It is, without doubt, a different discourse from most European governments and, needless to say, from the speeches of Mark Rutte, Secretary General of NATO, the President of the European Union, Von der Leyen, or the heads of the current US administration, Trump and Musk. Sánchez establishes himself as the furthest left wing of social democracy in Europe in clear confrontation with the semi-fascist wing of the imperialist countries.

Thus, whilst the majority of North American, Russian or European governments are proposing a rearmament policy based on the old choice that led to disasters such as the First and Second World War, of “guns instead of butter”, Sánchez proposes “guns and butter” simultaneously. Raising the military budget without touching “a single cent” of social spending. Legitimate doubts appear in the face of this. The socialist and revolutionary left must try to answer them. We cannot remain on the sidelines.

Is rearmament necessary?

The proposed rearmament is to face Russian expansionism, which has already shown its criminal aggression with the invasion and war it is waging against Ukraine. Russian imperialism has not attacked the neighbouring country because it had attacked Russia. Nor because NATO threatened it. The war against Ukraine, which began in 2014 with the occupation and annexation of Crimea and parts of Donbas, is being waged by Putin’s Russia in the name of recomposing the “Russian world”. That is, to bring under its command all countries that have Russian-speaking inhabitants and, from there, recompose the old empire of the tsarist era and the influence and dominance over other countries from the era of Stalinist USSR.

That is the concrete problem through which all this global change has emerged in the last three years. True that a change in the era of globalisation was already brewing as it showed signs of exhaustion. But we cannot ignore the concrete. Therefore, what would have been enough to help Ukraine defend itself effectively, with the weapons it requested for this and in due time, has now become complicated. To the point that there is a change of alliances between the most aggressive imperialisms: now Russia and the United States go hand in hand to strip Ukraine and to reach an agreement on “dividing up the world”. For now, leaving China aside. But we shall see how it all ends.

Russia and the United States are now allies against Europe. To see how each positions itself within that attack, Russia threatens Europe directly and the United States disengages from defending it. The problem is not yet situated in the realm of military war throughout Europe, but in the part of Ukraine. If Europe does not defend Ukraine and replace US military aid, we may witness its partition, or capitulation. That would not give any “peace” but a period of greater instability since, emboldened, Russian imperialism will continue its aggression in other countries. And the excuse for Trump, Netanyahu, China and some others, to invade others.

Therefore, yes, Europe and the working class of all countries, including Russia itself, need to stop the feet of that imperialist war of plunder. For this, yes, it is necessary to rearm, to produce weapons and ammunition in Europe itself, instead of remaining dependent on the United States. But if we must respond to an objective need of society to defend itself, what should not be done is in the form of business. The arms industry must be nationalised and placed under democratic control. First and foremost, by its own workers. It is they who know where the weapons go, the costs, the supplies, what can and cannot be done. That is, faced with a need for defence, we need democratic control so that it is not converted into a business and sale of weapons to countries that use them against other peoples, as happens with Israel or Saudi Arabia.

Rearmament for what?

If PP and Vox oppose Sánchez today in that aspect, it is only because they want to bring down the government at all costs and need to take advantage of any division in the parliamentary bloc that supports it. Nothing is further from the PP than opposing rearmament. On the other hand, the right-wing PNV has given support. And that of Junts has not given support, but agrees with European rearmament. But, paint it as you may, none of the right-wing parties agrees with not cutting social spending. In that sense, the Spanish, Catalan, Basque right-wings are indeed more in line with the conservative, liberal or even social democratic European majority.

But what does the left of that government support bloc say? Most of these parties do not agree with European rearmament. And they add that it is in the name of “peace”. A peace that they leave in the hands of two mobsters like Trump and Putin, although they don’t like it. But they have no left-wing alternative. Faced with a real war that invades a country, that murders citizens by the thousands, that kidnaps children, that changes borders, that annuls the culture and language of a sovereign country, that tramples on any international resolution be it from the UN or the International Criminal Court, they lament the thousands of dead, but propose nothing more than a “peace” based on negotiations... by Trump and Putin.

The T-shirt and statements of Ilone Belarra, from Podemos, upon leaving the conversation with Sánchez said: “No to war”. As a slogan against the US war in Iraq, it was very good. But what about Russia’s against Ukraine? Without positioning oneself on the side of the oppressed against the oppressor, there can only be one “peace”: that of the cemeteries, the imposed peace of imperialism, not a just peace. Is that what Belarra understands by “peace”? Should Ukraine be left alone against Putin’s semi-fascist regime, as England and France left the Republic alone against fascism during the Spanish revolution?

That must be a selective rearmament, not general, not to expand or modernise all armies. Increasing armies is preparing to expand wars and, in any case, they can be used against the people themselves. Nor should it be the starting point for direct interventions in Ukraine, unless the Ukrainian government itself requested it, which it has never done, and it would have to be seen in what framework and conditions. No: today it is about effectively helping Ukraine to reject the invasion, for Russian troops to have to leave all occupied territories and, ultimately, for the Russian militarist adventure to be defeated and end in a political crisis that facilitates a regime change in Russia.

What should security be based on?

Sánchez has mentioned that the problem goes beyond rearmament and self-defence: security. Indeed, no one can feel at ease when they have as a neighbour an abuser, a batterer and a thief who, moreover, does not only act far from the neighbourhood but also among the neighbours. Even more so if we see this bully and thief allying with the biggest of bullies: Trump. Although we are in a capitalist society, we need to organise some type of defence that is capable of deterring or, in the worst case, repelling, any attack from the bully.

But security is not only or mainly attacks from outside. Above all, the enemies of democratic peoples and the working class act from within, they have ultra-right and neo-fascist “fifth columnists” within each European nation. Some already have power, as in Hungary or Italy. In other countries they are advancing rapidly, as in Germany, Denmark, France, Spain... Their advances are not by chance but because they have the support of a true “neo-fascist international”.

Therefore, security is based on a defence of both aspects: the military and the defence of a type of socially cohesive society, with decent wages, with rights, with health, food and housing secured as rights, with culture, with time for citizen participation in all areas of decision-making. Hence, it is not only about “not cutting” social rights, but about advancing much further in them. When precariousness, poverty, insecurity about the future or disinformation are wreaking havoc on the population, the turn that must be taken is revolutionary. This requires strong measures. Otherwise, the extreme right and fascism will advance with their demagoguery. The socialist left must respond there.

Who should pay?

Clearly for this type of rearmament in favour of the defeat of Russia and in favour of advancing the security and quality of life of the majority of the population, the rich must pay. And, above all, the ultra-rich. Only them. It is these new super-powerful elites that encourage this new division of the world in their favour. They are behind multiple wars and conflicts with the looting of natural resources, arms sales or financial plundering of debt. They are the ones who finance the extreme right and its racism and sexism to foment the division of the working class. They are the ones who have obtained the most benefits in recent years. And, like shameless pigs, they show their wealth to the world with videos like the Gaza Strip Resort. They have neither humanity nor do they care how the world is left after them. Putin, Trump, Musk are the most prominent, but in Spain and every country we have them.

Therefore, the only left-wing option, the sensible one if we do not want to sink the working class into poverty, desperation and lumpenproletariat, is a revolutionary option. It is to orient towards a change of system. Because it is the capitalist system that cannot dispense with wars and destruction of the productive forces and nature. It is part of its essence, its DNA. No reform formula within the capitalist system can now satisfy the demands of humanity. The capitalist class as a whole must be expropriated if humanity wants to live freely, decently and in peace. Society must be reorganised on the basis of collective, social participation of all working layers, restoring women, youth, the elderly to their rightful place, as equals.

Such a type of society is what the revolutionary left must rethink and organise from today. That is the basis for resistance to war and to the plans of fascist-type “fifth columnism”. I do not believe that Sánchez will pursue this type of revolutionary policy. Neither will the UN nor the EU. However, in very complicated historical situations, such as the one we find ourselves in, sometimes there are characters who favour necessary changes. It also depends on us, on the pressure they receive. This struggle must arise from below and also through the agreement of those sectors that clearly see the need for an independent response from the current governments, powers and institutions. That is, the true left. This does not remove punctual support for any progressive reform, such as the reform of the United Nations Security Council or a housing law that would expropriate large holders, for example.

But the important thing now is to get to work those who, on an international scale, are already giving support to a just peace in Ukraine, to a socialist, egalitarian society, in harmony with nature. That is, those who have not waited to act in solidarity, those who have been able to empathise with the aggressed, despite being attacked as “pro-NATO”, “pro-Nazi” or “warmongers” by sectors of a myopic left aligned with Putin.

How, where, when? We must seek all opportunities for it. Seek them actively, time counts. The European conference of solidarity with Ukraine to be held in Brussels on the next 26^th and 27^th is one of those golden opportunities.

Alfons Bech

Click here to subscribe to ESSF newsletters in English and or French.