Russian army on the defensive, Ukrainian people on the offensive
Tuesday 23 June 2026, by NPA-A Ukraine Solidarity Intervention Group
Russia is continuing its war of attrition against the Ukrainian people, but is struggling to make significant progress on the ground. In response, Kyiv is intensifying its strikes against Russian military infrastructure while civil society continues to keep democratic and social mobilizations alive.
On 3 June, Ukrainian missiles hit energy and military sites at the opening of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, where Russia’s political and economic elite received their foreign guests under plumes of black smoke. Responding to the deadly attacks of the previous day, Kyiv thumbed its nose at Putin’s arrogance while demonstrating its growing ability to break through Russian air defenses.
On 2 and 3 June, hundreds of drones and dozens of missiles reached residential areas in Kyiv, Dnipro, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia (40 dead and 250 injured). Following hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries in April and May, these attacks target homes, civilian infrastructure and public services. Putin is seeking to break the morale of the Ukrainian people. In vain.
Increasing pressure on Russian rear
On Ukrainian soil, the army succeeded in blocking Russia’s spring offensive, neutralising attempts to regroup men or equipment. The Russian occupying forces, despite the multiplication of assault operations, made little progress. “600 km2 of Ukrainian territory have been liberated since the beginning of the year,” said Oleksandr Syrsky, the commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian armed forces.
For several months, the Ukrainian army has been conducting offensive operations on Russian territory, destroying refineries, industrial facilities, weapons factories and military bases in order to disrupt Russian logistics lines and war capabilities. These strikes, deep into Russian territory and on the rear of the occupied territories, are shaking a civilian economy already weakened by inflation and the war economy.
Kyiv has increased the use of strike systems combining medium-range missiles and combat drones to reach the Russian rear up to 200 kilometers. The Ukrainians are holding important supply routes under constant fire: Crimea is particularly affected, which has consequences for supplies to the southern zone of the fighting. The authorities ofBastopol have limited fuel purchases to twenty litres per vehicle. Prices of food and services are already rising.
The state of the global balance of forces does not currently open up the prospect of a victorious offensive on the ground. By multiplying devastating air incursions, the Ukrainian leadership is forcing Moscow to come to the negotiating table from a more balanced position.
A committed and combative society
Ukrainian civil society, which is very involved in the defence of the country, is active and vigilant (fighting against corruption and oligarchs, defending living and working conditions). After the demonstrations in May against the draft of the new Civil Code (which infringes on the rights of sexual minorities and allows the plundering of common goods), two examples of struggle illustrate the permanent mobilization, despite the state of war, of citizens.
In Kyiv, during the public discussion on public transport, the Kyiv Passengers Association, which organises quality checks on the routes and even discusses the choice of vehicles, gathered the opinion of almost 1,500 people opposedto the quadrupling of prices. The student union Priama Diia has joined this struggle, denouncing a new blow to students.
Teachers and parents of students in Rivne, in northwestern Ukraine, are opposing the closure of several schools. The soldiers on the front, from their city, sent a video of support. The municipality backed down.
Despite the war, despite the mourning and fatigue, civil society, committed and concerned about the future of the country, is speaking out publicly about the economic, political and legal orientations that are dangerous for the rule of law, social and democratic achievements — essential battles for the reconstruction of the country once it has regained its democratic sovereignty.`
11 June 2026
Translated by International Viewpoint from l’Anticapitaliste.
Russian socialists: ‘Solidarity means accepting Ukrainians’ pain and suffering as our own’
First published in Russian on the Russian-Speaking Leftists Telegram Channel. Translation by Simon Pirani for People and Nature.
Russian-Speaking Leftists, a group based in Germany, published this interview with a socialist activist living in Russia who, they write, “stands for revolutionary defeatism,” on May 19.1
Please tell us a little about yourself.
I am a Communist. I worked in various proletarian and quasi-proletarian jobs. I support the Left For Peace Without Annexations coalition.
Tell us about the coalition.
For me and some of my comrades, the full-scale war that started in February 2022 did not come as a surprise. But all the same, the war disrupted the left-wing movement. Not everyone took a correct position.
Pretty quickly, a “left” that supports Russian state power took shape. Moreover, it was the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) that had initiated a vote in the Duma [parliament] calling on Putin to recognise the Luhansk and Donetsk “people’s republics” as independent states.2
A few days after the all-out invasion, a declaration by “Socialists Against the War” appeared. It was fairly abstract, and many centrist organisations, such as the Trotskyist Workers Revolutionary Party signed it.3 There were even a few members of the CPRF who signed it. But it did not lead to any serious joint activity.
After the first wave of repression came the designation of the Russian Socialist Movement as “foreign agents”,4 and many activists emigrated. Practical anti-war activity by leftists in Russia ground to a halt, having hardly got started.
This situation was reflected in attitudes and policies — with the emergence of a tendency that equated Russia and Ukraine, and considered that there was no need to support Ukraine. As a rule, these organisations and activists did not consider the annexation of parts of Ukraine by Russia to be acceptable.
These centrists simply abandoned the anti-war declarations they had made at the start, and were completely separated from the anti-war movement. An exception was the honest centrists of the Russian Communist Party (Internationalists).
For myself, I was convinced from the start of the all-out war that Ukraine was waging a just, defensive war against revanchist Russian imperialism.
I tried to make contact with other defeatists in the Russian Federation. But the situation was such that we were unable to do anything effective. And then I was annoyed to learn that the left-wing centrist émigrés [in November 2024] were organising a forum of the left emigration in Köln [Cologne, Germany]. They wanted to present themselves as representative of the whole Russian left, including the defeatists. But at the same time I realised that this forum presented an opportunity to the revolutionary defeatists, to make our presence known and to join together.
And so the open letter by the Left for Peace Without Annexations appeared, addressed in the first place to the forum in Köln. Some activists inside the country, and some who had emigrated, both participated in putting it together. [See below for a translation of the open letter.]
It was important for us to show that, among leftists, there is a significant group who consider Russia’s war to be unjust, who do not accept annexations and who believe that Ukrainians have an immutable right to defend themselves.
The Left for Peace Without Annexations alliance brought together people from a range of political traditions, activists who are more or less radical. What unites us is the conviction that we will not connive with “our” imperialism, and that the struggle of an oppressed nation against aggression is a just one.
Why did you decide to amplify the voices of people in Russia with regard to the supply of weapons to Ukraine? After all, Russian activists have practically no influence on European politicians.
The open letter was not really about weapons supply. Or to be accurate, weapons supply was mentioned, but that was not for us the main point. The letter was in the first place about solidarity – which means working people in Russia accepting Ukrainians’ pain and suffering as their own pain and suffering. It means the left in the oppressor nation recognising the rights of the oppressed nation to its own separate state and to defence of that state.
For those in emigration, that way of putting the question might seem a bit abstract, while in Russia — for obvious reasons — it is impossible to make public statements along those lines. So for activists in Russia, the [Köln] forum and the open letter gave us a way to present our position — for resistance to the Putin regime and support for the Ukrainian people — “from inside”.
To comrades in other countries we signalled that: in Russia there are left wingers who recognise that defeat is the best outcome; that the left in the west should not think that everything in Russia is fine and dandy; and that people should not think that in the Russian left unanimous support for, or acquiescence in, the so-called “special military operation”, holds sway.
And of course all this is important in explaining the situation to working people in the western countries.
What processes going on in Russian society currently do you think are important to highlight?
In Russia there is a process of mounting contradictions, and to some extent a thaw.5
Instability is mounting. And that has started in the Z-osphere,6 which, it seems, can in the fifth year of all-out war no longer envisage victory built on mountains of dead bodies.
Ilya Remeslo,7 Igor Strelkov-Girkin and Pavel Gubarev8 have all had their say. And now we are hearing political and quasi-political statements from public figures who previously stayed out of politics, such as the blogger Victoria Boni, the actor Dmitry Nagiev and others.
The blocking of the internet and restrictions on the use of Telegram are causing serious discontent throughout society. And the authorities have clamped down brutally on attempts to protest – not only by forbidding public gatherings, but also by arresting those who announce their intention to organise such gatherings on trumped-up charges (for example, “disobeying police officers”).
Another big scandal resulted from the large-scale slaughter of farm animals in Siberia, conducted without any clear explanation. In other words, the state is allowing, or creating situations — quite apart from the war — that cause dissatisfaction across the whole of society.
Putin’s popularity rating consequently fell in the first months of this year, before VTsIOM9 changed the methodology of their surveys.
How has Russian society reacted to the more frequent attacks by Ukrainian drones, for example those that we saw recently in Tuapse, Perm and the Moscow region?
There wasn’t much of a reaction. Such attacks are not new. And of course the state gives the impression that everything is fine. After the escalation of drone attacks in mid-May, one could hear people talk about the fact that they were not going to change their plans and did not feel threatened.
Obviously, even though the Ukrainian drones aim for military targets, and targets related to Putin’s war economy, there can be, and have been, civilian victims. The three deaths resulting from the drone strikes in Moscow region were, of course, a tragedy. But in Kyiv at the same time more than 50 people were killed.
There is a massive difference between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, not only in the logic, but also in the precision, of drone strikes behind the front lines. Russia pays no attention to “collateral damage” to the civilian population; it actually flaunts it and uses it as an instrument of terror.
We all saw how the Russian government, having demanded from Ukraine the right to hold its military parade on May 910 undisturbed, threatened to bomb Kyiv if this demand was rejected. And, so that there could be no doubt as to the criminality of such bombing under humanitarian law, they added that the population of Kyiv would need to evacuate.
Are you not worried that your position on the supply of weapons to Ukraine might alienate even those Russians who are against the war?
In my view, excessive attention to this question of weapons supply to Ukraine is an intra-left and émigré phenomenon. For those in emigration, it is indeed a real political issue: we see European populists, centrists and pro-Putin elements using the narrative about weapons supply to win electoral support from reactionary voters.
What do you think of sanctions? In my view, this is a complex issue. On one hand, there is an inter-imperialist trade war, which hits ordinary Russians hard; on the other, sanctions is a way of weakening Russia’s military capability.
I think that sanctions should, above all, be focused on the military industrial complex. But sanctions on other parts of the economy is also not a simple question. If propaganda can link people’s deteriorating living standards to sanctions, and not to the war, to bad policies, and to the capitalists’ greed, then dissatisfaction can to some extent be used [by the state] to strengthen anti-western prejudices.
Moreover, sanctions that “disentangle” the Russian and western economies from each other could increase the danger of a large-scale war. And this problem could get even more serious if there are restrictions on travel by Russian citizens to EU countries, further complications in receiving visas, and so on. Instead of undermining xenophobia, this could drive Russians further into isolation.
“Slow” sanctions, to which the Putin regime is successfully adapting, are of little use. I think that the EU is preparing for a situation in which it is necessary to wage war with Russia, rather than increasing aid to Ukraine to a level sufficient to end this war.
The problem is that neither the USA nor the EU wants a Ukrainian victory. They want to preserve the Russian Federation. Being afraid of a serious confrontation with Russia and of Russia drawing closer to China, Ukraine’s western allies are actually bringing such prospects closer, with their half-measures.
What is the state of the anti-war movement in Russia?
It is in an illegal, or semi-underground, state. On one hand, the majority of people who pay at least some attention to politics are against the war. On the other, the left has been rendered impotent. It has been crushed. It can not organise anything substantial. But there remain hopes in the emergence of new generations of activists, who are able to work even in these conditions.
The liberals are relying on the prospect of a high-level coup in which those elites that want to make peace with the west stop the “special military operation”. If you compare that prospect to the continuation of the war and of Putin’s rule, that would be some sort of improvement from a left-wing point of view too.
But the only serious chance of the left movement developing is to find a way to connect with the mass of people who are dissatisfied and disillusioned as a result of the impoverishment, the deaths and injuries and the shame of a lost war.
Are activists in Russia ready for a complete shutdown of the internet? How could activists in emigration help?
We are not ready. Convince [Pavel] Durov [the owner of Telegram] to enable messaging via Telegram with bluetooth and wi-fi direct? Use Starlink in some way that it is not blocked for activists?
If you consider the possibility of a complete shutdown, then support could mean: we need good VPNs, and good agitators on social media who are not at risk of prosecution; we need spaces in which activists inside Russia can safely speak out; and we need spaces for the publication of material that is illegal in Russia.
Maybe a Youtube channel could be set up. Money is needed too, because it is difficult to combine active political work with earning money full time. In my opinion, providing these conditions for activists in Russia is the duty of émigrés, who of course live in relative safety.
What else should Russian-speaking activists in Germany do?
Collect donations and send them to those in struggle, and to support political prisoners. Undertake a consistent battle against the centrists and pro-Putin elements. Explain to German people that, today, the solidarity of working people means supporting the resistance by Ukrainians, and supporting Russia’s left-wing anti-war opposition. And inform people of the real state of affairs in Russia.
Open Letter from Russian Socialists to the Anti-War Left Emigration Forum
Leftists for Peace without Annexations, October 31, 2024.
Preamble
Russia has been in a state of large-scale war with Ukraine for more than two and a half years (more than 10 years since the start of the undeclared war).
This brings incalculable suffering, first of all, to Ukrainians. Their cities are being destroyed, industry and infrastructure facilities are being destroyed, millions have become refugees, tens of thousands of civilians and soldiers who defend the country are dying.
The Russians themselves are also suffering, whom the Putin regime sends by force and bribery to seize and die in the territory of a neighbouring country. They are faced with a decline in their standard of living and the elimination of almost all political freedoms, who have been saddled with the shame of an unjust war against a kindred people.
In this situation, the "Forum of the Anti-War Left Emigration" is planned for November 2-3 in Cologne. Unfortunately, its preparation is not entirely democratic, and among its organizers there are Russians who intentionally or unintentionally play along with Russian imperialism.
It is also obvious to us that many European leftists, accustomed for years to being against NATO and the US, in the current situation, which does not fit into the old patterns, have consciously or unconsciously become allies of Putin's dictatorship. They need to hear the voice of Russians who are unconditionally against "their" imperialism.
However, this voice must be heard, first of all, by the Russians themselves. For too long, in the name of leftist unity, serious contradictions were hidden between those who spoke from formally anti-war positions and those who sincerely wished for the defeat of the imperialist aggressor.
In addition, this open letter will form the basis for a draft resolution at the "Forum of Anti-War Left Emigration".
The nature of the war
The war on the part of the Russian Federation is imperialistic and was started based on the interests of capital, imperialistic logic and the opportunistic political interests of its ruler, the usurper Putin. Russia bears responsibility for inciting and continuing the war.
The Kremlin's military aggression began back in 2014. At that time, the Russian Federation lost to the European Union in the imperialist struggle for Ukraine (the Ukrainians themselves were more pro-European). Hopes for the subjugation of Ukraine collapsed when the Ukrainian people, during the Maidan, overthrew Yanukovych, who had finally turned to the Russian Federation (by that time, his dictatorial tendencies had clearly manifested themselves). Such an example from a kindred people was terrible for the Putin regime.
The Euro-Association instead of joining the Customs Union became inevitable. In addition, Ukraine independent from the Kremlin does not fit at all into the imperial and revanchist sentiments of the ruling class and parts of the Russian population.
Then the Russian government decided to try to keep Ukraine in its zone of influence by military means (to remove concerns about the operation of the naval base in Crimea), to prove that revolutions do not lead to anything good. The Russian Federation annexed Crimea, ignited a war in Donbass, using a limited contingent of the Russian Armed Forces, imperialist-minded volunteers, and internal contradictions in Ukraine.
The West, since 2014, has pursued a policy of appeasement of Putin, played the "Normandy Four" and the "Minsk Agreements".
The Putin clique, seeing the dead end of the "Minsk Agreements", the expulsion of its capital from Ukraine, the connivance of the West and hoping for an easy victory, began a full-scale aggression on 24 February 2022.
The adventurous nature of this step is a consequence of inevitable degeneration, loss of adequacy and full feedback with the world, as well as the political system of the Russian Federation, built on an irreplaceable dictatorship and personalism.
Our decision and actions
- Russia started the war and its end depends on it, by withdrawing troops from the territory of Ukraine.
- Therefore, the Russian left should concentrate on bringing this condition closer - the real struggle of Russians for peace can consist, first of all, in the struggle for the withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine, for Russia's exit from the war.
- It is unacceptable to demand from the Ukrainian people a truce, capitulation or concessions of any parts of Ukraine, even (and especially) under the cover of slogans of a speedy peace.
- We unconditionally recognize the right of the Ukrainian people to defend themselves from Russian imperialism. Only the Ukrainian people have the right to decide how long and how to continue the struggle.
- The left should not sabotage aid to Ukraine (including weapons). It must criticize the US and EU for insufficient support, readiness to surrender Ukraine for the sake of profit, secret diplomacy behind Ukraine's back.
- The left and workers of the West must expand workers' and public control over aid supplies to Ukraine in order to increase their effectiveness, as well as to prevent capital from enriching itself on supplies.
- The left must demand the writing off of all debts to Ukraine and compensation for damages from the Russian Federation, primarily at the expense of capital involved in unleashing the war.
- Fight for the dismantling of Putin's dictatorial state-monopoly regime.
- Work with all categories of Russian citizens to bring them closer to anti-war, leftist organizations, to explain the reasons for the war and ways out of it.
Criticism of the centrists
Knowing about the idea, widespread in some circles, to force Ukraine to recognize the annexations through an immediate ceasefire and new “referendums” in the occupied regions, we declare:
- The Ukrainian people implemented their self-determination in 1991. All regions, including the Donetsk and Lugansk regions and Crimea, voted for independence and the creation of an independent Ukrainian state.
- It is unacceptable to demand a ceasefire from Ukraine. The demand for an immediate ceasefire without preconditions, directed from Russian politicians to Ukraine (when Russian troops are on Ukrainian territory), looks like imperial impudence and is an attempt to consolidate the annexations.
- The Ukrainian state renounced nuclear weapons, counting on guarantees of sovereignty and territorial integrity. Consequently, in the current situation, it has the right to restore its nuclear status.
- The principle of the right of nations to self-determination cannot be used to legitimize Russian annexations, since the occupied zones are part of the Ukrainian nation (in the overwhelming majority of cases, the Ukrainian population predominates and/or they are integrated into the Ukrainian economy and Ukrainian culture). In addition, since the very question of self-determination of individual parts of Ukraine arose as a consequence of the use of camouflaged and overt military force, it should be perceived as a continuation of aggression against Ukraine.
- Russian anti-war forces cannot and should not welcome Russia's withdrawal from the war while it continues to keep parts of the internationally recognized territories of Ukraine annexed.
We also ask why Russian politicians who raise the issue of self-determination for regions of Ukraine (mostly populated by Ukrainians) do not raise the issue of the right of nations to self-determination in relation to regions of Russia that are mostly populated by non-Russians, but by other peoples?
Humanitarian aspect
Since the Russian regime, having seized the Ukrainian regions, forced collaboration on a large part of the population, forcibly drove men to war, we, as Russians, also consider ourselves partly responsible for the fate of these people. Therefore, we ask the Ukrainian people for leniency and the implementation of the principle of broad amnesty (with the exception of the leadership of the so-called "people's republics", malicious collaborators, participants and organizers of war crimes, etc.).
Prospects
If the Russian regime manages to somehow retain the seized regions, this will mean, on the one hand, suffering and national oppression in relation to the Ukrainian population, and, on the other hand, the Russians themselves will find themselves in a position of triumph of imperialism (the regime will pass off these acquisitions as a great victory) and an even greater strengthening of the regime. Here it is absolutely appropriate to recall the famous phrase: "A nation that enslaves another nation forges its own chains." This scenario would also create a threat of new wars in the post-Soviet space initiated by the Russian Federation and would strengthen the right-wing forces in Europe.
And, conversely, the liberation of the occupied territories by Ukraine, the defeat of the Putin government and Russia's withdrawal from the war would allow millions of Ukrainians to return to their homes, begin to restore what was destroyed, and would give a chance for the weakening or fall of the current Russian regime.
Another positive development scenario is also possible: The Russian people, tired of war and injustice, dismantle the Putin regime, and establish a revolutionary democratic power of the working classes, and withdraw Russia from the war with Ukraine.
This would also make the space of the former Soviet Union more secure, deprive the right-wing forces in Europe of support from Russia and make it possible to restore solidarity between Ukrainian and Russian ordinary wage workers.
In order for this scenario to become possible, we must wake up Russia. Now it is captured by the dictatorial regime of Putin, who on behalf of Russia, on behalf of you and me, commits his crimes both outside and inside the country. But tens of millions of ordinary employees, workers, entrepreneurs, youth, and intellectuals do not want this madness to continue! For now, they are inactive. For now, Russia of employees and workers is dormant. But it will wake up, it is already waking up. And our task is to wake it up!
Who is the letter from?
For security reasons, with the exception of some emigrants, we are forced to use pseudonyms. But you can judge the support and significance of this open letter by the resources and pages on which it is posted.
Pavel Kudyukin (socialist and trade unionist)
Ilya Budraitskis
Nikolay Petrov (Leninist)
Elmar Rustamov (Russian communist, political emigrant in France since 2022)
Igor Filippov (LevSD)
Dmitry K. (socialist and former trade unionist)
Dmitry Kovalev (RCIT supporter, trade unionist)
Heinrich Deymann (socialist and labor activist from Russia)
Irina Belova (journalist)
Alexander Zhelenin (journalist, socialist)
RCIT-Russia (Revolutionary Communist International Tendency)
Sergei Kasochnik (worker)
V. Bukvoyedov (trade unionist, social democrat)
Georgy Losev (anti-authoritarian Marxist)
Guzel Yunusova (student, anarchist)
Gigi Bitsadze (service sector)
Yaroslav Smolin (worker, welder, leftist, TGC "YaroslavAvstriya")
Korsanna (political activist)
Shnur (student, Leninist)
August Sternberg
Vladimir Plotnikov (psychoanalyst)
Artem Langenburg (LevSD)
Valentin (worker with Marxist views)
Georgy Shelike (pensioner, Marxist)
Elijah Sundress (history student, social democratic views)
Vladimir Kardail (journalist, social democrat)
Mark Romanov (psychoanalyst, tattoo artist)
Boris Gunko (Russian Maoist)
Kit Golovich (revolutionary Maoist)
Antiwar Block Catalonia
Evgeny T. (student, communist)
Azamat Ismailov
Ivan Rukodeltsev (Trotskyist)
Yuri Fedorov (social democrat)
Kuprum Yarmozhenny (Russian Maoist)
Rakhil Fayanson (Trotskyist, researcher)
Yogor (software developer, Marxist-Leninist)
Igor Bronshteyn (programmer, socialist)
Felix Levin
- 1
Note by Simon Pirani (SP): In the Marxist tradition, “revolutionary defeatism” signifies those socialists who during war hope for the defeat of their own nation’s ruling class, and the emergence from war of opportunities to overthrow it. The term started to be widely used during the first world war. The Russian Bolsheviks and German Spartacists were the most prominent representatives of this trend, along with e.g. John Maclean in Scotland and James Connolly in Ireland.
- 2
Note by SP: The CPRF deputies put this proposal in the Duma on 19 January 2022, and it was approved on 15 February. On 21 February, Putin announced Russian recognition of the “republics”; this was regarded as a key step towards the all-out invasion three days later. In September 2022 Russia declared that it had annexed Donetsk and Luhansk, along with two other Ukrainian regions – Zaporizhye and Kherson. Russia had annexed Crimea in 2014.
- 3
Note by Russian-Speaking Leftists (RL): “Centrist” here signifies left-wingers, taking a mid-way position between revolutionaries and opportunists.
- 4
Note by SP: The Russian Socialist Movement was one of the largest socialist organisations outside the group of “official” Communist parties. Many of its active members left Russia in 2022, and continued to denounce the war. Declaring an organisation a “foreign agent” is a standard repressive tactic by the Russian regime against its opponents, and strips them of many legal rights.
- 5
Note by RL: Thaw of political life, on the basis of increasing economic problems, the lack of progress at the front and the authorities’ crude interference with the internet.
- 6
Note by RL: The active supporters of the war.
- 7
Note by RL: A well-known enemy of the opposition, who recently sharply criticised Putin.
- 8
Note by RL: Leaders of the so-called “Russian spring” of 2014 in the Donbass, who are now blaming the Kremlin for its failure to win the war.
Note by SP: The “Russian spring” was the separatist uprising, supported by Russia, in Donetsk and Luhansk in March-April 2014. Gubarev was a leader of an extreme right-wing separatist Ukrainian militia and held political office in Donetsk; Girkin led a right-wing Russian nationalist militia that crossed the border to support the uprising.
- 9
Note by RL: A state agency that conducts opinion polls.
- 10
Note by SP: May 9 is “Victory day” in Russia, on which the Soviet defeat of Germany in the second world war is marked with a holiday and military parades. This year’s parade in Moscow was smaller than usual, and held without the usual tanks and armoured vehicles
Sunday 14 June 2026, by Collective
The Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Ukraine (KVPU) has announced the creation of a new organisation: the All-Ukrainian Union of Combatants, Military Personnel and Veterans. [1]
The trade union confederation states that “this is a historic event for the independent Ukrainian trade union movement and the veterans’ movement, as it opens up new prospects for the systematic protection of the rights of military personnel, veterans, combatants and their families.”
According to the union, “in the current context of large-scale war and a difficult post-war period, the social protection of Ukraine’s defenders is of strategic importance. The unification of independent trade union structures and veterans’ organisations constitutes an essential step towards establishing a strong civil platform capable of effectively defending the rights of those who have fought in defence of Ukraine.”
During a meeting, discussions focused on the development of joint programmes to support veterans and the families of Ukraine’s fallen defenders, as well as on the legal and social protection of military personnel.
The President of the KVPU, Mykhailo Volynets, emphasised that the accession of the All-Ukrainian Union of Combatants, Military Personnel and Veterans demonstrates the strengthening of Ukrainian society’s solidarity with the military and veterans. He also stressed that modern veterans’ movements and trade unions must be independent, strong and capable of genuinely influencing state policies on social protection and respect for workers’ rights. Veterans and military personnel must not only enjoy society’s respect, but also have effective mechanisms to influence state policy and defend their civil rights.
The creation of this trade union for serving and former military personnel is of considerable importance, particularly because it has emerged from the ranks of the labour movement. Once again, from the ranks of the Ukrainian army, the banner of democracy within the armed forces is being raised, inseparable from the struggle against Russian fascism.
8 June 2026
Footnotes
[1] Photo: Ukrainian soldiers with captured Russian tank.
No comments:
Post a Comment