06.05.1999

More heat than light

For most of those participating in this year’s London May Day march the Serbian war was foremost in their thoughts. I was not surprised to discover, in the course of a dozen or so arguments with comrades from various left organisations, that the CPGB’s backing for Kosovar self-determination in general, and the Kosova Liberation Army in particular, has led to our being stigmatised as “supporters of imperialism”. Sadly, the discussions in which I took part generated more heat than light. A march is not the ideal place to debate, but it was not so much the noise of the brass band and the cacophony of chanting, so much as the raw emotions of anger and disgust that got in the way of meaningful dialogue.

Of course, feelings have their place. Is there anyone on the left who does not feel a visceral detestation of the manifold evils inflicted on human beings by imperialism? Anyone who is not nauseated by Tony Blair’s crocodile tears over the Kosovar refugees and his claim that Nato is bombing Serbia in the “cause of humanity”? But feelings by themselves, however sincere, are not enough. As Marxists we must view the issues raised by the Serbian war soberly, analysing a situation that is both complex and constantly changing. I have already set out the CPGB’s viewpoint in a series of articles. My purpose now is merely to focus on the key questions, in the hope - forlorn though it might be - that certain comrades will begin to think about it, rather than give vent to stock reactions and conditioned reflexes.

First, as regards Kosovar self-determination, I ask: “Does the population of Kosova consist of a nation?” Yes, it does. According to the definition that forms part of the Marxist canon on the national question, “A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture” (JV Stalin Works Vol 2, Moscow 1953, p307). The provenance of this citation may cause some to wince, but they should not forget that Lenin himself acknowledged its accuracy.

Secondly, if the Kosovars are a nation, do they have the right to self-determination, including the right to secession from the rump Yugoslav state? Yes, they do, if this is the democratic desire of the population as a whole. Neither the din of war, nor the fog of propaganda can obscure the fact that the ethnic Albanians of Kosova do aspire to an independent state. Leaving aside the inveterate Yugoslav defencists and Sovietophile nostalgics, this justified, democratic demand is accepted by most on the left, but only in principle, only as a theoretical postulate. In practice, they tell the Kosovars to ‘wait for socialism’ and the establishment of a ‘socialist federation of the Balkans’. There is nothing wrong with the latter as a slogan, but, in the current circumstances, that is all it is.

Thirdly, some comrades appear to believe that the imperialists have, from the outset, given their support to Kosovar independence and the KLA’s role in furthering this aim. Hence, to support the Kosovars is to back imperialism. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our comrades’ assessment of the main enemy is woefully deficient. If they had studied it more closely, they would realise that Kosovar independence was never on the agenda at Rambouillet. What is more, the aborted Rambouillet agreement specifically envisaged the disarming of the KLA and its replacement with a contingent of Nato ‘peace-keepers’. For the Nato powers, the KLA’s presence on the ground offers some obvious tactical advantages, but strategically the KLA’s role as the front-line force in a drive to Kosovar self-determination is profoundly problematic.

Do we need to remind ourselves of the imperialists’ geopolitical goals in the region? Militarily, they seek to safeguard their southern flank and establish the Balkans as a secure bridgehead for further operations in the east, directed against the former Soviet Union; economically, their consistent and predictable goal is to create and maintain a group of stable client states ripe for exploitation. Only a wilfully blind person or a fool could fail to see that an independent Kosova has no place in such a scheme. To the imperialists, an independent Kosova ruled by a triumphant KLA, if it became a reality, would represent a threat, a source of potential destabilisation.

The KLA would no doubt seek Albanian unity with Kosova - not Kosova unity with Albania. Greater Albania - incorporating Albania, Kosova and the Albanian parts of Montenegro and Macedonia - would be under the domination of KLA nationalist revolutionaries.

Hence, the democratic demands of the Kosovars count for nothing in Washington or London. At best, they will enjoy a spurious autonomy under the status of a Nato/UN protectorate; at worst, their territory will be partitioned as part of a negotiated ‘peace’, whereby the Serbs would be rewarded for their mass terror and genocide by having the north of Kosova incorporated into a postwar Greater Serbia.

Here we see the fundamental error of those on the left who condemn the CPGB as “supporters” of the imperialists’ war aims: they fail to perceive that, in the current situation, to support the Kosovars’ legitimate, democratic right to self-determination is to act against the interests of Nato and the imperialists. But even if the Kosovars’ struggle did happen to coincide to some degree with imperialist actions, that would not prevent us supporting its democratic content.

Does this mean that our support for the KLA’s military operations (as distinct from the political cause of Kosovar self-determination) is unconditional? Of course it does not. At present, notwithstanding its ambivalent and changeable political complexion - especially given the influx of recruits from the west, not least American Albanians - the KLA’s very raison d’être remains inimical to the imperialists’ long-term interests in the region.

In the event, however, of a successful Nato ground offensive, one of the imperialists’ first objectives in imposing a ‘peaceful solution’ will almost certainly be to neutralise the KLA. They may try to do this by ‘disbanding’ it altogether - in which case the KLA will very probably take up arms, however futile such a gesture may be, against the ‘victors’; or, more probably, the imperialists may offer the KLA a subsidiary, internal security role as a local gendarmerie, helping to police a Kosovar ‘protectorate’, or whatever portion of Kosova remains after the imperialists have carved it up at the negotiating table. If the latter happens, and particularly if the KLA indulges in ethnic cleansing on its own account, then it would clearly cease to merit support as a force for Kosovar liberation, and really would become what others on the left now say that it already is: ie, a tool of imperialist interests.

It is not difficult to foresee other contingencies in which the KLA would forfeit the critical support of communists. But it is not our job to second-guess the future. Our task is to support the struggle for human liberation now, wherever, and in whatever paradoxical and contradictory circumstances, it is taking place. The cause of the Kosovars is just. All communists should support it.

Michael Malkin