Lindsey German on bipartisan jingoism and the cost of war

There were two remarkable scenes in parliament last Wednesday. The most reported on is the speech to both houses by Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, a set piece where, dressed as usual in combat gear, he demanded yet more military aid, this time in the form of fighter planes. But as significant was the prime minister’s question time which preceded it, when both Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer put aside any political conflict to try to outdo each other with their support for arming Ukraine. There was not a whisper of anything that might hinder this lovefest – nothing about economic crisis, the pay disputes, super profits of oil companies, corruption, the Turkish earthquake, poverty, scapegoating of refugees.

The reception for the Zelensky speech was adulatory, with MPs and Lords cheering to the rafters, and mainstream journalists dutifully agreeing that this was a defence of liberty. The speech referenced Winston Churchill, talked about English tea, and demanded more weaponry – this time the provision of fighter jets, only days after this option was ruled out by both the US president, Joe Biden, and the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz.

The whole aim of his visit was to make this point, allowing the British government to position itself as the key driver of military support for Ukraine, putting pressure on European governments at the EU summit the following day, and therefore bouncing the various Nato powers into committing to supplying fighter jets in exactly the way that Britain led the way in drumming up support for sending tanks last month.

The main driver of this is not the present prime minister but the disgraced former one, Boris Johnson, who has been conducting his own operation to send more arms to Ukraine. No doubt he sees this as a way back for him politically if he chooses to challenge Sunak later in the year. The Tories themselves go along with it partly because they are a war party and because given their disastrous scores in the polls, they too see this as a way back politically. It is the only area of politics where the Tories are scoring remotely well.

The fact that so many politicians and pundits are now seriously talking about sending fighter planes (despite the fact that RAF Typhoons are both unsuitable for the kind of warfare being conducted in Ukraine, and in short supply given their use in other theatres of war) marks an incredible ratcheting up both of the demands from Ukraine and of the willingness of Nato powers to supply weapons. As we approach the first anniversary of Russia’s invasion and the start of this bloody war, it is worth remembering that a year ago, and until relatively recently, the Nato powers resisted the sending of tanks and planes because they felt this would draw them into an open war with Russia, rather than the proxy war now taking place.

This is partly because the west and Nato’s war aims have changed especially since last spring, with the increasing sense that Ukraine could defeat Russia, and partly because the outcome of the war is uncertain and is not likely to be soon. Russia is close to taking the key town of Bakhmut, while Ukraine talks about its own spring offensive, hence the pleas for more weapons.

Continuing the war, however, will be at great cost to the people of Ukraine, and with the considerable threat of escalation, potentially to even nuclear war, despite this being dismissed by the right-wing warmongers. There is also the wider political threat of the war. This partly lies in dragooning of sections of the left into the war party, most notably those left MPs who could once be relied upon to oppose war. The bipartisan approach so evident in parliament last week encompassed left and right in Labour, the nationalist parties of Scotland and Wales, and the Greens.

That in turn disarms the working-class movement. It does so on economic issues, as a free pass is given to those wanting to increase military spending while they adopt the most intransigent refusal to fund public services or pay the nurses. The £2.3 billion going to Ukraine last year will be matched again this year, while the British government has pledged only £5 million to match donations for the earthquake in Turkey. Labour is committed to increasing spending on ‘defence’ as enthusiastically as any Tory retired major.

It also does so on political grounds. Those on the left who support the war and the increased jingoism around it should consider what goes alongside that: more of what they would normally find abhorrent – more nationalist ideas, more flag waving, more attacks on migrants, more racism. It isn’t a zero-sum game, but a political slide which strengthens the right. Nor can support for the war be seen as a stages theory – if you don’t confront your own ruling class now, then you will find it much harder to do so in the future.

Politics abhors a vacuum. Striking nurses are blamed for playing into Putin’s hands. We are told there must be money for war, and that calling for peace is not patriotic. Attacks on refugees and asylum seekers grow, stoked by a torrid stream of attacks on ‘small boats’ from Braverman and Sunak. We know from bitter experience that the last refuge of Tory scoundrels is scapegoating, racism and war.  

The British working class has been fighting back in a way unprecedented for over three decades and deserves our full support in its struggle for decent pay and conditions. But we need a political trade unionism which links war abroad with class war at home. On the anniversary of the biggest demonstration in British history, when 2 million of us marched against the war in Iraq and in support of Palestine, we should remember the politicians, media barons, big business, and yes liberal pundits who were cheerleaders for that conflict. And we shouldn’t let them do it again. 

This week: I will be speaking at Stop the War’s online international rally tonight. I’ll be watching a new play Trouble in Butetown on Tuesday and joining my picket lines for this week’s UCU strikes.