The NATO proxy war with Russia in Ukraine remains the sharpest expression of global inter-imperialist rivalry. It is a confrontation between the NATO imperialist bloc of the US, Britain and Europe, and Russia, itself within a competing bloc which includes China and Iran. The crisis of global capitalism has forced a confrontation between competing imperialist powers in a relentless drive to redivide the world for control of profitable outlets for capital. Now, due to relentless NATO escalation, there is a danger of direct military confrontation between a nuclear-armed NATO and Russia. George O’Connell reports.
Stalemate and escalation
The military situation in Ukraine has recently been a bloody stalemate with numerous casualties on both sides. Ukraine however faces increasingly severe shortages of manpower and ammunition, eroding its defensive capabilities, notwithstanding the enormous sums provided by its imperialist backers. There is now a growing concern over a Russian advance: its forces are slowly approaching Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second largest city, located 19 miles from the border.
The Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, with $61bn of military aid for Ukraine, has now been passed by US lawmakers after being repeatedly blocked by Republicans in Congress since last December. The Act is part of a larger package to arm US imperialism’s key allies, with $26bn to Israel and $8bn to Taiwan. It is a roadmap of the coming conflicts, each state serving to defend US interests against Russia, Iran, and China respectively. $11bn of the aid to Ukraine will fund existing US military operations in Eastern Europe including the current NATO exercise Steadfast Defender, a rehearsal for direct confrontation between NATO and Russia.
British imperialism leads the escalation
As US imperialism prepares for conflict against these rivals, the British ruling class is united in supporting it. Both the major parties offer unswerving support to the Israeli state and its genocidal attack on Gaza, endorse sabre-rattling against China and are brazen in seeking escalation of the war in Ukraine.
In early May, Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron visited Ukraine where he announced the indefinite provision of £3bn annual military assistance for Ukraine. On 3 May, he gave Ukraine the green light to use British-provided long-range missiles to strike mainland Russia, up to now a red line. British troops are on the ground to train Ukrainian forces operating the missiles, which can be used to strike deep into Russian territory. In response, Russia’s foreign ministry stated on 6 May that Britain is a ‘de facto participant in the war’ and that ‘British military facilities and equipment on the territory of Ukraine and abroad’ could be targeted in response. The same day, it carried out nuclear drills as a response both to Cameron’s comments, and to French President Macron’s doubling down on his statement about ‘not ruling out’ deploying NATO troops in Ukraine.
No independent role
In a 3 May editorial, The Times opined that ‘allowing Kyiv to use British-supplied missiles to hit targets in Russia is fully justified’and ‘long overdue’. The Times is a mouthpiece for the most hawkish sections of the British ruling class who clamour for escalation against Russia. They are blasé about the prospect of nuclear confrontation. But British imperialism is in relative decline, less and less able to play an independent role especially as it has distanced itself from the European imperialist bloc. It is therefore forced to ally itself closely with US imperialism, and if needs be, follow its twists and turns, as it did with the unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. The government first criticised the withdrawal, but then had no choice but to follow suit. Hence there is concern about a possible Trump victory in the November US presidential election given his pledge to end the war in Ukraine and withdraw US support. As we said in FRFI 299:
‘Trump’s approach comes in the context of a deepening economic and political relationship between Russia and China, catalysed by the war in Ukraine. […] The risk is that a continuation of the war will further strengthen [this] relationship. [Trump’s approach] is calculated to mitigate this risk.’
In order to forestall this, Cameron visited Trump in early April as part of a US trip to pressure Republicans in Congress to release the Ukraine aid bill. He also sought to reassure Trump that Britain is doing its bit in ramping up military spending for the conflicts to come. On 24 April, Prime Minister Sunak declared that Britain would increase military spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2030. Sunak’s announcement aims to address key concerns within the British ruling class that, despite the rhetoric, Britain is ill-prepared militarily for coming conflicts. An embarrassing example of this was when Britain became the only imperialist power to join the US in bombing Yemen in January 2024; British naval vessels were unable to support US ships in attacking Yemeni positions because they lacked the capability to fire on land targets. Instead, British ground strike support was limited to RAF jets stationed over 1,500 miles away in Cyprus.
The Labour Party, which has uncritically supported the government arming Ukraine, has also refused to condemn the government’s recent escalation. On 15 May, Labour’s Shadow Defence and Foreign Ministers John Healey and David Lammy followed Cameron’s visit to Ukraine with the sole purpose of assuring the Kiev regime that British support would remain unchanged under a future Labour government. The Labour party and its left wing continue to actively support British imperialist aggression against Russia. Only by building an anti-imperialist movement can we challenge the course of constant, dangerous escalation taken by British imperialism.
