« | Home | »

Trotsky on Ukraine

Tags: |

Trotsky on ‘The Ukrainian Question’ in Socialist Appeal, 22 April 1939 (via Counterpunch):

The Ukrainian question, which many governments and many “socialists” and even “communists” have tried to forget or to relegate to the deep strongbox of history, has once again been placed on the order of the day and this time with redoubled force…

In the conception of the old Bolshevik party Soviet Ukraine was destined to become a powerful axis around which the other sections of the Ukrainian people would unite. It is indisputable that in the first period of its existence Soviet Ukraine exerted a mighty attractive force, in national respects as well, and aroused to struggle the workers, peasants, and revolutionary intelligentsia of Western Ukraine enslaved by Poland. But during the years of Thermidorian reaction, the position of Soviet Ukraine and together with it the posing of the Ukrainian question as a whole changed sharply. The more profound the hopes aroused, the keener was the disillusionment. The bureaucracy strangled and plundered the people within Great Russia, too. But in the Ukraine matters were further complicated by the massacre of national hopes. Nowhere did restrictions, purges, repressions and in general all forms of bureaucratic hooliganism assume such murderous sweep as they did in the Ukraine in the struggle against the powerful, deeply-rooted longings of the Ukrainian masses for greater freedom and independence…

Not a trace remains of the former confidence and sympathy of the Western Ukrainian masses for the Kremlin. Since the latest murderous ‘purge’ in the Ukraine no one in the West wants to become part of the Kremlin satrapy which continues to bear the name of Soviet Ukraine. The worker and peasant masses in the Western Ukraine, in Bukovina, in the Carpatho-Ukraine are in a state of confusion: Where to turn? What to demand? This situation naturally shifts the leadership to the most reactionary Ukrainian cliques who express their ‘nationalism’ by seeking to sell the Ukrainian people to one imperialism or another in return for a promise of fictitious independence…

Sections of the Ukrainian people have become so much small change for the Kremlin in its international calculations. The Fourth International must clearly understand the enormous importance of the Ukrainian question in the fate not only of Southeastern and Eastern Europe but also of Europe as a whole. We are dealing with a people that has proved its viability, that is numerically equal to the population of France and occupies an exceptionally rich territory which, moreover, is of the highest strategical importance. The question of the fate of the Ukraine has been posed in its full scope. A clear and definite slogan is necessary that corresponds to the new situation. In my opinion there can be at the present time only one such slogan: A united, free and independent workers’ and peasants’ Soviet Ukraine.

Comments on “Trotsky on Ukraine”

  1. Simon Wood says:

    Yeah and look what happened to him.

  2. Dr Paul says:

    A major problem with Trotsky’s articles on Ukraine is that they does not take into account something which, if it did not exist 75 years back, certainly does now: a sizeable mixed Russian and Ukrainian population in Eastern and Central Ukraine, that is, in a fairly large chunk of the country. He actually refers in one article to the creation of ‘a powerful and purely Ukrainian proletariat’ (my emphasis) having been formed by Soviet industrialisation, although there were fair numbers of Russians in factories and mines in Ukraine prior to the October Revolution, let alone prior to the First Five-Year Plan.

    For decades in Eastern and Central Ukraine, Russians and Ukrainians have lived together with many mixed marriages and friendships, there’s a vernacular language, Surzhik, a mixture of Russian and Ukrainian. The nationalist discourse on either side ignores all this: it does not fit in with their preconceptions.

    What concerns me is that the parallel Russian and Ukrainian nationalist agitation will, if it gets worse, force Russians and Ukrainians in the mixed areas of Ukraine to have to choose their allegiance and identity — towards Moscow or towards Kiev. In a way, this was posed in the abstract when the Soviet Union broke up, but is now threatening to become a practical reality with the official nationalist agendas being run from Kiev and Moscow. We saw what this led to in Yugoslavia. If the governments in Kiev and Moscow keep raising the heat, then the consequences will be appalling.

    Trotsky’s articles, 75 years old and not able to deal with a vitally important social development in a fairly large chunk of Ukraine, are unfortunately of little use today, as is the dogma of national self-determination when that dogma, when exercised by nationalist zealots, merely serves to divide people from one another.

  3. Dr Paul says:

    Error — first para, first line, for ‘they does not’ please read ‘they do not’.

  4. Doug1943 says:

    A phrase which encapsulates the problem Dr Paul addresses is: “inter-penetrated peoples”, for which the Spartacist League should receive credit.

    Almost all of the ‘easy’ colonial questions have been solved (although some remain). What we have left are the hard ones, where there is not a neat match between self-identified ‘nations’ and their occupation of territory. Here, the demand for the ‘colonial’ power to simply leave is misguided.

    No matter how borders are redrawn, some people are going to be on the wrong side. Depending on the nature of those who then come to rule them, this can be merely a slight inconvenience, or lethal.

    Where both sides are civilized democrats, this separation can be accomplished with minimal pain, as witness Norway and Sweden at the beginning of the 20th Century, or the Czech Republic and Slovakia,at the end. Sadly, this condition does not always apply. And inflamed national feelings are often in tension with civilized and democratic behavior.

    What can democrats do in these situations? I think we have to uphold the right of self-determination, all other things being equal (which they seldom are), while agitating for maximum minority rights for those left behind on the ‘wrong’ side of the new borders.

    There aren’t going to be any good solutions, only less bad ones.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • andymartinink on Reacher v. Parker: Slayground definitely next on my agenda. But to be fair to Lee Child, as per the Forbes analysis, there is clearly a massive collective reader-writer ...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: And in Breakout, Parker, in prison, teams up with a black guy to escape; another white con dislikes it but accepts the necessity; Parker is absolutely...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: Parker may not have the integrity and honesty of Marlowe, but I'd argue that Richard Stark writes with far more of both than Raymond Chandler does: Ch...
    • Christopher Tayler on Reacher v. Parker: Good to see someone holding up standards. The explanation is that I had thoughts - or words - left over from writing about Lee Child. (For Chandler se...
    • Geoff Roberts on Reacher v. Parker: ..."praised in the London Review of Books" Just read the article on Lee Child in a certain literary review and was surprised to find this rave notice...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement