Report on the international situation

This report analyses the facts, the different statements, positions of the imperialist representatives and opinions in the bourgeois media of the different countries involved in the so-called “Ukraine crisis”, their interrelation and the internal contradictions and above all the fundamental contradictions today on international level and among them, the main contradiction.

Download PDFPrint document
The number of overseas military bases by country
Eastward expansion of NATO
Proletarians of all countries, unite!




This report analyses the facts, the different statements, positions of the imperialist representatives and opinions in the bourgeois media of the different countries involved in the so-called "Ukraine crisis", their interrelation and the internal contradictions and above all the fundamental contradictions today on international level and among them, the main contradiction.

Ukraine is a burning point of the situation, which shows the sharpening of all contradictions that beset imperialism as an expression of its further decomposition, which opportunism wants to cover up in order to try to deny the development of the unevenly developing revolutionary situation, which with the uneven development of the subjective conditions in the world indicates that the world is entering a new period of revolutions. The economic basis or international economic relations is the oppression by a handful of imperialist countries over the oppressed (colonial or semi-colonial) nations.

As Lenin teaches us: „[…] all the basic contradictions ... of imperialism, which are leading up to revolution [...], are all connected with this partitioning of the world’s population.“1

That is to say, the distribution of the booty. On this basis, the exploitation of the world has increased in the last decades by finance capital, by imperialist monopolies, by imperialism, on this basis, the power of the bourgeoisie over the proletariat in the imperialist countries has also grown immensely, which the bourgeois sociologists express as "growing inequality" and "precariousness of employment" and other expressions that indicate the worsening of the exploitation and oppression of the class.

The report shows that the same contenders of the two world wars are preparing a third world war, but in the present situation none of the imperialist countries is in a position to start it, when this happens then the third world war will take place. Imperialism is violence and reaction all along the line. It is violent capitalism as opposed to the "peaceful capitalism" of its pre-monopoly stage.

In the face of this, what is the role of revolutionaries? To prevent it and if necessary to be ready to face it. How to prevent it? By making revolution in each country through people's war to converge into world people's war and sweep imperialism and reaction off the face of the earth. And, in case of a world war, how to confront it? Also with people's war that is being waged in the different countries up to the world people's war in order to oppose the imperialist world war. This is how we understand preparing for all circumstances.

The development of the class struggle on the international level has its expression in the explosiveness and great activity of the masses all over the world. The task of the communists is to lead them by reconstituting or constituting militarised Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Communist Parties to initiate new people's wars as fast as possible in addition to the existing ones in order to make revolution and sweep imperialism and reaction off the face of the earth. This task demands an inseparable and irreconcilable struggle against imperialism, reaction and revisionism.

The unevenly developing revolutionary situation in the world is the basis for our revolutionary action to transform it. As Lenin stated in similar situations: "It is now necessary to "prove" in practice that revolutionary parties have sufficient consciousness, organisation, linkage with the exploited masses, decisiveness and ability to take advantage of this crisis to successfully carry out the victorious revolution". Today, this demands taking advantage of the situation to give a powerful new impetus to the ongoing people's wars in India, Peru, the Philippines and Turkey and in those where it has not yet begun, it is up to complete the reconstitution or constitution of the Communist Party as a militarised Marxist-Leninist-Maoist party to initiate the people's war.

Lenin, too, touhgt us that the economic basis of opportunism in the workers' movement is the extra-profit (super-profit), which the imperialists derive from the exploitation of the oppressed nations through the export of capital from which they throw crumbs to the upper stratum of the workingclass. These are the deep economic roots of this phenomenon. This disease has been prolonged and its treatment has been more protracted than optimists might have expected. Our main enemy in the proletarian movement is opportunism. Opportunism in the upper stratum of the workers' movement is not proletarian socialism, but bourgeois socialism. The bourgeoisie could not maintain itself if they did not lead the workers. There is our main enemy, and we must defeat it. Therefore, fulfilling the task demands an inseparable and irreconcilable struggle against imperialism, reaction and revisionism.


In the last weeks and months, the inter-imperialist contradictions, particularly between US imperialism and Russian imperialism, have intensified in a publicly perceptible manner. The developments concerning Ukraine, the core of contention, are particularly striking. We have already published several documents on this subject (we refer specifically to the document on the defeat of US imperialism in Afghanistan), which in their entirety build the basis of this report.

Three decades of the development of the international situation concentrated 

The international situation has reached a point where much of what has developed in the three decades since the bankruptcy of Soviet social-imperialism is concentrated. The Yankees have displaced Russia, the successor of the former Soviet Union, from its domains in the Balkans, including the countries of the former Yugoslavia, Eastern Europe, the Baltic States and now targets the countries of West and Central Asia through subversion, its so-called "low intensity warfare" and through the war against these oppressed nations, now targeting the countries of Central Asia. Thus, the partition and re-partition of the oppressed countries from the sphere of influence of Russian imperialism to the sphere of influence of US imperialism and other imperialist powers, in collusion and struggle, has taken place. This development has reached a point where the US imperialists want to sanction what they have won on the negotiating table and the Russian imperialists are trying to draw a last line of demarcation, taking advantage of the fact that US imperialism wants to lower the tension in this hot spot in order to concentrate on another hot spot that threatens to ignite, the Indo-Pacific region.

In the hot spot of Ukraine, different interests and two contradictions are expressed, that is obvious: Ukraine, the oppressed nation; the USA the sole hegemonic superpower and Russia that wants to defend its interests there, that is obvious. In addition, there are the interests of Germany and France as secondary actors. England is at the tail of the United States. Germany, by its representatives' own admission, is the most economically involved in Ukraine and also has interests in its relationship with Russia at different levels.

In correlation with the “Ukraine-crisis” there were a series of meetings, preliminary investigations, in which various forces tried to find out what possibilities and needs exist for them in the current situation.

One of the more important meetings in this sense is undoubtedly the one on 10 January in Geneva. There, second-level representatives of US and Russian imperialism, delegations headed by US Secretary of State Wendy Sherman and Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Riabkov, explained their respective positions for the first time in an eight-hour session.

“But in the meeting, the two delegations maintained their positions without compromise. The attitude was positive, which seems to promote the possibility of a future agreement, especially through the commitment to continue negotiations. Russia explicitly stated that it did not want to invade Ukraine and praised the "professionalism" of the delegations. The US did not back down on either its criticism or the idea of providing military assistance to Ukraine and called for "mutual measures that would be in the interests of security".
[…]  Riyabkov was optimistic about his country's demand that NATO not expand but reduce its military presence near Russia: "We have the impression that the United States took the Russian proposals very seriously," he said. "The situation is not desperate," the diplomat said, although "the risks associated with a worsening of the development of the confrontation should not be underestimated." "Progress is needed, a real gesture must be made towards Russia and that must come from NATO," urged the deputy minister, who insisted that Ukraine should "never, ever" join NATO.
[…] On the other hand, Sherman reported that the United States “has put forward a set of ideas that the countries can adopt as reciprocal measures that will benefit common security concerns” and “return to common security interests and enhance strategic stability.” She lowered her counterparts optimism, warning that NATO's "open door" policy would continue despite Moscow's pleas.2

Moreover, on 21 January a meeting between US and Russian foreign ministers took place in Geneva. Nothing of exceptional significance was decided there, although it was announced that a U.S. document in response to the Russian proposal would be delivered within a week. This letter was delivered on 26 January, together with a NATO document.

Wendy Sherman said on Wednesday: "We are definitely seeing all the signs that he (Vladimir Putin - Kommersant) will use military force at some point, probably between now and mid-February".3

US Secretary of State Blinken said:„The U.S. response “sets out a serious diplomatic path forward should Russia choose it,” Mr. Blinken said at a news briefing in Washington. He said he expects to speak in the coming days with his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, once Russian officials have read the American paper and are “ready to discuss next steps.”
The document suggests “reciprocal transparency measures regarding force posture in Ukraine, as well as measures to increase confidence regarding military exercises and maneuvers in Europe,” Mr. Blinken said, as well as nuclear arms control in Europe.“4

In addition: „“Our responses were fully coordinated with Ukraine and our European allies and partners,” U.S. Secretary of Antony Blinken said in remarks. But, he noted, “we’re not releasing the document publicly.”“5

It is obvious that both are aiming for a general agreement that will guarantee them some security. Russian imperialism in particular needs this security. Its position in the confrontation with the Yankees is a defensive one. Russian imperialism faces thirty years of progressive encirclement by the Yankees, including through its subordinate "partners". However, within this defensive, Russian imperialism is also developing offensive actions to gain the initiative.

The Yankees, on the other hand, want to sanction at the negotiating table what they have won on the battlefields over the past three decades. However, it is tactically important for the US to conclude an agreement that guarantees them as far as possible that no "accident" will happen, because Russian imperialism, although economically only a second-ranked imperialist power, is still a nuclear superpower. And especially in the present situation of increased difficulties of US imperialism, it seeks to lower the tension in this Eurasian hot sport, which reaches as far as up to the so-called expanded Middle East, in order to concentrate on what President Biden has declared the priority of his foreign policy, the Indo-Pacific region, i.e. the containment of social-imperialist China in its efforts to become the dominant power in the region. Here the statements of (now former) German Navy Admiral Schönbach at a security meeting in India take become significant.

“NATO, according to its General Secretary, has mentioned a number of issues to the Russian delegation on which it wants to enter into talks with Russia and from which negotiations could emerge. Among other things, there is a need to increase transparency in military exercises and reduce the risk of cyber threats. NATO wants to start broad-based arms control talks, which may include mutual limitations on missiles.”6

In the current situation in relation to the “Ukraine-crisis”-scenario, the contradictions of the period from the 1990s to the present are expressed in concentrated form. This period is marked by the consequences of the bankruptcy of Soviet revisionism and the dismantling of the USSR – i.e. one of the superpowers that contended for world hegemony –, without a world war, went into dissolution and the other superpower, US imperialism, became the sole hegemonic imperialist superpower. In this capacity, it grasped the task, in collusion and competition with the other powers, of being the one to divide and share the cake, i.e. the countries that were under the orbit or zone of influence of the former social-imperialist Soviet Union.

The tactical quests and conflicting interests of the imperialists

We reiterate the tactic of the Yankees to encircle Russian imperialism and cause disorder and trouble also within Russia and the former Soviet republics, i.e. today’s semi-colonies, which are mainly dominated by Russian imperialism. The Yankees strive for Russia to get more and more involved politically and militarily in these countries, as in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

The Yankees explain it like this:„Gen. Mark Milley, the top US military official, spoke to his Russian counterpart a few weeks ago. He reportedly pointed out that an invasion would be followed by a campaign of resistance similar to the one that drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan and demoralized the slumping superpower.“7

The Chinese: „The International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL) estimates there are 38,000 active NGOs in Kazakhstan while the majority of them ̶ some say around 20,000 ̶ are funded by US and European countries by way of grants and donations, including the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and Freedom House.“8

Russian media agree: “As soon as Russia decides that it has to protect the two people’s republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, its army should suffer a phlebotomy. Together with the sanctions threatened in this case and then implemented, it is expected, such bloodshed would bring Russia to its knees domestically. A Maidan on Red Square then could be reached very quickly, judging by events in neighbouring Kazakhstan, where there was much less reason for it.

The second explanation, however, only becomes visible in the context of the current negotiations on legally binding mutual security guarantees between Russia on the one hand and the US and NATO on the other. Here, the presence of NATO troops in and around Ukraine, as well as military aid to Ukraine, are intended to artificially inflate the importance of this issue in these negotiations to make it the sole focus of the negotiations.”9

On the other hand, the defensive of Russian imperialism, which tries to gain the initiative within this defensive to break the encirclement as demonstrated in 2014 by taking Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk and through other offensive actions, as by the military operation in Kazakhstan. In addition, new Russian military developments, such as new stealth drones, are being launched in the press.

According to President Vladimir Putin, Russia and the CSTO military alliance he leads will not allow any destabilisation or even “colour revolutions” in the states of the former Soviet Union. This was underlined by the Russian head of state […].”10

It should be stressed that the Americans have clear conflicts with their allies, which are not conducive to their plans: “The fronts are hardened. And since Nato does not have a plan, the Kremlin has an advantage. […] The talks at the NATO-Russia Council can be interpreted in two directions. The first represented the American Diplomat Kurt Volker, who told CNN that NATO’s failure to quickly deter Russia from attacking Ukraine has increased the threat of a military invasion by Russia. He sees an attack as more likely because although NATO is threatening to sanction Russia after an invasion, it is not preventing such an invasion. This is exactly what President Putin wanted to explore.”11

Which spheres are involved?

It is about parts of Eastern Europe, the Balkans and Central Asia, as well as Syria, which is important for Russia’s access to the Mediterranean. The Russian imperialists complain that the contractual guaranteed non-eastwards-expansion of NATO was violated. They want NATO to adhere to its 1997 status, withdraw its troops from the border areas and never ever allow Ukraine to become a member of NATO. To illustrate the development: Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary have become NATO members since 1999, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia since 2004, Albania and Croatia since 2009, Montenegro since 2017 and North Macedonia since 2020.

In Asia, it becomes clear that US imperialism has succeeded in bringing together two powers that have been in serious and very serious conflict with each other for centuries (with the exception of the times of the socialist Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China):

So far, the US and the West have slapped more than 100 sanctions on Russia, sparing no effort to suppress a major power “from a position of strength.” Before this dialogue, the US and NATO had warned Russia with a sense of intimidation. In the dictionary of Washington, “respect” is rarely seen. Washington’s real intent is to pressure Russia until it surrenders, so as to get rid of this threat to US hegemony for good.

In a sense, the US has brutally forced Russia to become an “enemy.” With this “enemy,” Washington can hold Europe closer to itself. While pushing NATO to expand eastward, the US is also hyping Russophobia in Europe. Consequently, relatively new members to NATO are generally hostile to Russia. The anti-Russia sentiment is at a peak in Ukraine, which is not a wise move for the country. Because this will put it at risk between two major powers – but this meets Washington’s strategic demands.

Talking about these meetings, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said, “We can’t go back to a world of spheres of influence” like the one during the Cold War era. However, from South America to Central America, from Southeast Asia to Northeast Asia, which country on earth is ganging up and forming “small circles”? As the Warsaw Pact dissolved and many former Soviet states have tilted toward the West, with some having become NATO members, which country is the one cultivating “spheres of influence”?

To some extent, China can empathize with what Russia is going through. In Europe, Washington is trying its best to contain, suppress, and squeeze out Russia through mechanisms such as NATO; in the Asia-Pacific region, it is trying to pressure China with similar tricks. Perhaps the US’ successful experience in the Cold War has made the US overconfident so that the American political elites have taken out their rusted Cold War weapons against the world in a new era.

Nevertheless, the world has already changed. It will eventually be proven that the infringement of other countries’ core interests and the violation of international equality and justice will not bring another “victory” to Washington as it has wished.

Washington still has deep-rooted hegemonic thinking, but its hegemony is something tough outside but cowardly inside. Therefore, the world has seen a tangled US: It on one hand acts maliciously against other major powers but cannot really give up negotiations on the other hand. As a matter of fact, the US doesn’t have much capital to squander on great-power relations; its “position from strength” cannot support its hegemonic ambitions. And the times will not give it such an opportunity either.“12

At the same time, Chinese social-imperialism – in its process of decomposition towards its bankruptcy, confronted with serious internal problems, trying to distract attention from them – is taking advantage of the situation in which all media attention is focused on “Corona” or the “Ukraine-crisis”. Thus, despite the considerable tensions caused by the situation in the South China Sea, Beijing transferred $20 million in military “aid” to the Duterte regime. In addition, Chinese Air Force J-16D fighter jets have repeatedly entered Taiwan’s13 airspace.

And what are the needs of Russian imperialism? The withdrawal of nuclear-capable medium-range missiles from Europe, i.e. from the vicinity of Russia. The Yankees and their subordinate “allies” will not comply. So the Russians remaining possible option is a buffer zone consisting of their former semi-colonies.

The US official also said she proposes to continue these dialogues soon to get into details, particularly with regard to missile deployments. In that regard, Sherman said it is an opportunity to revive the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which the US withdrew from in 2019 after years of accusing Moscow of non-compliance. Thus, Washington proposed to address the intermediate-range missile position and agreed to “establish formulas for setting mutual limits on the scale and scope of military exercises.””14

When it came to the question of troop deployments, presumably in particular the deployment of US troops in Ukraine from 8 December 2020, but also NATO troops in Eastern Europe in general, the Yankees response was clear: „”We have not discussed the number of American soldiers. I do not think this point is on the agenda, it is not under consideration. This question is not a point of discussion”, said Wendy Sherman.“15

“NATO in our understanding is an organization that is created for confrontation, not protection. And NATO is not a dove of peace, stability and prosperity. And this weapon of confrontation was moving closer and closer to our borders every day,” Peskov [press-secretary of Kreml] said in an interview with CNN.“16

„”Russian diplomacy sees how the situation in the Euro-Atlantic region has degraded, taking into account the NATO factor,” he said during an online briefing at the Rossiya Sevodnya international multimedia press center. According to him, “the North Atlantic Alliance, together with the European Union, in fact, displaces the OSCE from the matrix of European security.””17

The ruse may look on paper like a win-win for Putin. Perhaps the Russian people believe Putin’s manufactured claims that Ukraine poses a danger against the much larger and better-armed forces. But, in the longer run, this maneuver could well backfire.

Russia’s menacing stance toward Ukraine, its continuing threats even as the talks proceeded, are solidifying the Kremlin’s image as that of a bully endangering its neighbors. The more Putin threatens, the more he unwittingly makes evident why Russia’s neighbors believe they need to join NATO to protect themselves.

Ukraine, of course, poses no serious military threat to Russia. It used to have the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal, but it transferred it to Russia in exchange for a commitment to respect its borders and sovereignty, a commitment Russia violated when it invaded and annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula. That pact, known as the Budapest Agreement, is just one of several Russia has signed and brazenly violated.“18

It must be understood that in these matters for both the Yankees and the Russians the existential question arises, because one thing both sides know very well, if one of the two were convinced of winning a war, then this war would probably be started. At present, however, neither side is in a position to start the Third World War, there is a military balance between the USA and Russia. The USA and the Russian imperialists are facing serious problems not only internationally but also internally, as well as England, France, etc.. Germany and China are also not in a good position at present. If they were, it would happen. However, there is always the possibility that at any of the many hot spots in the current international situation, without any particular intention of one or the other, the fire could flare up and a new world conflagration could be ignited. The same contenders of both world wars are preparing for the third one, but at the moment they are not in a position to do so.

NATO plays as a military alliance – like every imperialist alliance only temporarily, developing within collusion and struggle, while the collusion is relative and the struggle is absolute and therefore this alliance is built on the struggle, i.e. subjection and violence, on the changing relations of force (in the case of NATO, the subordination of the other imperialists that build it up, to the world’s sole hegemonic superpower, with the incorporation of semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries of the South and East) – a special role as an instrument mainly of US imperialism. Remember the role of the “barbarians” and the mercenaries from their colonies for the Roman Empire and how it collapsed. It is a sign of the parasitism or decomposition of empires and the collapse it is in. Some raise the armament of the imperialists to the clouds, they see them as all-powerful, but this is another sign of their weakness and collapse, let us remember that the ancient empires rose when they pondered the courage of their soldiers and collapsed when they centred on arms. Chairman Mao teaches us that men and not weapons are the decisive factor in war.

This is the decomposition of imperialism and its ever-increasing artillery, a sign of weakness and not of strength; look at any history in depth and you will understand, any military history proves it, why does it (revisionist China) want to arm itself to the teeth, why does it want to be a military power? You see: the same path! Not being able to develop and strengthen their economy, they want to use the immense mass of a billion people as cannon fodder, they want to use it by strengthening their military might to be a power and fight for world domination, also scheming like others like Germany, like Japan, that from the clash of the two superpowers should come another power or another dominant superpower. Chairman Gonzalo analysed this with great reason.

German imperialism and the EU, which it mainly leads, are weeping bitterly at having been virtually excluded from the negotiations. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov underlined this situation in a particularly impressive way in a conversation with German Foreign Minister Baerbock, when he explained how important this conversation was, since US-Russian relations were of particular importance.

The German Foreign Minister appeared correspondingly “friendly” in Moscow: “At Tuesday’s joint press conference in Moscow Baerbock practised verbal disarmament, emphasised similarities in culture and business, […] called for dialogue and diplomacy in the Russia – Ukraine conflict. [] Words on the continuing needs for Russian gas… After all, Baerbock wants to keep in touch with the Russians’.”19

Senior EU representatives also cried about the results of the relative weakness of this alliance: “EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell is also doing the EU a disservice by complaining that he would not be asked if it were about security in Europe and Ukraine.”20

“On 12 and 13 January 2022, the informal meeting of EU defence ministers (iVM) took place virtually in Brest, France. […] the situation in Ukraine was discussed. Support for Ukraine in the framework of the European Peace Fund and the fight against disinformation in view of possible responses to non-state actor interference were also raised.

Issues such as space and associated EU strategic interests were discussed in several working sessions. There was a broad consensus that the EU should become more involved in this sphere […]

The focus of the meeting, however, was the joint discussion between EU foreign and defence ministers on further adjustments to the current draft of the strategic compass.

The strategic compass is intended to guide the EU’s future actions. It is a further step on the road to better cooperation in the field of security and defence and dates back to a German initiative.

The Strategic Compass was launched during the German presidency of the EU Council. It is due to be adopted by member states in March this year. It aims to give the EU a direction for future action and is a further step towards better cooperation in the field of security and defence.

The fundamental satisfaction with the document was clear from the debate. Suggestions for improvements and additions that have been made are now being discussed in the Political and Security Committee.21

These wishes and ideas that exist within the EU are an expression of the aspirations of German imperialism. Today, however, they are quite illusory. German imperialism is not yet advanced enough in its striving to make the leap to become a superpower, while subjugating the other members of the EU, to seriously challenge the Yankees or the Russians. Their hopes depend on a US-Russian confrontation in which both are weakened in order to advance to superpower status. They are riding two horses, they can fall off again.

But in the meantime, the subordination of German imperialism to the Yankees is once again confirmed by the planned military hospital, the largest outside the USA, near Kaiserslautern in western Germany. We also recall in this context the surveillance of former German Chancellor Merkel’s phone, or the spying network node in Frankfurt.

Whatever they can do, the European thieves under German leadership are doing it. In the dispute with Russia they are acting, mainly after recognising their inability to deal with Russia’s military challenge in the wake of events in Ukraine (rememeber also the failed German-backed coup attempt in Turkey22), economically, through sanctions. However, they are cutting themselves in the flesh, as the example of Nord Stream II shows. There the Germans are forced to submit to the Yankees. But the lack of supply to Western Europe of raw materials and energy sources, in this case gas, seems extremely threatening, because that would mean becoming even more dependent on the Yankees, which would frustrate the German efforts of the last decades. That is why, in addition to sanctions, which would undoubtedly weaken the Russian economy enormously, the focus is mainly on subversion.

“We are working together with the EU and its member states to further develop the Eastern Partnership. States such as Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia, which are striving to join the EU, should be able to move closer through coherent constitutional and market economy reforms. We will react decisively and reliably to democratic changes and be a partner of democratic movements. We want to simplify exchanges between civil society by facilitating specific visas.”23

An article in the “FAZ” shows how difficult economic sanctions are for the FRG, in the same article the hegemonic status of the Yankees on the basis of the “dollar economy” is once again confirmed: “Because the US access to the network organised as a cooperative, based in Belgium, has long been a source of frustration and has led Russia and China to develop alternatives to Swift.

Even Swift should not be happy with the current discussions. On Monday, the network said it was neutral and operated for the benefit of its members. “The decision to impose sanctions on individual countries or entities rests solely with the relevant government agencies and legislators,” Swift said. One of the few politicians to express concern about Swift’s exclusion of Russia these days was the head of CDU Friedrich Merz. “Questioning Swift could be the nuclear bomb for the capital markets and also for goods and services relations,” he said at the weekend. Swift’s strength lies precisely in his independence. However, as a political pawn, this is being undermined.”24

Moreover, there are obvious differences within the German reaction. These find clear expression in the dissatisfaction expressed by the head of the German “Beamtenbund”, DBB, Silberbach, on 19 January at the FAZ or the statements of (now former) German Navy Admiral Schönbach and the reactions to his dismissal, among others of the former General Inspector of the German Armed Forces, Kujat, a retired air force general.

But there are also a number of actions by the Russian side to annoy the other side: „Scores of Ukrainian government websites were targeted in a cyberattack with threatening text warning Ukrainians to “be afraid and wait for the worst” and alleging their personal information has been hacked.

Ukraine claimed Russia was most likely behind the attack, which affected the websites of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a number of other government agencies.

Oleg Nikolenko, Ukraine’s foreign ministry spokesman tweeted on Friday that the “investigation is still ongoing but the Security Service of Ukraine has obtained preliminary indicators suggesting that hacker groups associated with the Russian secret services may stand behind today’s massive cyberattack on government websites.”“25

The “Brexit” also plays an important role. British military capabilities were very important within the EU, as has just been demonstrated again: “On Tuesday, the Russian government criticised Britain’s arms deliveries to Ukraine as “extremely dangerous”. The British action “does not help to reduce tensions”, a spokesman in Moscow said. Earlier, the British government announced that it had begun supplying anti-tank weapons to the Ukrainian military. In addition, a “small number” of British soldiers will teach the Ukrainian armed forces how to use the systems, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace told the House of Commons on Monday night.

… Until now, London has only sold ships and naval equipment to Ukraine. A contract worth almost two billion euros provides for the delivery of two minesweepers and the joint construction of eight ships for the Ukrainian Black Sea fleet.”26

Canada, which has just been hit by a cyber-attack on government institutions (suspected to be Russian in origin), is behaving in a manner analogous to England proving, among other things, this shows that the former British Empire is completely losing its status and its relationship with its former colony in North America has increasingly turned upside down: “A Canadian military spokesman confirmed this week that training operations have been underway since 2020 and that a contingent is currently there that was deployed on January 9 this year. Canada was already supplying Ukraine with sniper rifles in 2019, and talks about building a Canadian ammunition and small arms factory in Ukraine have been going on for years.”27

Ukraine is part of the spoils on dispute, that’s pretty obvious. The same counts, e.g. for Syria, Yemen, Iraq or Yugoslavia. This is partition and re-partition par excellence: ”American representatives sat down at the negotiating table. There were no demands for the presence of Kiev. So Washington made it clear that the format “about Ukraine without Ukraine” for the American authorities is acceptable, if not preferable.”28

The contest for world hegemony: consequences of the bankruptcy of revisionism and the collapse of the soviet social-imperialist superpower.

In the present international panorama there is one sole hegemonic imperialist superpower, the USA, which as such is more parasitic or in a more advanced state of decomposition than the other imperialists, who as imperialists suffer the greatest decomposition in the present phase of imperialism. The USA is the main imperialist robber, the main enemy of the peoples of the world and the worlds counter-revolutionary gendarme, plus a special role of Russian imperialism as a nuclear superpower, with a second ranked imperialist powers economy based on hydrocarbon and other raw materials. These two have particular contradictions with each other, the US imperialists to maintain their sole hegemony and the Russian imperialists based on being an atomic superpower to recover in the coming decades to be a world superpower to return to contend for world hegemony, that is why Putin’s tactic is to provoke and gain time waiting for changes of situations, changes of force in the international arena that are always taking place. From this situation comes the greatest danger of a new world war. In addition, there are the imperialist powers such as Germany, Japan, France or England and social-imperialist China, which aspires to be a great power, for the time being striving to advance as the great Asian power in order to realise the dream of the Chinese revisionists to be a superpower by the middle of the present century, but this depends as in the case of the Germans on the weakening of the US and Russian imperialists in a conflagration between the two. The German imperialists and the Chinese social-imperialists would like to be able to sit on the hill and watch the tigers fight it out. As for the pretensions and needs of the Chinese social-imperialists, see for example the case of Hong Kong or the confrontation over Taiwan. All of them are experiencing the consequences of the hegemony of US imperialism, to a greater or lesser extent and in different aspects and have different tendencies: Britain remains as always an appendix of its former colony, while Germany is striving to make the leap to superpower and even France, a nuclear power, within the framework of the EU subdued to a certain extent. They also have strong contradictions among themselves, e.g. “Brexit”. The second order imperialist powers like Spain, Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, Canada and Australia move in collusion and struggle among themselves and in collusion and struggle with the US imperialism, they feel the political, economical and military pressure of the US imperialism like the imperialist powers inside the EU, Japan or China. All of them, this small handful, are fighting each other for the spoils, the semi-feudal and semi-colonial third world countries, in which bureaucratic capitalism is developed, bitterly contested, e.g. Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Syria, Yemen, etc. These are the overwhelming majority of the countries of the earth and the world’s population. Their plunder is the basis of the whole existence of imperialism. On the one hand, today’s world economy is unthinkable without the blood of the oppressed nations, the coarsest, dirtiest, most consuming, most life-destroying manual labour has been outsourced to precisely these Third World countries, the export of capital to them and the destruction of capital (nota bene: also the destruction of the productive forces, including living labour: the bearer of the commodity workforce) in these countries is of vital importance for imperialism and its crisis management strategies. On the other hand, without the bribery of the upper, but diminishing, layer of the working class in the imperialist countries, which is made possible through the super-profit they extract from the export of capital to the Third World, the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie would sharpen to the extreme and explode there.

The spoils the imperialists are contenting over are the oppressed nations – the oppressed nations are home of the immense masses of the earth

Revolution is the main trend in history, yes. It is the main trend in the world, historically and politically; that is what we must emphasise, it is not simply that it is the historical perspective but that it is political, it is already the order of the day and that is what we must strive for. This fits in with the 50 to 100 years, otherwise why did Chairman Mao give us a masterly calculation: 50 to 100 years, because in that period imperialism and reaction must and will be wiped off the face of the earth, and that is the world revolution.

It is well put together, the military principle is well put together: world revolution, tendency, weight of the masses, 50 to 100 years, period; it is specifying and that is masterly, it is unfortunate that it is not seen like that. Hegemony, US imperialism as the only hegemonic imperialist superpower, but there is another one which, although weakened, is still a nuclear superpower, which is what worries US imperialism. That is why there are two powers that can develop a world war – US imperialism or Russian imperialism – paper tigers, said Chairman Mao; they are not to be feared, they can be punctured, so he has taught. “Atomic war”, how to oppose atomic war: “first condemn it and then prepare in advance to oppose it with people’s war”. What Chairman Mao has put forward all fits together.

Now, the problem of the oppressed nations: Are they or are they not the ones that are home to the immense masses of the earth? Two-thirds or seventy percent, immense masses. The oppressed nations have the immense masses of the earth; moreover, the growth of the masses is immensely greater than the increase of the oppressors in the oppressing nations, of the oppressing countries, of imperialisms, even considering that they themselves oppress their own people; just look at the growth rates, that it is 70% of the new children that are born in the backward world and this is going to go on, increasing more and more. This is good, because the weight of the masses in history has begun to express itself more and more, and this is fundamental; if the masses make history, and this is a very great truth, then the weight of the masses will decide the revolution in the world, and where is this weight, then, in the oppressed nations? There is not much to discuss, if they are material realities, facts; to close one’s eyes to them is foolishness. The latest reports illustrate that by the end of this century the population of Spain, Italy, China and other imperialist countries will have halved.

“As well as the economic and political relations that are unfolding through the process of the decomposition of imperialism”. Very important. Chairman Mao said, that the decomposition of imperialism is greater every day – with his own positions, he puts forward that. Who can deny the greater decomposition of imperialism every day. Isn’t it sinking more and more? It is decomposing, it is rotting; if some can invoke that they produce more, and what the hell does it matter, that is the problem; on the contrary, if they produce more, this proves that there are all the means to satisfy the elementary needs.

By way of conclusions

The development of the international situation, of the class struggle on the world level is fully revealing the aspects of certain contradictions, internal and external, through the imperialist rulers’ own mouths. Because in these crisis situations the imperialists and reactionaries deviate from their usual norm of concealing their misdeeds, as Chairman Mao taught us.

Today we see, in order to answer the attacks of the other faction, the ruling faction in the USA, represented by the “Democrats” (the Biden presidency, supported and voted by the revisionist renegade Bob Avakian and the so-called “RCP-USA”) and the other represented by the “Republicans”, or to answer the accusations of the imperialists against each other, have been forced to publish authentic facts of their aggression in collusion and struggle against the oppressed nations in the last three decades for the partition and re-partition of the countries that were part of the former social-imperialist Soviet Union, including former Yugoslavia, because of its historical links with the former tsarist empire, and Syria.

Today all this history of the last three decades is concentrated, summarised or condensed in what has been called the “Ukraine crisis”. This “crisis” and the consequent negotiations are part of the development of the imperialist contradiction in the middle of collusion and struggle against the interests of an oppressed country, thus two contradictions of today’s world are being expressed.

We also argue that this is where the differences of power and interests between the USA and Russia, as well as other secondary actors, appear or show themselves in this situation; that there are three interests and two contradictions, that is obvious: Ukraine, an oppressed nation; the USA wants to control Ukraine and to be recognised as its new zone of influence within the “NATO-expansion”; Russia wants to defend its interests there, that is obvious, and it to be recognised as the red line that must not be crossed by the zone of influence of US imperialism: could the power of the USA be compared with that of Russia today? Although Russia is a nuclear superpower and maintains the situation of strategic equilibrium with the sole imperialist superpower, US imperialism. If we take the situation of both contenders as a whole, Russian imperialism constitutes the weak side (the skinny dog) and US imperialism represents the strong side in this contradiction (the fat dog).

The occupation of strategic positions by US imperialism and its instrument NATO, in collusion and struggle with its “allies”, which were previously under the control of Soviet social imperialism (Warsaw Pact) and later by its heir imperialist Russia, is evident.

Russian imperialism has been able to maintain through open warfare and its “hybrid warfare” vital positions in Georgia, Moldova, Belarus, Chechnya, the Asian republics of the former Soviet Union in Central Asia. In 2014, Russia with the occupation of Crimea and the establishment of his protectorates of the “people’s republics of Donetsk and Luhansk” through his “hybrid war”, reacting against the pretension of the German imperialists in collusion and struggle with the US imperialists (who in the face of German weakness took the baton) to control Ukraine, a strategic position that was going to close the siege against Russia on its western flank, prevented its corridor through the Black Sea to the Mediterranean Sea and its bases in Syria. Where, since 2011, US imperialism, with the “regime-change”, has been trying to change hands of the country in order to subject it to its control.

There are other imperialists Germany and France, which with Russia and Ukraine have formed the so-called “Normandy Format”, suffer from the impositions of the US imperialism, for example, the “economic sanctions” imposed by the US imperialism affect them directly because of the hegemony of the so-called “dollar economy” as an expression of the hegemony of the finance capital of US imperialism. They are interested in maintaining special relations with Russia and their intentions to advance to superpowers go through the weakening of US imperialism in a war with Russia, which is also the dream of the Chinese social-imperialists. The British imperialists are as always on the tail of US imperialism, but they have a government in a severe crisis with Boris Johnson.

After the negative response of the United States in the letter expressing its rejection of Russia’s main claim that Ukraine will not join NATO and that it will withdraw from countries that joined NATO after 1997, but leaving open the diplomatic track to deal with secondary issues, Putin’s response in a telephone conversation with Macron, who said that the United States and NATO did not take into account Russia’s fundamental concerns, told Macron that he had “no offensive intentions” but did not rule out the diplomatic track, which will remain open even if only to deal with other secondary issues of Europe’s security. It is clear, therefore, who is the stronger and that both are about to ease up on this burning issue and that the major collusion points to the US imperialists being about to reach an agreement to defuse the tension on this issue and therefore in Syria, so that the US imperialists would have a free hand for China.

This development of the two contradictions mentioned above is driving the bourgeoisie-proletariat contradiction in the imperialist countries themselves. All three contradictions are sharpening, contrary to what is maintained by the opportunists who have tried as always to veil the deep contradictions of imperialism in an attempt to deny that imperialism is in a phase of greater decomposition, in a more advanced state of decay, and that it is sinking into a complex series of wars of all kinds whose sweep is being carried out by the world proletarian revolution through the people’s wars taking place in the world today, to which new ones will be added as suits to the new period of revolutions into which the world is entering.

The oppressed nations have the immense mass of the earth; moreover, the growth of the masses is immensely greater than the increase of the oppressors in the oppressing nations, of the oppressing countries, of imperialism, even considering that they themselves oppress their own peoples; just look at the growth rates.

With that we have exposed with incontestable facts from the world scene the foundations of the Maoist thesis of three worlds are outlined. But we will come back to this in future articles.

So we see three fundamental contradictions in the world today (the fourth contradiction, socialism-capitalism, exists today only in the sphere of ideas):

1. principally, the imperialism-oppressed nations contradiction;

2. the inter-imperialist contradiction

3. The proletariat-bourgeoisie contradiction (which has a particular expression in the oppressed nations and the new democratic revolution, since the national (or middle) bourgeoisie in these countries can and must be part of the united front, i.e., it is a contradiction within the people, which will only be resolved by the socialist revolution, in which the new democratic revolution must directly pass into without any interruption.

As Chairman Mao tought: “This monopoly capitalism, closely tied up with foreign imperialism, the domestic landlord class and the old-type rich peasants, has become comprador, feudal, state-monopoly capitalism. Such is the economic base of Chiang Kai-shek’s reactionary regime. This state-monopoly capitalism oppresses not only the workers and peasants but also the urban petty bourgeoisie, and it injures the middle bourgeoisie.

[…] This capital is popularly known in China as bureaucrat-capital. This capitalist class, known as the bureaucrat-capitalist class, is the big bourgeoisie of China. Besides doing away with the special privileges of imperialism in China, the task of the new-democratic revolution at home is to abolish exploitation and oppression by the landlord class and by the bureaucrat-capitalist class (the big bourgeoisie), change the comprador, feudal relations of production and unfetter the productive forces. The upper petty bourgeoisie and middle bourgeoisie, oppressed and injured by the landlords and big bourgeoisie and their state power, may take part in the new democratic revolution or stay neutral, though they are themselves bourgeois. They have no ties, or comparatively few, with imperialism and are the genuine national bourgeoisie. Wherever the state power of New Democracy extends, it must firmly and unhesitatingly protect them.”29

Further. We emphasize: “But whatever happens, there is no doubt at all that at every stage in the development of a process, there is only one principal contradiction which plays the leading role.

Hence, if in any process there are a number of contradictions, one of them must be the principal contradiction playing the leading and decisive role, while the rest occupy a secondary and subordinate position. Therefore, in studying any complex process in which there are two or more contradictions, we must devote every effort to finding its principal contradiction. Once this principal contradiction is grasped, all problems can be readily solved.”30

Today, there are still three major contradictions in the old world, as Stalin pointed out long ago: first, the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie in the imperialist countries; second, the contradiction between the various imperialist powers; and third, the contradiction between the colonial and semi-colonial countries and the imperialist metropolitan countries. Not only do these three contradictions continue to exist but they are becoming more acute and widespread. Because of their existence and growth, the time will come when the reactionary anti-Soviet, anti-Communist and anti-democratic counter-current still in existence today will be swept away.”31

The imperialist world faces the Third World as a colossus with feet of clay and it does not seem so colossal when you consider that 2/3 of the population lives in the oppressed nations and that in total it is at most ten percent who actually benefit from this system. Yes, the imperialists now have in their hands the most cruel and deadly weapons in human history and genocide is their daily work, but their impotence in the face of the peoples of the world is becoming more and more evident (note the defeat in Afghanistan, the continued failures in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Mali, etc.) and likewise towards the international proletariat (note the crisis of bourgeois democracy concentrated in the crisis of parliament).

Don’t believe in fairy tales about the end of history, don’t allow convergences, smash, burn and sweep. Matter advances and so does human society as its expression. Marxism is all-powerful because it is true, because it is scientific. The Entente could not defeat revolutionary Russia. The coalition of Japanese and American imperialism failed to defeat the Chinese Revolution. The people’s wars in Peru, India, Turkey and the Philippines cannot be defeated, they will inevitably win.

But a child who learns to walk falls down. However, it does not lose its ability to get up and walk again. This is our path. This is the process of struggle between restoration and counter-restoration. Yes, socialism was lost by the black, the blackest black, in our own ranks. This was also the only way in which the people’s war in Nepal could be led to its temporary defeat. But this pain, like a child learning to walk, is a prerequisite for the new that will inevitably come, triumph and shine.

The next fifty or hundred years from now will be an epic period of fundamental change in the social system of the world, an earth-shaking period, with which no past era can be compared. Living in such a period, we must be prepared to carry out great struggles, differing in many respects from the forms of struggle of previous periods. In order to carry out this task, we must do our very best to combine the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism with the concrete reality of Chinese socialist construction and with the concrete reality of future world revolution and, through practice, gradually come to understand the objective laws of the struggle. We must be prepared to suffer many defeats and set-backs as a result of our blindness, thereby gaining experience and winning final victory.”32

The first stage covers the period of the enemy’s strategic offensive and our strategic defensive. The second stage will be the period of the enemy’s strategic consolidation and our preparation for the counter-offensive. The third stage will be the period of our strategic counter-offensive and the enemy’s strategic retreat. It is impossible to predict the concrete situation in the three stages, but certain main trends in the war may be pointed out in the light of present conditions. The objective course of events will be exceedingly rich and varied, with many twists and turns, and nobody can cast a horoscope …“33

These concrete statements on the war of resistance against Japan must be applied in general to the world proletarian revolution and its course. The lessons of more than one and a half century of struggle are on our side. Focused and expressed in its fullest expression by Chairman Gonzalo. Today we have Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and with it the style and method of work. If the question of the Cultural Revolution is truly the solution to the question of how to win the struggle between Restoration and Counter-Restoration, today it is the people’s war that is at the centre of our attention, because that is what we are doing and what must be done. As Lenin confirms to us: “In view of the undoubted honesty of those broad sections of the mass believers in revolutionary defencism who accept the war only as a necessity, and not as a means of conquest, in view of the fact that they are being deceived by the bourgeoisie, it is necessary with particular thoroughness, persistence and patience to explain their error to them.”34

1Lenin, „Report on the international situation and the fundamental tasks of the Communist International“

2pagina|12, „No hubo acuerdo, pero hay diálogo“, January 11, 2022; our translation, “Посол США передал в МИД РФ ответ на российские требования о гарантиях безопасности”, January 26, 2022; our translation

4The New York Times, “U.S. Offers ‘Diplomatic Path’ in Answer to Russian Demands”, January 26, 2022, “US, NATO deliver written replies to Russia on security demands”, January 26, 2022

6FOCUS-Online, “Analyse von Thomas Jäger: Nato zeigt sich machtlos gegen Putin – der nimmt nun weiter die Ukraine ins Visier”, January 15, 2022; our translation

7CNN, “Putin’s big miscalculation” Opinion by Frida Ghitis, January 14, 2022

8Global Times, “What is behind the unrest in Kazakhstan?”, January 13, 2022

9RT, “Tatsachen schaffen: Ukraine mit Kriegshilfen und “NATO+”-Status zur Verhandlungsmasse aufblähen”, January 16, 2022; our translation

10Deutsche Welle, “RUSSLAND UND KASACHSTAN: Putin will “farbige Revolutionen” in Ex-Sowjetrepubliken unterbinden”, January 10, 2022; our translation

11FOCUS-Online, “Analyse von Thomas Jäger: Nato zeigt sich machtlos gegen Putin – der nimmt nun weiter die Ukraine ins Visier”, January 15, 2022; our translation

12Global Times, “Delusional for US to overwhelm China and Russia by brute force: Global Times editorial”, January 11, 2022

13Taiwan is part of China, nowadays its role is the one of an outpost of Yankee-imperialism.

14pagina|12, „No hubo acuerdo, pero hay diálogo“, 11 January 2022; our translation

15; our translation

16; our translation

17; our translation

18CNN, “Putin’s big miscalculation” Opinion by Frida Ghitis, January 14, 2022

19Deutsche Welle, “Meinung: Annalena Baerbocks verbale Abrüstung in Moskau”, January 18, 2022; our translation

20Deutsche Welle, “Meinung: Putin triumphiert, der Westen rotiert”, January 09, 2022; our translation

21German Federal Ministry of Defence, “EU-Verteidigungsministerinnen und -minister beraten strategischen Kompass”, January 17, 2022; our translation

22The (probably) German agent Deniz Yücel wrote after the attempted coup in the “WELT”: „Does Erdogan not uses his voters to establish an authoritarian regime? In short: Are the putschists not only to be blamed because they failed?“, WELT, „Recep Tayyip Erdogan, das ewige Opfer“, July 18, 2016; our translation

23„Mehr Fortschritt wagen Bündnis für Freiheit, Gerechtigkeit und Nachhaltigkeit“, Koalitionsvertrag 2021 – 2025 zwischen der Sozialdemokratischen Partei Deutschlands (SPD), BÜNDNIS 90 / DIE GRÜNEN und den Freien Demokraten (FDP); the coalition agreement of the new government of the FRG

24Frankfurter Allgemeine, “ZAHLUNGSVERKEHR: Warum ein Swift-Ausschluss Russlands ein zweischneidiges Schwert ist”, January 17, 2022; our translation

25CNN, “Cyberattack hits Ukraine government websites”, Januar 15, 2022

26Frankfurter Allgemeine, “KRISE MIT RUSSLAND: Großbritannien liefert Panzerabwehrwaffen an die Ukraine”, January 18, 2022; our translation

27taz, “Ukraine-Russland-Konflikt: Nato erweitert Militärhilfe”, January 18, 2022; our translation

28; our translation

29Mao tse-tung, “The present situation and our tasks”

30Mao Tse-tung, „On Contradiction“

31Mao Tse-Tung, „The foolish old man who removed the mountains“

32Mao Tse-tung, “Talk At An Enlarged Working Conference Convened By The Central Committee Of The Communist Party Of China”

33Mao Tse-tung, “On protracted war”

34Lenin, „The Tasks of the Proletariat in the Present Revolution“