalism.



In due course, unmasking the German bourgeois "true socialists," Marx and Engels indignantly wrote: "...such a narrow nationalist world-view lies at the foundation of supposed universalism and German cosmopolitanism" (K. Marx, F. Engels, Works, Vol. IV, p. 464).



Self-seeking imperialist interests of the Anglo-American capitalist monopolies and militant Anglo-American bourgeois nationalism lie at the foundation of bourgeois cosmopolitanism.



All the preaching of cosmopolitan ideas, exported from the USA, of "world citizenship," "universal government," "world-wide power," and the "supranational state" etc. are called to serve in their own way as an ideological disguise for Anglo-American nationalism.

Leninism revealed the sources, the roots of bourgeois cosmopolitanism. V.I. Lenin wrote: "...the union of imperialists of all countries, the union, naturally and inevitably, for the defense of capital, knowing no homeland, proved by many of the most significant and greatest episodes in world history, that capital puts the keeping of its alliance of capitalists of all countries against the workers higher than the interests of the fatherland, of the people or of anything else." (Works, Vol. XXIII, p. 4).

Lenin proved here that the bourgeoisie places the protection of its self-serving class interests "higher than the interests of the fatherland, the people, or anything else," that in the name of protecting its class interests the bourgeoisie creates a "union of imperialists of all countries" against the workers.



The composition of a new international situation as a result of the Second World War - the growth of the power of the Soviet Union and its international authority, the drop-out from the imperialist system by the peoples' democracies, leftward tendencies among the masses in capitalist countries, the colossal growth of the strength of socialism and democracy in the whole world, the growth of national liberation movements in colonial and semi-colonial counties - all this provokes spiteful hatred from the imperialist, antidemocratic camp, headed by the USA, having set as its main purpose the struggle with socialism and democracy.



Present-day bourgeois cosmopolitanism with its call for the repudiation of national sovereignty, with its notions of "one-world government," the creation of the "United States of Europe," etc. is an ideological "basis" and "consecration" of the assembling under the aegis of American imperialism of a "union of imperialists" in the name of the struggle against the toiling masses, against the Soviet Union and people's democracies, against the irresistible growth over the entire world of the forces of socialism and democracy.



Bourgeois cosmopolitanism is from start to finish a profoundly reactionary ideology of the imperialist bourgeoisie, an ideological banner of the imperialist, antidemocratic camp. Therefore the struggle with bourgeois cosmopolitanism is an indispensable and paramount component part of the struggle against imperialism, against decadent bourgeois ideology.
source: 

http://www.cyberussr.com/rus/chernov/chernov-mirovaya-e.html

Democracy and Class Struggle notes while the RCPUSA and British Left are infected by this cosmopolitan world outlook of Anglo/ American Imperialism both the Communist Party of India (Maoist) and the Communist Party of the Philippines demonstrate by their practice that they have grasped Mao Zedong's thought that patriotism is applied internationalism and that they are the true Indian and Filpino patriots in the 21st Century.

Today,on 17th June,2014,we dip our blood in memory of Comrade Krishna Singh ,member of erstwhile C.P.I.(M.L.) Party Unity and secretary of the Mazdoor Kisan Sangrami Samiti on his 30th death anniversary

                     A Personal Tribute by Harsh Thakor

He was like a red flower blooming who planted red roses everywhere and illuminated the red flame of Maoism. Com Krishna Singh sowed the seeds of the revolutionary peasant movement in Bihar.

This beloved comrade came from the ranks of the poor peasantry.

He failed to complete his school education and took up a job as a casual labourer in Calcutta in a jute mill.

On returning to Bihar he worked as a bus conductor in the State transport co-operation. At the call of Naxalbari he became actively involved in the peasant struggle in Aurangabad. He also organised the workers of Japla Cement factory when he was arrested.

On being released he began to organise the peasantry and became the secretary of the M.K.S.S on June 17th 1984 while conducting a meeting at Jharha in Palamau district he was attacked by a landlord. At first the peasants stood up but the landlord re-appeared with a bunch of goondas and forced the peasants to flee.

Showing great tenacity Krishna Singh continued to speak but tragically was gunned down.

This comrade was a flower that bloomed as later several peasant activists were to lay down their lives for the cause of emancipation. The commemoration meeting held for this comrade in 1994 was one of the most emotional ever seen in Bihar.

The movement of the Mazdoor Kisan Sangrami Samiti will be written in red letters in the annals of the Communist movement permanently.

Revolutionary mass peasant resistance was developed instead of military annihilation.The most significant trend was using traditional armed weapons.

Athough armed guerrilla sqauds were formed they were deployed to protect the democratic struggles and not to substitute them.

I reccomend readers to read past issues of journal Mukti Marg.

The Mazdoor Kisan Sangram Samiti was formed in 1978 The Jehanabad-Palamau region is one of the backward regions of Bihar. In addition to cultivation, the peasants have to rely on the collection of forest produce for their subsistence. In this area the writ of the landlord lay unchallenged. The situation began to change with the entry of the Unity Organisation. (later C.P.I.M.L-Party Unity) Learning from their previous left errors special attention was paid to build a mass base for the activities of their armed squads.

A peasant organisation was formed - The Mazdoor Kisan Sangram Samiti (MKSS).

All old practices were questioned and landlords  authority challenged. Struggles for wage increase, against the social oppression of women and scheduled castes, and the biggest struggles arose over the auction of forest produce.

The incipient movement saw three of its young activists martyred on 10th August 1982. The landlords of Bhagwanpur village in Gaya district kidnaped Lakhan Manjhi (20 years), Sudeshi Manjhi (19) and Balkishore Manjhi (15) and killed them. Lakhan was an important member of the Party's Red Squad.

In May 1984 the Palamau-Aurangabad Regional Committee of the MKSS had held its conference and plans were being made for fresh attacks on the landlords . In July 1983 It's 1st legal conference was thwarted by the state and it's agencies.

In June 1984 the movement faced a severe loss, when the popular secretary of the MKSS, Krishna Singh, was shot dead by landlords. 

In May 1984 the Palamau-Aurangabad Regional Committee of the MKSS had held its conference and plans were being made for fresh attacks on the landlords.

On June 17, Krishna Singh was conducting a meeting of the MKSS at Jharna in Palamau district. The local landlord and goondas attacked the meeting, opening fire. A chase began, Com. Krishna Singh allowed his comrades to get away, and fell to the enemy's bullets.

Condemnation of this murder spread in a spate of protests throughout the area. The protests led to the arrest of 35 of the hoodlums involved. Meanwhile. As the movement grew the party too put forward the perspective of building up a guerilla zone.

Banned after the Arwal massacre in 1986 it was revived as the Mazdoor Kisan Mukti Manch in 1988 and the Mazdoor Kisan Sangrami Parishad in 1994.Qualitatitively arguably the M.K.S.S or later M.K.S.P led by C.P.I.(M.L.)Party Unity led the most outstanding t revolutionary peasant movement by any Marxist -leninist group in Bihar from the 1980's.

In the view of researcher Bela Bhatia who worked with the Lok Sangram Morcha (front of the Party Unity group) from 1993-96, the C.P.I.(M.L.) Party Unity did the best work within the revolutionary camp in Bihar as it built mass movements and did not place one -sided emphasis on guerrilla armed squad actions carried out by defence squads .


It played a major role in combating and isolating the Ranvir Sena from 1996-98. In fact after 1998 when merging with the PWG the mass movement it led declined with sole emphasis on military actions.

The 1997 ,'30 years of Naxalbari commemoration' booklet gave great praise to the M.K.S.S.for spreading the peasant movement from Jehenabad to other districts in Bihar like wildfire and for exhibiting strong tendencies of massline.

It praised the Party Unity section for building genuine armed revolutionary striking power fluttering the red flag in vast areas of land and combating the menace of combating the senas of the landlords and Upper castes. Red Defense squads intervened to protect the peasant resistance struggles . I personally heard accounts from speakers of the Lok Sangram Morcha in an anti-repression campaign in 1990 and visited Patna in 2001.

The ban on the M.KS S was an abject lesson for those who believed that India had fully developed bourgeois democracy.

Significantly although the Party Unity group was not banned the M.K.S.S. faced a ban.

The movement to arrest the killers of Krishna Singh is an inspiration for revolutionaries today on the capabilty of a mass movement of resistance.

Today several democratic activists are languishing in jails under false charges.

The protest rally against his killing constituted over 40,00 people in Patna.

It is 25 years since the C.P.I. (M.L.) mass front, Lok Sangram Morcha-a joint front of  7 organizations was formed in Bihar ,which led a convention in Delhi in 1989.

It was attended by sections of a huge stream of revolutionary groups from Liberation, Communist League of India, Chandra Pulla Reddy Resistance group, New Democracy group etc.

The Mazdoor Kisan Sangrami Parishad played a significant role in Bihar in the 1999 All India campaign by the erstwhile All India Peoples Resistance Forum against state repression in Andhra Pradesh,Dandkaranya and Bihar.

It also staged a state level rally in Patna in March 1999.It is remarkable as though it was officials banned as the M.K SS it revived to function under the most repressive conditions as the M.K.S.P.

Red salutes in memory of Krishna Singh on 30th death anniversary!

Social activist and rsearch worker Bela Bhatia interviewed activists of the Mazdoor Kisan angram Samiti (M.K S S.).Below I am quoting an excerpt from her interview.

Feudalism will have to be rooted out steadily, otherwise it will uproot you.
It lies like a shadow to every person and until it  is rooted out revolution cannot be achieved.

Before the organization came we did not have knowledge. The organization gave us education regarding the present system and he need to overthrow it.

India is a semi-colonial and semi-feudal Country. There is foreign
capital also in our country. We have o en this foreign capital an utilize the capital of our own country.

The downtrodden people have to rise above the system.

Each individual should get education.

We got books to read about Marx,Lenin and Mao From these we learnt that Mao was a revolutionary and so were Lenin and Mao Tse Tung.

We read a little about all the 3.

We have not read a lot but understood that what Marx and Lenin wanted to say was that this rotten system should be destroyed, the exploitation of one human being by another should end, human kin should be liberated from this. This is what the leaders have to say.

Below I am publishing some testimonies of leading members of the M.K S.S on revolutionary violence.

Without arms we feel that we shall not be able to fight. With arms we feel confident ,we will have the power. 

We fell that we will be able to settle he fight. If e do not have the armed power ,then how will we counter the Landlords anger. 

Can his anger be countered by wagging our finger at him?

Without armed power it is impossible to ensure peoples protection. If we do not have arms then no one will take our committee seriously. Each will do according to his will. They will think ,What can they do to us. When this power is their, they will fear.They know that if thy do not obey us the we have the power to destroy them.

There will be lot of problems. We may even be killed During this period ,many have been matyred .Seeds are sown I he field in hope that they will grow. Similarly, with a dream of Socialism we are walking.

The possession of arms helped resolve some conflicts without actual resort to violence In Nyona village a wage issue was resolved peacefully because of the armed capacity of the organisation. A villager stated Because we have arms ,the zamindars have shrunk with fear. Also gangs of bandits and dacoits ,who used to lot peoles houses ,have been vanquished. Because of the atrocities ,the people used to feel very insecure. This has come to an end.

I am quoting another passage fro Bela Bhatias interview. A senior member of the M.K S S stated: In 1979 there was an atmosphere of terror in the villages due to the feudal forces and criminal gangs.

Even though he labourers had heard about us they we too scared to call us.

However we were able to establish contact with few members of he J.P Movement, and asked him to arrange a meeting with few labourers introducing us as individuals who belonged to a party of the poor.

On the agreed day we met at midnight In the fields. Instead of meeting a small group we met about 50 men.

They were armed with lathis ,bhals and gadasas.

The terrorized villagers explained that they would have taken the activists to the village but it was too risky.

The Maliks had warned them that they would be severely punished if they brought he Naxalites to the village..

We activists, emphasized the issues of ,wages, land and basic democratic rights, but explained that it could only be done by our own strength. The People understood this stating,

We have understood .

You are Naxalites,you talk about strength.

People now started coming in large numbers.

At first they were hesitant to speak out. Finally one of them spoke out,

We will now be coming to the  meeting, expecting each time to get arms.

If you are demanding confrontation and armed revolution,should you not provide us with arms.

Thus ,I actual fact, they were demanding arms.

Such incidents show the mass approach of the M.K S.S

Red salutes in memory of Krishna Singh on 30th death anniversary!

RED SALUTE TO COMRADE HARBHAJAN SOHI ON 5TH DEATH ANNIVERSARY OF HIS DEATH BY HARSH THAKOR

This is a personal tribute by Harsh Thakor to Harbhajan Sohi on the 5th anniversary of his death

Today on June 15th we commemorate the 5th anniversary death anniversary of legendary comrade

Comrade Harbhajan Sohi ,Secretary of the Central Commitee of the C.P.R.C.I.(M.L.) was one of the best Marxist-Leninist theoreticians or polemicists in the world in the class of Com Gonzalo, Jose Marie Sison, Shan , Kondappali Seetharamiah or Ganapathy.

Whether on the nationality question, aspect of mode of production ,tactics of elections or international line Harbhajan Sohi was a master.

He brilliantly handled the contradictions between the mass organizations and the proletarian party in the movement, striving to mantain the correct relationship between the 2 bodies in practice.

Harbhajan Singh Sohi who made an invaluable contribution in building the massline and in developing the correct polemics of the International Line.

He was the pioneer in the criticism of the Dengist 3 worlds theory propagated from 1977 by the C.P.C.

In practice and theory he gave abject lessons on the correct relationship between the party and the mass organizations and the correct concept of practice of mass organizations.

Very often there has been a tendency to confuse the party with the mass organizations and impose the party politics on mass organizations.

Comrade HBS played a major role in leading the Punjab Co-ordination Committee of Communist revolutionaries in refuting the left adventurist line of Charu Mazumdar.

Comrade HBS defended the Leninist concept of the party and dictatorship of the proletariat tooth and nail and fought all capitulationist and ecclectic trends like a boulder standing in a gale.

He also took the correct position on nationality question and on the mode of production.

I would have loved to have read Sohi's critique of Bob Avakian's New Synthesis from a Maoist perspective and of revisionist trends.

Comrade Sohi also made a concrete theoretical appraisal  of the Kashmir nationality movement  in 1990 .

He made a proletarian  class analytical perspective when certain groups like J.K.L.F .in Kashmir and U.L.F.A in Assam were taking a non-marxist stand.

Today let us dip our blood in Comrade Sohi's memory.

The document Harbhajan Sohi wrote in 1982 on ' defence of Marxism -Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought and General Line of International Communist Movement' is the best theoretical writing by any communist leader  defending Mao Tse Tung  Thought since 1976 in the world.

It rendered great service to the 1963 C.C.P.letter on general line of the ICM on June 14^th.

The document had refuted Enver Hoxha’s 2 world theory and Deng Xiaping’s theory of 3 worlds.

It consisted of  reviewing the entire history of the Communist Movement in the period of Trotskyite attacks, to the period of the great debate and finally to the period of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution.

It is arguably the best theoretical work in the Communist revolutionary camp in India.

It brilliantly defends the edifice of Leninism  and it's basic foundations..Sadly we never read Comrade Sohi's analysis of the C.P.I.(Maoist) which would have been one of the most accurate and enlightening lessons for the entire revolutionary camp.

He would have admired the C.P.I.(Maoist) from a critical angle. I also would have loved his interpretations or views on the terminology of 'Maoism.'

Sergei Kirichuk "From the beginning, Maidan supported imperialist plunder"

 

The following interview with Sergei Kirichuk, leader in exile of Union Borotba (Struggle), was published at Initiativ-online.org on June 11, 2014.

It was translated from German by Workers World managing editor John Catalinotto.


“From the beginning the Maidan [the demonstrations in Kiev’s central square] supported the free trade agreement with the EU. We, on the other hand, were from the beginning against the EU, which had no other goal but to plunder and destroy the Ukrainian economy.”

Initiativ: How and when was Borotba created?

SK: We are a very young, very new organization. We founded Borotba in 2011 as the result of a coalition of various left-wing groups. Some came from Marxist associations; others came from the Communist Party of Ukraine (KPU) and also its youth organization.

We are different people with different backgrounds.

We have Stalinists, Trotskyists, Maoists and people of other political backgrounds in our organization.

We reached a point when we realized that these divisions are no longer as important as they once were.

In various campaigns we have all worked together and found that these differences are not as significant now.

We can work together to build something new; that was the key idea.

A lot of people have participated in this process.

To be honest, it was mostly politically experienced and educated people who have supported this process.

But even workers without special training were involved, as well as leading people out of the labor movement. One of them comes from Kharkov.

A few days ago someone tried to kidnap him.

Although for a long time we were very well organized and active, we were numerically a very small organization. We had regional offices in all major cities. At our biggest demonstrations we had several hundred participants.

When the crisis began, when the Maidan movement started [last November], we were from the beginning against this movement.

It was a position many people could easily understand, especially people from the working class. Riding this wave, we increased our influence, and became one of the leading forces in cities like Kharkov, for example.

After the Maidan coup [of Feb. 22], the fascists destroyed our headquarters in Kiev.

Our comrades in western Ukraine went underground, while we continued to lead public activities in the east, where it was still possible.

The Ukrainian city of Kharkov was one of the largest industrial centers in the days of the Soviet Union, after Moscow and Leningrad. Today, Kharkov is one of the largest railway hubs in Europe. It’s a city with a good old left and democratic tradition.

It is therefore not at all surprising that the mood in Kharkov was and is so strong against the new oligarchic coup government.

There were huge gatherings, which were all peaceful, against this new government in Kiev. And of course, we won over new members from this movement.

For example, in one day, 300 people signed a statement that they would like to join our organization. And of course they were not all communists, socialists or leftists; they expressed their agreement with a specific policy.

But 300 such declarations alone already have enormous importance. It showed how our program was right on target.

Initiativ: If someone asks what Borotba is, how do you answer them? What sets you apart from the KPU (Communist Party of Ukraine)?

SK: We are a communist organization. But the best known leftist organization in Ukraine is the KPU. We criticize this party very sharply, and we were clearly against their parliamentary illusions.

The KPU was part of the oligarchic Yanukovych government. But if you say you’re a communist, then everyone thinks you’re part of the KPU.

That is why we have taken the name Borotba. The name literally means “struggle,” and implicitly evokes the tradition of Ukrainian communists, who once had a newspaper named Borotba.

There have been other organizations in the past that were called Borotba.

For westerners, the name sometimes sounds strange, but it has true Ukrainian roots. What is humorous here is that Borotba is the name in Ukrainian.

 In the Ukrainian media, we are naturally represented as Putin’s agents, as a pro-Russian party.

The problem is that we of course also appear in the Russian-speaking regions with the Ukrainian name Borotba. Most people find it difficult to understand why such a party would have a Ukrainian name.

Initiativ: Right from the start you were against the Maidan. Why?

SK: From the beginning, the Maidan demonstrations made no social demands.

Many people think the Maidan was some sort of great democratic movement, with social demands.

The fascist forces came into the Maidan like a natural catastrophe, destroying the progressive part of the movement and putting themselves at the forefront.

From the beginning, the Maidan supported the free trade agreement with the EU, which has no other content except plundering and destroying the Ukrainian economy.

On the other hand, the idea of success of the ​​individual held sway. This culminated in the idea that the corrupt Ukrainian system dominated by oligarchs could be overcome if we were part of the EU. Those who are willing to work hard will be successful and become rich.

Not only the liberal nationalist opposition but also the Yanukovych government spread the same propaganda in the media. Look at the Baltic countries, they said.

They have implemented reforms, they are part of the EU, they have wealth, they are so rich, and we have to follow that path too.

But Ukrainians can see and think. They have noticed the crisis in the EU and, for example, also seen what happened in Greece.

And there was this big anti-Greek campaign in Ukraine, which argued the following:

In Greece, socialism rules, the people are very rich and very lazy. And now they have to pay for their behavior. This is no joke; I mean seriously, it’s what they argued.

For a long time we were the minority of a minority.

For example, when I took part in a discussion on a TV show, I was the only one against European integration.

All the official representatives [of the Yanukovych regime] as well as the opposition were in favour.

And of course they had no reasonable arguments against my position, because I pointed out what the consequences of the free-trade zone would be.

They could make not a single rational argument.

They said, “Looking at the EU, they are all so rich,” and when I made it clear that I did not agree, they countered by saying they no longer wanted to hear such Soviet propaganda.

Initiativ: What were the reasons Yanukovych refused to submit to the EU’s dictates?

SK: Yanukovych did not sign the declaration with the EU because there was pressure from the Russian side.

The problem was that Russia was not able or willing to find a compromise that would have allowed Ukraine to cooperate with Russia as well as with the EU.

On the other hand, there was great pressure from Ukrainian business, especially from the high-technology sector, for example, the industry that produces engines for helicopters, airplanes, nuclear weapons and space rockets; they produce for the Russian market and not for the EU.

Some 50 percent of Ukrainian foreign trade is with the Russian Federation and the other half is with the EU. So Yanukovych had pressure on both sides from oligarchs.

The difference is Ukraine delivers many raw materials to the EU, and the profit from these sectors is very low, while what is delivered to Russia is high-price, high-tech products. Big capital exerted tremendous pressure and Yanukovych finally announced that there must be more negotiations. There should be more negotiations so that Ukraine would achieve more profitable exchanges with the free trade agreement. That was the reason why the Maidan movement began.

They tried to explain that the reason we are so poor is because we are living in the Soviet Union. It doesn’t exist anymore, but we still have a Soviet mentality, they say, and we need to break with this mentality and become a part of Europe. On the Maidan they built a symbolic wall. They said we are living in the Soviet Union, and if we overcome this border and become part of the EU, then we are breaking with our past.

Initiativ: What was the concrete political program of Borotba at that time?

SK: Of course we were in sharp opposition to the Yanukovych government. But we also understood that this opposition on the Maidan is just as reactionary as Yanukovych.

Thus, we have directed our criticism towards both sides. At this time, the political camps were already very strongly polarized between Yanukovych and the pro-Western opposition.

We represented at this time the thinking of a small minority of Ukrainian society.

Then some people began to understand what was really happening when the Maidan movement across the country began to destroy Lenin monuments. They destroyed hundreds of monuments that are spread all over the country.

Then people could understand very well what was happening. These are reactionary forces, they have no progressive social demands, and they have this right-wing ideology.

 And they say all problems can be found in the person of Lenin.

After the coup, the Lenin monuments became important political symbols. In Kharkov, for example, they also tried to destroy the monument. Many people from all over Kharkov came to protect the monument, and only a minority of them were communists or leftists, the absolute majority were ordinary people.

And they defended the monument as an expression of our history, our Soviet history. This is our history and we won’t let them take it away from us.

For example, there was an older woman at a demonstration with a self-made placard on which she had written:

You should not destroy your own house, just because it was built in the Soviet era.

Initiativ: What is the situation today?

SK: All our party offices were destroyed by the so-called National Guard, which is the legal cover for the neo-Nazi groups.

When our people came to the offices they saw people in black uniforms, armed with AK-47s and blockading our offices.

They took everything: flags, music systems, computers and even newspapers. It is easily understood that under such conditions no legal, open work is possible.

Two weeks ago, an attempt was made to kidnap two of our leading comrades following an anti-war demonstration in Kharkov.

At the end of the demonstration, people with AK-47s tried to pull our comrades into a car.

Bystanders were able to stop that from happening.

Our entire leadership is now in the underground.

Many of our members have left the country.

The Nazis have, for example, attacked the well-known left-wing journalist and Borotba member Andriy Manchuk, who is the chief editor of the daily Internet magazine Liva.

In the end, we were made illegal and the leadership was forced into exile.

But a few days ago there was an impromptu rally in Kharkov. Ordinary people gathered in the square, and we saw a lot of Borotba flags at this meeting.

Initiativ: You spoke of solidarity with the Kurdish liberation struggle? What did you mean by that?

SK: That must be clarified. If we look at the flag of Borotba, we see a great many similarities with the flag of the Workers’ Party of Kurdistan (PKK).

It was not that we conceived it as such from the beginning.

But we have quite a few Kurdish members in Borotba.

And it was ultimately pro-capitalist, neoliberal students, hostile to us, whose pressure brought about this agreement on the flag.

They wrote in a statement that Borotba is connected to the PKK and that the Kurdish Workers’ Party is considered a terrorist organization in the EU. They claimed that both together form a terrorist front against the EU. We were always in solidarity with the liberation struggle of the Kurds.

Initiative: Where do the Kurds come from? Did they immigrate to Ukraine in the days of the Soviet Union?

SK: The majority of Kurds living in Ukraine come from the south, from the Odessa region. Some of them are students and others work in the markets as traders. The Ukrainian government has always worked in close cooperation with Turkey. This put pressure on the Ukrainian government to take steps against the Kurds.

Previously, the authorities did not actually arrest Kurds, nor did they want to carry out greater repression against them. But the university authorities exerted pressure, for example, on the students, saying they should only study and not take part in political activities. Nevertheless, the Kurdish students have organized political meetings.

The main propaganda that the Ukrainian media always repeated was that Kurds simply cannot live in peace. And that although Turkey is such a “democratic” and “peaceful” country, the Kurds would always carry out terrorist acts. The media always asked, “Why are they coming to Ukraine? They cannot live in peace.”

Initiativ: What do you think about the concept of a democratic federation? Also in relation to the concrete situation in Ukraine?

SK: The Kurdish people must decide for themselves what form self-determination will take. In Ukraine, we are for democratic federalism. This means budgetary, political and social autonomy for southeastern Ukraine. The southeast would be a part of the Ukrainian Federation. And of course we need full equality of languages.

The people are very shocked about the historical mystifications. Nazi collaborators are suddenly turned into national heroes in Ukraine. Those days are now good pages of our history. If they now want to build monuments to Bandera [Hitler’s Ukrainian collaborator], please leave me out. People from the southeast want none of that. They say they are building monuments in Lvov in the west for Nazi collaborators and we defend our Soviet Army monuments.

Whether that should be happening in the same state or in two states is now the ultimate question. In the southeast, in the People’s Republics, there is now a debate. What should we do? Do we enter into a federation with Ukraine or will we be separate?

Initiativ: How will the struggle continue, given the new situation?

SK: We always criticized the KPU because they were focused on the parliamentary struggle. We have always concentrated on mass mobilization of working people and youth, on government service workers, etc.

We were under the illusion that we were going to live for many years in a liberal democracy, with freedom of assembly and association.

We are not at present nor were we ever prepared for this new situation, this guerrilla warfare. We have no infrastructure, weapons and experience.

That was a big mistake.

Initiativ: Are the majority of people who are struggling in the southeast on the part of the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk made up of Russians, as is claimed by the media again and again in the west?

SK: Of course, the absolute majority of people come from the region itself. Just as there are people from the southeast fighting on the side of the Kiev junta, so there are also people from Russia fighting on the side of the People’s Republics.

In the southeast there is no significant Russian influence. For example, there is a Russian citizen who is the leader of the resistance in Slavyansk.

And Kiev has been claiming that he is a member of the Russian secret service. According to research by journalists it has now come out that he is a member of the “Rekonstructer” movement. These are people who wear the uniforms that date from the time of the Tsars. They meet for public appearances and organize spectacles, etc.

Well, he became a leading commander of the resistance in Slavyansk, and to that extent this is Russian influence. But there are no experienced officers of the Russian secret service who lead and control everything, the way the media present it.

On the other hand, there are some Russians in the southeast, but in turn not as well suited for pro-west media propaganda, because they take a clear position against Putin
.
Initiativ: Now one last question about Crimea. What is the situation overall, and in particular that of the Tatars in Crimea?

SK: Putin is now playing the game. He has now given the Tatars in Crimea some national rights. They are represented in the local parliament and in the government.

This is exactly what the Tartars have always demanded from the Ukrainian government for 20 years.

As the Ukrainian army left Crimea, nobody wanted to fight against the Russian army; all accepted the new situation more or less.

Only the Tatars expressed their rejection.

And the Ukrainian nationalists called on the Tartars to join with the Ukrainians in this struggle. But no one joined, not even the Tartars.

Not all people in Crimea were happy about the annexation to Russia. But now they watch TV and see the Odessa massacre, the civil war and the bombing of apartment blocks in Donetsk, and they say to each other, “Thank god that we are not affected.”