Contribution of the Communist Party of Sweden

Security under Capitalism-Imperialism Is an Illusion

The question of imperialist alliances in general is a relevant one as long as capitalism-imperialism exists, and as these alliances constantly shift and rearrange themselves, with the sharp contradictions inherent to them only increasing with time. To make these imperialist alliances more acceptable to the general population, propaganda is manufactured and illusions created, and propagated through capitalist media, both state and private. It falls to the communists to shatter these illusions and to explain to the people the nature of imperialism and the alliances it spawns.

However, even within the communist movement this question is controversial and strong opportunist currents try their best to dilute every revolutionary analysis of imperialism and imperialist alliances.

In order to understand the issue of imperialist alliance, one must first understand imperialism. To understand one without the other is impossible.

As a system, capitalism entered its imperialist stage more than a 100 years ago. This development meant an incredible sharpening of contradictions between different capitals and their political representatives; it laid the ground for wars that in their scope and brutality are unsurpassed in the history of mankind.

The basis for these wars was the sharpening competition of different capitals and capital groups for market shares, raw materials, transport routes, geopolitical advantages and so on. With the ever-pressing need to grow, each capital and capital group inevitably found themselves having to struggle with their competitors from other nations - while the world is finite, the need for every capital to grow is infinite.

This simple fact lays the basis for capitalist and imperialist competition, forcing ever-stronger conflicts and in the end, laying the ground for a generalized imperialist war,

aimed at a redivision of large parts of the world. This happened in 1914, as well as in 1939, albeit World War II was also directed against socialism, against the Soviet Union.

These wars redistributed the spoils of imperialism.

In this struggle, every capital and capital group, every imperialist nation, seeks the best conditions for its own expansion. One result of this is the banding together of imperialists into larger groups, into alliances, to further their own interests - when the common interests are larger than what divides the participants, these imperialist alliances are able to hold together, but within themselves, they contain the seeds for further division as contradictions inevitably sharpen further.

Imperialist alliances are nothing more than alliances of imperialists with the aim of furthering their own interests against their competitor - and this holds true for every alliance under imperialism, be it the EU, the NATO, the ALBA, the Shanghai Cooperation
Organisation or the Eurasian Economic Union.

However, because of the relative domination of the Western imperialist powers, the idea that the opposition of other imperialist powers to this domination is progressive has gained traction within parts of the communist movement.

By some self-proclaimed communists, Iran was recently held up as an example of opposition to imperialism, because they opposed the American offensive in the Strait of Hormuz. In reality, Iranian capital wrestles for their own power within the region. Likewise, the Russian invasion of the Ukraine was by some hailed as an act of resistance against Western imperialism.

The source of this faulty and dangerous idea, is the equation of imperialism with Western imperialism - it is the extrapolation of one or a couple of imperialists to imperialism as such. This is nothing short of opportunism, as the end result of this is to align the policies of the communist movement with the interests of imperialism. It seeks to hide the realities of capitalism-imperialism and to smooth over the contradictions. It seeks to create illusions.

In regards to the question of security, these opportunists try to portray the struggle of the weaker capitals and capital groups as a basis for security - their alliances are qualitatively different than those stemming from the US or Europe, and represent a real alternative.

This is what they say, and they disregard reality, which shows that every capital and every capitalist-imperialist nation struggles for their place in the sun, based on their strength and opportunities. Therefore, we draw the conclusion that there is nothing qualitatively different in alliances under imperialism - they all serve the same purpose of advancing the position of their capital.

In turn, this leads us to regard the question of security in a broader sense: is security a possibility under capitalism-imperialism?

Of course not. The capitalist-imperialist system in itself creates insecurity and it constantly elevates the threat and danger to the peoples of the world, to the planet itself.

The only security that can stem from an alliance under imperialism is the relative security of the participating capitals.

The creation of imperialist alliances must necessarily be at the expense of the people, as it is the people who are the subject of their exploitation. It is the peoples that suffer from the wars, poverty and atrocities committed by these alliances. Therefore, we reject them
all equally, and we do not choose one above the other.

Instead, we choose a third path: the path of socialism, of the power of the working people, of the planned economy under the command of the workers. This is the only security we know and this is the only security that we can ever recognize, because with this security, we are able to eliminate poverty, wars and insecurity.

We struggle against the insecurity of capitalism-imperialism and we are committed to exposing those who sow illusions and those who purposefully distort the reality of capitalism-imperialism.

We reaffirm our deep conviction that socialism is the only path forward and, as many comrades have said before: every day, the difference between what we have and what we could have increases.