Is NATO still the number one enemy in the context of the war in Ukraine? Even during the May 1 move in Zurich, several left-wing groups are sticking to it.
From a distance, everything looks the same as it always has: unionists with the red flags of the Association of Public Servants (VPOD) are marching at the very front of the May Day parade in Zurich. Followers of the Revolutionary Construction, Kurdish communities and the Social Democrats follow further behind. A closer look, however, shows that the positions on the Ukraine war differ from group to group.
The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine leads to tensions in the left-wing parties in Switzerland. Because: In the past, the left has always positioned itself against a rapprochement with NATO. It was said in each case that a peaceful world could not be achieved with military alliances and possible force of arms. The war in Eastern Europe is now putting this attitude to the test.
Swiss communists blame the West
Forgoing military support for Ukraine would mean abandoning the country to its fate in the fight against Russia. And preventing that seems to be more important to some left-wing politicians than pacifist dogmas. In view of Russia’s violations of international law, many Swiss leftists are in favor of supplying ammunition for the German Gepard anti-aircraft tank.
Jo Lang, a politician with the Greens and a pacifist for a long time, now considers arms deliveries from the West to Ukraine to be justifiable, as he said to “Blick”. The Green National Council President Irène Kälin and the SP National Councilor Roger Nordmann showed up recently also ready to talk about arms deliverieseven from Switzerland.
Other leftists, on the other hand, are sticking to their point of view. The Labor Party (PdA) finds the clearest words for this. In a communiqué dated April 21, the Communists write that it is “crucial” that Switzerland stays out of the conflict. NATO describes the PdA as a “warlike military organization” that embodies nothing more than the “armed arm of US foreign policy”.
If you believe the PdA, then it was also NATO that “destabilized” sovereign states such as Libya, Afghanistan, Syria and now Ukraine. A statement by the party on March 22 even read: “NATO, the USA and the EU bear their share of the responsibility for the war. This is no less than that of Putin’s regime.” The “unilateral” sanctions against Russia are therefore rejected. When asked, the PdA also emphasized that NATO had expanded eastwards with the clear strategy of encircling Russia. And anyway: US President Joe Biden has “more blood on his hands than Vladimir Putin” because of the war in Iraq and the conflict in Libya.
The PdA is not alone in its opinion during the May 1 move in Zurich. Groups marching next to her, showing a similar attitude. “Stop NATO” is written on a banner. “End imperialist aggression, whether from Russia, EU, USA, NATO” on another.
“NATO should finally be dissolved”
It’s not just radical splinter parties like the Labor Party that radically reject NATO. The Zurich SP National Councilor Fabian Molina has always distinguished himself as a major opponent of the western military alliance. He wrote last August: “NATO should finally be dissolved.” This “violent special alliance of the West” only contributes to instability in the world and hinders “collective security on our planet”.
the @NATO belongs finally dissolved! This violent special alliance of the West only contributes to instability, geopolitical tensions and flight in the world. And it is the obstacle to collective security on our planet. How many #Afghanistan| do you still need it?
— Fabian Molina ✊?? (@FabianMolinaNR) August 19, 2021
When asked, you no longer want to play such loud sounds. The SP emphasizes that it supports NATO’s Partnership for Peace programs, in which Switzerland is already taking part. These partnerships involve cooperation between the military alliance and several non-member European and Asian countries. However, they reject further military cooperation with NATO. The same applies to arms deliveries to Ukraine.
Where do these differences of opinion among the left come from? The political geographer Michael Hermann sees a classic left-wing thought pattern here: “The Ukraine war is about the strong attacking the weak. Many leftists reflexively side with the weak.” For him, that explains why Roger Nordmann and others are now flirting with arms deliveries from Switzerland.
At the same time, sympathies for the weak in the past have led to great skepticism about the USA among leftists, says Hermann. “There is a view that the United States is attacking defenseless states arbitrarily and for no reason,” says Hermann. “This opinion first emerged during the Vietnam War, and many saw it finally confirmed after the Iraq War.” A certain friendliness towards Russia sometimes mixes with US skepticism, for example with the PdA.
It could well be “rumbling,” says the expert
The Ukraine war is not only causing differences within the left. According to political geographer Michael Hermann, new alliances could even form across the entire spectrum of parties. In Roger Köppel’s “Weltwoche”, for example, the same argument as in the statement by the PdA could be read – according to which NATO’s eastward expansion at the end of the 1990s had provoked Putin to invade Ukraine.
Could these conflicts divide the parties? “No,” says Michael Hermann, “at least not as long as it’s all about attitude.” However, if the war in Ukraine remains topical and there are real political votes in Switzerland, such as on the supply of ammunition, things could definitely “rumble”, says Hermann.
There are even clearer quarrels on the German left. Especially at the party of the same name. Gregor Gysi, an old war horse from Die Linke, accused comrades like Sahra Wagenknecht or Andrej Hunko of a lack of empathy for their attitude towards the Ukraine war. In a letter at the beginning of March he wrote: «You are only interested in saving your old ideology. NATO is evil, the US is evil, the federal government is evil.”
Gysi’s anger was preceded by statements by party colleagues who, shortly before the war, said that a Russian invasion of Ukraine was a lie by the US secret service. Now that this scenario has come true, they are meek. She couldn’t have imagined that, said Sahra Wagenknecht on Day 1 of the war. The German historian of Eastern Europe Karl Schlögel does not want to accept that. Opposite the ZDF he said: “It’s not that easy.” One cannot show understanding for Putin’s policy of violence for twenty years and then simply crawl back.