Showing posts sorted by date for query MODI. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query MODI. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Friday, April 17, 2026

 

India: The forthcoming Assembly elections — Challenges before defenders of democracy (plus Defeat the conspiracy to steal the voting right of the people)


First published at Liberation.

On 15 March, Election Commission announced the election schedule for Assam, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry and West Bengal Assemblies. Assam, Kerala and Puducherry will vote on 9 April, Tamil Nadu on 23 April and West Bengal will vote in two phases, on 23 and 29 April. The counting will happen on 4 May which means the people of Kerala, Puducherry and Assam will have to wait for nearly a month for their votes to be counted! Those who still support EVMs for polling for the belief that EVM-based polling facilitates faster counting of votes and declaration of results should take note of this time gap between voting and counting.

Like the Bihar elections in November 2024, the current round of Assembly elections is also being preceded by the exclusionary campaign of Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls. In every state SIR is resulting in large scale exclusion of voters and shrinking of the electoral roll. The reduction has been the lowest in Kerala, but even here the electoral roll has been reduced by close to one million or 3 percent. By contrast, Tamil Nadu witnessed a massive 12 percent shrinking with the elimination of 74 lakh names bringing the electoral roll down from 6.2 crore to 5.5 crore. West Bengal has already witnessed deletion of more than six million voters, but the future of another six million voters is still 'under adjudication'.

Indeed, the opaque and arbitrary nature of the SIR process can be best understood in West Bengal. When the first draft roll was published after voters were linked back to the 2002 base electoral roll, 5.8 million names were excluded on grounds of death, permanent migration or duplicate entries. But what began after that initial phase was mass harassment and targeted exclusion of voters. In Muslim-dominated constituencies of Malda and Murshidabad, where only 2 percent voters were deleted in the first draft, the cases of half of the electorate now await adjudication for a second round of potential exclusion. And what is even more galling is that poll dates have been announced keeping these six million voters on hold as though their voting right does not matter, their votes do not count in the much touted 'festival of democracy'. Voters who have survived the SIR purge must use their vote to punish the Modi government for this SIR assault on India's electoral democracy. 

Of these four poll-bound states, the BJP is currently in power only in Assam. The Assam Chief Minister has emerged as one of the BJP's most toxic peddlers of hate, who now openly incites violence against Bengali-speaking Muslims in Assam. Under his government Assam has also turned into a grazing land for unregulated corporate plunder. In West Bengal the BJP is pulling out all the stops to grab power. Just before the announcement of elections, the Modi government transferred the controversial Tamil Nadu Governor N Ravi, who was condemned by the Supreme Court for his unconstitutional acts, to West Bengal. And immediately after the announcement, the EC has initiated a process of complete administrative takeover in the poll-bound state. Even in Tamil Nadu and Kerala where there is no prospect of a BJP victory in the foreseeable future, the aggression of the Modi government and the Sangh brigade is intensifying by the day.

For defenders of democracy and the Constitution, the Assembly elections must therefore be taken up as an anti-fascist platform of political mobilisation. From April 1, the government is going to enforce the new labour codes of slavery. There are already signs of growing workers' unrest against attempts to lengthen the work day. The agenda of the 12 February general strike should be taken up as the common election agenda. The disastrous implications of the escalating US-Israel war on Iran are already being felt quite sharply in India. The surrender of the Modi government to the US-Israel axis is not just a blot on India's foreign policy, it is a direct blow to the interests of India and our common people — farmers who will be hit hard by the trade deal with the US, expatriate workers who are trapped in West Asia and every ordinary Indian who feels the heat of the fuel crisis and soaring prices. The elections must also be treated as an anti-war campaign platform.

All the poll-bound states have been vibrant centres of Left movement in India. Beyond the immediate electoral context and outcome, we must work hard for strengthening the fighting capacity of the communist movement in all these states. There is no uniform alliance pattern in these states, but revolutionary communists must intervene in these elections to strengthen the people's movement and weaken the fascist grip over India. To this end, for the first time CPI(ML) will have a statewide electoral understanding with the CPI(M) and Left Front in West Bengal. In Assam the party will have partial understanding with the Congress, and in Tamil Nadu, Puducherry and Kerala the party will field a few candidates in select constituencies while extending general support to the DMK-led coalition in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry and the LDF in Kerala.


Defeat the conspiracy to steal the voting right of the people

First published at ML Update.

With nominations for the two-phase West Bengal Assembly elections drawing to a close, the electoral roll has been declared 'frozen' for these elections. And with this, electoral democracy, as we have known it since the first elections held in 1952, has also been shelved in the deep freeze. 

Several states have now undergone the traumatic experience of what the Election Commission of India calls SIR or Special Intensive Revision of the electoral roll. In the name of a grand fool proof updating of the electoral roll involving removing names of deceased voters, voters with multiple entries or voters who have permanently shifted from their original place of enrolment, millions of voters have been deleted from the electoral roll in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and West Bengal. By the time SIR covers the whole of India, the world would have witnessed the biggest ever electoral purge. 

While the scale of deletion of voters is huge in all states, what is happening in West Bengal is truly shocking with the voting right of millions of voters being suspended for no fault of their own. The initial scale of deletion in West Bengal was comparable to what we had witnessed in Bihar — 5.8 million voters out of a pre-SIR electorate of 76 million. But what started next turned out to be an unprecedented saga of mass harassment and targeted exclusion. 

In West Bengal, the ECI applied an extra set of filters to detect what it called cases of 'logical discrepancy'. Using untested software and AI tools, the EC claimed to detect some 15 million such cases, eventually narrowing it down to nearly 10 million. These voters were all asked to attend hearings and submit additional documents. Another half a million deletions followed and six million were referred to adjudication. The task of electoral roll finalisation quietly became a judicial business. 

The adjudication of these six million voters has produced an excessive rate of exclusion: nearly forty five percent. The scale apart, what is more scandalous about this process of adjudication and resultant deletion is the hugely disproportionate exclusion of Muslims. In some constituencies of Muslim-dominated districts like Murshidabad and Malda, the initial exclusion rate of 2-5 percent jumped ten to twentyfold to reach the 40-50 percent mark. 

The pattern has been glaring even in districts with average levels of Muslim population. Let us consider, for example, the Nandigram constituency where Mamata Banerjee suffered a shock defeat in 2021 to the outgoing leader of the opposition in the West Bengal Assembly Suvendu Adhikari. Nandigram has some 25 percent Muslim population. In the first SIR list published in end December, 10,604 names were deleted of which Muslims accounted for 33.3 percent, one out of every three. But now in the supplementary list covering additional deletion of 2,826 voters, Muslims number 2,700 or a stunning 95.5 percent of further excluded voters! AltNews has found similar patterns in its intensive study of two constituencies in Kolkata — Mamata Banerjee's current seat Bhabanipur and Ballygunge. 

When the issue of adjudication came up before the Supreme Court, the judges stressed the availability of another redressal forum and option for correction - the tribunal. We were told that nineteen tribunals would be set up to consider the appeals of voters deleted through the adjudication process. It sounded fine except that the tribunals existed only on paper. But with tribunals yet to really get going, how can 27 lakh excluded voters who are very much alive and documented get any justice before the elections? The court now offers the consolation that if the appeals are upheld, excluded voters could always vote in future elections! Justice delayed is justice denied. If the voting right of a citizen is suspended because of the procedural complexities of the joint operation of the Election Commission and the judiciary, it is nothing but an effective disenfranchisement of an eligible elector. And when millions of voters are excluded, the entire election becomes unfair and vitiated. Adjudication and verification can be deferred, but there can be no postponing or dilution of the principle of universal adult suffrage. 

When the SIR was launched, the credo was 'no eligible voter shall be left out'. Now with twenty seven lakh voters who had voted in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections being denied their rights, the eligibility principle has been turned on its head. The vote is no longer a fundamental right for citizens in West Bengal, it is a matter of privilege and luck. An election held by denying the voting right of millions of voters is evidently a farce, an unprecedented farce right at the most fundamental level of finalisation of electoral roll.

How do we fight against this farce? Many are arguing that participation in such a farcical election amounts to legitimising this unconstitutional exercise. But can a token boycott provide an effective political answer? Or will it leave the field open for the power-grabbers? From demonetisation and electoral bonds (since declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court) to CAA and SIR — most steps of the Modi government have been illogical and blatantly discriminatory. When citizens are forced to engage with processes shaped and distorted by these measures, they do not legitimise the wrongs, nor do they give up the struggle against these acts of injustice. More than any other state, the SIR process has become a major issue in West Bengal. That the BJP has launched such a massive onslaught on the fundamentals of the electoral system to grab power in West Bengal is now a glaring fact and the election campaign must be directed squarely against this SIR onslaught. Those who seek to purge the electors to grab power must be given a fitting rebuff.

Thursday, April 16, 2026

India walked away from its bid to host COP33 — here's why

Murali Krishnan in New Delhi
DW April 14, 2026

India has quietly abandoned its bid to host the UN's top-tier climate conference COP33, marking a shift from PM Narendra Modi's pledge in 2023. Experts and analysts explore what's behind the decision.

India has walked back on the pledge Modi made at COP28 in Dubai 

[FILE: December 2023]Image: Mahmoud Khaled/Reuters


When Prime Minister Narendra Modi took the stage at the Dubai climate summit in December 2023, he pledged that India would host the climate conference. It was a moment of ambition, a signal that India was ready to lead, particularly as a self-declared voice of the Global South.

The bid to be host from the UN's Asia-Pacific Group was supported by the BRICS group of Brazil, China, India and South Africa in July 2025.

But just 18 months later, India quietly withdrew in a four-paragraph letter dated April 2, according to Climate Home News, which first broke the story.

The annual Conference of the Parties or COP is the United Nations climate summit where 198 parties — 197 countries plus the European Union — gather to measure progress and negotiate responses to climate change. Hosting the conference confers status, agenda-setting power, diplomatic visibility and a platform to shape the global conversation.

A weakened climate consensus

Experts and policy analysts say that India's withdrawal reflects a shift in global priorities, with COP wielding less status than previously amid global instability and the pull of priorities at home. In recent years, the global climate consensus has weakened. The Paris Agreement, the 2015 global pact under which countries set voluntary national targets to limit global warming, has been under increasing strain, particularly with the Trump administration withdrawing the US from the agreement for the second time.

Ten years on: Has the Paris climate deal delivered?  02:44

"One of the key reasons for India's withdrawal appears to be the steadily declining relevance of COP in driving meaningful global climate action," said Chandra Bhushan, head of the Delhi-based International Forum for Environment, Sustainability and Technology.

"The complete erosion of trust among countries at the Belem summit in Brazil, where several nations reneged on previously agreed commitments, seems to have been the tipping point," added Bhushan.

There was low attendance and little high-level political engagement at the summit, including the US, which notably sent no high-level attendees.

Bhushan points out that India has demonstrated its willingness to engage in climate multilateralism: it recently updated its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) for the years 2031-35 — the name for countries' climate action plans under the Paris Agreement: India has pledged to cut the emissions intensity of its economy by 47% from 2005 levels by 2035, ensure that 60% of its installed power capacity comes from non-fossil fuel sources, and create an additional carbon sink of 3.5 to 4 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide through increased forest and tree cover.

But there is now a growing consensus within the country that domestic climate action will be central to achieving sustainable development. "This approach is likely to continue until more favourable conditions emerge for genuine and effective multilateral cooperation,” Bhushan explained.

In this environment, hosting a summit carries diminishing returns. While the symbolic value remains, the ability to extract meaningful outcomes or even global attention has become less certain.

India is still committing to renewables energies at home [FILE: October 2024]Image: Rajesh Kumar Singh/AP Photo/File/picture alliance


Carrying the financial burden

Abinash Mohanty, global sector head of climate change and sustainability of IPE Global, an international development organisation, views India's withdrawal as pragmatic.

"First, the global system is falling short. Developed countries promised $100 billion (€ 91.4 billion) per year by 2020 in climate finance, but have repeatedly under-delivered. Even newer pledges, like $300 billion (€273 billion) annually by 2035, cover only a fraction of what developing countries need. At the same time, the US has weakened trust by exiting the Paris Agreement twice,” Mohanty told DW.

For countries like India, which have consistently emphasised equity and climate finance, the imbalance becomes harder to ignore, according to Mohanty.

In Mohanty's estimate, India has delivered at home by crossing 50% non-fossil installed capacity, reaching 200GW of installed renewable energy capacity and cutting emissions intensity by over a third since 2005, largely using its own resources rather than external funding.

"Hosting COP33 would come at a cost. It would mean spending significant money and political capital to support a global process that, from India's perspective, has not delivered fairly for the Global South," argues Mohanty.

"Instead, India is shifting strategy, focusing on platforms it can shape more directly, like the International Solar Alliance and similar coalitions," he added.



Avoiding scrutiny

Hosting COP33 would have placed India at the centre of the next global stocktake cycle. This is the mechanism under the Paris framework that assesses collective progress on emissions reductions and climate goals.

For India, this would mean intensified scrutiny of its coal dependence, emissions trajectory, and timelines for transition. While India has made significant strides in implementing renewable energy, it is still the world's second-largest consumer and producer of coal.

Jayanta Basu, a Kolkata-based environment and climate correspondent, told DW, "As host, India would have faced pressure to show stronger climate action on future targets, timelines for cutting emissions, and its reliance on coal — especially with a global review of progress coming up under the Paris Agreement," he said.

Basu suggests that India's government is recalibrating its priorities ahead of the 2029 general elections. "With multiple demands on the system, the government may have chosen to focus on domestic priorities and other big events instead," Basu said.

Additionally, hosting the conference could amplify pressure from countries and climate advocates alike, potentially constraining policy flexibility at home, which could be bad timing ahead of the elections. "The heightened scrutiny will be not just of India's domestic energy choices but also of India's engagement with dissenting and activist voices, non-state actors, and civil society,” said Lavanya Rajamani, Professor of International Environmental Law at the University of Oxford.
Despite significant strides, India is still the world's 2nd largest producer and consumer of coal [FILE: November 2025]Image: Avijit Ghosh/REUTERS

A missed opportunity?


"I would characterize the global climate consensus as 'biding its time' rather than weakening," Rajamani told DW.

"India's withdrawal is more likely driven by domestic factors, but it comes at a time when international attention is sufficiently diverted that the decision will have fewer political and reputational consequences," said Rajamani. "It is, however, a missed opportunity for India to assume a leadership role in this space," she added.

For now, India appears to be choosing its performances on the world stage more carefully.

Edited by: Kate Martyr

Murali Krishnan Journalist based in New Delhi, focusing on Indian politics, society and business

Sunday, April 12, 2026

World Nuclear News


Three US states pave way for new nuclear



Legislation lifting a long-standing nuclear moratorium has been signed in New Jersey; legislation to incentivise nuclear construction has been signed in Kentucky; and in Texas, applications have opened for USD350 million of funding appropriated by the state to boost advanced nuclear construction.
 

Governor Mikie Sherrill signs the New Jersey legislation at the Salem nuclear power plant (Image: Office of Governor/Tim Larsen)

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill signed the legislation to remove the permitting hurdle that has created a de facto moratorium and announced the launch of the state's new Nuclear Task Force after a tour of PSEG's Salem nuclear power plant.

"For costs to come down, we need more energy supply. New Jersey is well-positioned to be a leader in next-generation nuclear energy to help bring that supply, and we are open for business," Sherrill said. "By lifting outdated barriers and bringing together leaders across government, industry, and labour, we're setting the stage for our state to pursue new advanced nuclear power. This will help New Jersey secure a stronger, cleaner, more affordable, and reliable energy future - while keeping the state at the forefront of innovation, job creation, and economic growth."

A nuclear moratorium is a state-imposed ban or restriction on building new nuclear capacity, but how this looks varies from state to state: for example, a state might set conditions related to legislative approvals, voter consent, or waste disposal requirements before construction can begin. According to the US Nuclear Energy Institute, eight US states - California, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont - have long-standing nuclear moratoriums. Connecticut has partially lifted its moratorium, and while New York conditionally lifted its moratorium many years ago a specific moratorium remains in parts of Long Island.

New Jersey's Coastal Area Facility Review Act blocks new permits for the construction and operation of new nuclear energy facilities by requiring an approved method by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for radioactive waste disposal, which New Jersey says is an outdated standard that cannot be met. The new legislation - S3870/A4528 - resolves the issue by allowing the commissioner of New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection to approve permits that are "based on safe, NRC-compliant waste storage", removing the de facto moratorium and clearing the path for new nuclear energy development.

The newly formed Nuclear Task Force, co-chaired by Elizabeth Noll, Senior Strategist for Energy at the Office of the Governor, and Christine Guhl-Sadovy, President of the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, will be organised across five focus areas - Financing, Supply Chains and Technology Development, Workforce Growth and Training, Regulatory and Permitting Framework, and Public Trust and Confidence - with the goal of ensuring that New Jersey is "ready to capture the benefits of new nuclear power, while maintaining the highest standards of public safety and transparency."

Two nuclear power plants - the two-unit Salem and the single-unit Hope Creek, all owned by PSEG - currently provide around 42% of New Jersey's electricity.

Kentucky incentives

Legislation signed by Governor Andy Beshear on 8 April establishes the Kentucky Nuclear Energy Development Authority and, under it, the Nuclear Reactor Site Readiness Pilot Program "to facilitate the application for and procurement of early site permits, construction permits, or combined operating licences from the NRC for the siting of new nuclear energy generating facilities".

Beshear said Senate Bill 57 would potentially lead to lower utility rates for Kentuckians over the long term. "Every step makes a difference when it comes to helping our people save their hard-earned dollars," he said.

Kentucky does not currently have any nuclear generation capacity.

Texas funding

Texas has issued a request for applications for USD350 million of funding appropriated to the Texas Advanced Nuclear Development Fund (TANDF). Applications are being accepted for the TANDF's Advanced Nuclear Construction Reimbursement Program and Project Design and Supply Chain Reimbursement Program.

The fund is under the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office (TANEO), which was established by the Texas legislature to provide strategic leadership for the advanced nuclear industry and associated supply chain industries in Texas and to promote the development of advanced nuclear reactors in the state, amongst other things.

Eligible applicants must be businesses, nonprofit organisations, and governmental entities, including institutions of higher education "that have - or reasonably expect to have - a docketed construction permit or licence application for the project at the NRC on or before 1 December 2026". Applications are due by mid-May.

Production begins at US uranium project


Uranium Energy Corp's Burke Hollow in Texas is the first new in-situ recovery operation to start up in the USA in over a decade.
 
Burke Hollow (Image: CNW Group/Uranium Energy Corp)

In-situ recovery - or ISR - is a method of mining uranium by dissolving and recovering it via wells. It is also known as in-situ leaching. Ground water fortified with a complexing agent, and often with an oxidant (such as gaseous oxygen), is introduced into the orebody to dissolve the uranium from the sandstone host. The uranium-bearing before being recovered and processed into yellowcake.

Uranium Energy Corp (UEC) has two ISR hub and spoke platforms in South Texas and Wyoming, with a central processing plant as the "hub" with several ISR uranium projects providing "spokes". Production from Burke Hollow will be processed at the company's Hobson Central Processing Plant, which is licensed to produce up to 4 million pounds of uranium per year.

"The startup of Burke Hollow is a significant achievement for UEC, advancing the project from a grassroots discovery in 2012 to production in 2026," UEC President and CEO Amir Adnani said. "With two ISR operations now producing, and our Ludeman ISR project planned for startup in 2027, we are building a scalable, multi-faceted platform supported by the largest uranium resource base in the United States."

According to UEC, Burke Hollow is the largest ISR uranium discovery in the USA in the past decade, with significant long-term development potential: only about half of the property, which covers some 20,000 acres (over 8,000 hectares) has been explored to date. The estimated mineral resource for the project is currently 6,155,000 pounds U3O8 (2,368 tU) in the measured and indicated category, plus 4,883,000 pounds U3O8 of inferred resources.

Production was able to start following the receipt of final approvals from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). Craig Wall, UEC's Vice President, Environmental, Health & Safety, Texas said the commission's approval, coming after more than a decade of exploration, permitting and development, "reflects the strength of our technical and operational execution. We appreciate the collaboration and professionalism of the TCEQ throughout the process and look forward to continuing to work with them as the project advances."

UEC's South Texas team will now focus on ramping operations and constructing additional wellfields across the project.

In addition to the largest uranium resource base in the USA, with 12 million pounds per year of uranium production capacity across its Wyoming and South Texas hub-and-spoke ISR operations, UEC also controls extensive land and resource portfolios in Canada's Athabasca Basin, including the Roughrider Project in Saskatchewan. The company is also pursuing domestic refining and conversion capabilities in the USA through its United States Uranium Refining & Conversion Corp subsidiary.

New Korean reactor cleared for start up


South Korea's Nuclear Safety and Security Commission said it has completed all nine inspections required to be performed prior to the reactor's initial criticality during the pre-operation inspection of Saeul unit 3.
 
Saeul 3 (Image: KHNP)

In January 2014, the government authorised construction of two APR1400 units as Saeul units 3 and 4 (formerly known as Shin Kori 5 and 6). Construction was originally scheduled to start in September 2014, but was then delayed. The regulator issued a construction licence in June 2016, and site works began immediately. Construction of unit 3 commenced in April 2017. However, following the change in government in June 2017, Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP) decided to suspend work for three months. In October 2017, a government-organised committee voted 59.5% in favour of resuming construction of the two units. The committee stated that stability of power supply had been cited as a primary reason for the choice in survey responses. In September 2018, construction of unit 4 commenced.

Prior to the delay, commercial operation of the units was due in March 2021 and March 2022, respectively. In late December 2025 the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) issued an operating licence for Saeul 3, with fuel loading and approximately eight months of testing to follow. Commercial operation is expected around August 2026. Saeul 4 is expected to follow in late 2026.

"Since the operating licence was issued last year, the NSSC has been conducting pre-operational inspections (5 stages) on Saeul unit 3," the regulator said. "During this process, inspections were conducted on items that must be performed before criticality, such as nuclear fuel loading inspections and high-temperature functional tests. As a result, it was confirmed that reactor criticality can be safely achieved."

The NSSC said it plans to finally confirm the safety of the unit by conducting follow-up inspections, including power increase tests, from the time Saeul 3 achieves first criticality - a sustained chain reaction - until it enters commercial operation.

Once commercially operational, Saeul 3 will account for about 1.7% of South Korea's total power generation and 37% of Ulsan's electricity demand.

South Korea has four operational APR1400 units - Saeul units 1 and 2 (formerly Shin Kori 3 and 4) and Shin Hanul units 1 and 2, plus the APR1400s under construction as Saeul units 3 and 4. Four APR1400 units have also been built at the Barakah nuclear power plant in the UAE, which are all now in commercial operation.

Dismantling of reactor channels to begin at second Ignalina unit


With the dismantling of the reactor channels of unit 1 at Lithuania's Ignalina nuclear power plant complete, the country's nuclear regulator has now issued a permit for dismantling and decontamination works on the upper and lower zone equipment of the reactor channels of unit 2.
 
(Image: Altra)

In accordance with the approved technical design, the steam-water discharge piping at the top of the reactor and the water supply piping at the bottom of the reactor, as well as other related systems and their components, will be dismantled, and initial treatment of radioactive waste will be carried out. The project also includes the dismantling of the fuel channels and the reactor control and safety channels located within the reactor.

Altra - the Lithuanian state-owned company leading the decommissioning of the Ignalina plant - said dismantling work is scheduled to begin at the end of 2026. Until then, the company will carry out preparatory work: installation of engineering systems, testing of remote control equipment, and upgrading and adaption of the radioactive waste management infrastructure to handle the waste generated during this project.

"The dismantling of the reactor channels of the first power unit has been completed, therefore the permit for the second unit paves the way for a consistent continuation of the dismantling process of both reactors," Altra said.


(Image: Altra)

"Nobody in the world has ever dismantled a power plant of this size and radiation contamination," said Altra CEO Linas Baužys. "The transition to the second unit is a significant step forward in implementing the mega-project for decommissioning the Ignalina nuclear power plant. We have dismantled two-thirds of the first reactor with our own forces - the most complex and radiation-hazardous dismantling of the reactor cores remains, for which we will use external contractors. Our experience with the first unit allows us to confidently move on to the dismantling stages of the second unit. We are carrying out some of the work using remote and robotic technologies to ensure the highest safety standards."

The dismantling of unnecessary systems and equipment at the power plant has been carried out since 2010, and the overall dismantling progress has already reached 45.7%, Altra said. It is planned that the final dismantling of the reactors, including the dismantling of the most complex reactor cores, will take place by 2043, and all decommissioning-related work will be completed by 2050, with the final cleaning of the reactor buildings.

This year, Altra also plans to carry out dismantling and decontamination works on the steam drum separators of both power units of the Ignalina plant. There are eight such devices - metal cylinders with a diameter of almost 3 metres and a length of about 30 metres - in both power units of the plant, the total weight of which exceeds 6,000 tonnes. In November 2024, US-based company Amentum was awarded a contract worth an estimated EUR5.5 million (USD6.5 million) to consult for the first-of-a-kind dismantling of steam drum separators at Ignalina units 1 and 2.

Lithuania assumed ownership of the two RBMK-1500 units - light-water, graphite-moderated reactors, similar to those at Chernobyl - in 1991, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. It agreed to shut down the Ignalina plant as a condition of its accession to the European Union, with unit 1 shutting down in December 2004 and unit 2 in December 2009. The reactors are expected to be fully decommissioned by 2038, with most of the cost of the decommissioning being funded by the European Union via the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and other funds.

ČEZ eyeing 80-year operation of Dukovany units


Czech energy group ČEZ announced it has started a preparatory process to enable the long-term operation of the four reactors at its Dukovany nuclear power plant. It is also considering extending the operation of the two reactors at its Temelín plant.
 
Dukovany (Image: CEZ)

ČEZ currently operates four VVER-440 units at Dukovany, which began operating between 1985 and 1987. Their output has gradually been increased from the original 440 MWe to 512 MWe through extensive modernisations. Ongoing modernisation work aims to ensure the units can operate for at least 60 years, to 2045-2047.

A CZK407 billion (USD19.6 billion) contract was signed with Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power last year for two of its APR1000 reactors near the existing Dukovany units. The aim is to start construction in 2029. Two more units at the Temelín plant are also being considered. There are also developing plans for small modular reactors in the country.

"We have planned to operate our nuclear power plants for about 60 years so far and we are convinced every day that they are in excellent condition," said ČEZ CEO Daniel Beneš. "Current economic and safety analyses confirm that it will be possible to operate Dukovany for longer. Eighty-year operation is becoming a trend in the world, and a number of units have already been licensed for 80 years of operation. We see this as realistic for us as well, provided of course that the condition of the equipment and the safety of operation are regularly evaluated. Of course, this will not affect the project to build a new nuclear power plant at Dukovany and other small modular reactors. Electricity consumption will grow rapidly, and the Czech Republic will need as much emission-free electricity as possible."

ČEZ said it regularly evaluates the future operation of its nuclear power plants using a technology and financial model, which assesses the technical condition of key components and the expected development of electricity prices and other inputs. "These analyses also indicate that the long-term operation of the Dukovany nuclear power plant is very well feasible," it said.

"Every year we evaluate the conditions for further operation in great detail, and all key decisions are supervised by the State Office for Nuclear Safety," said Bohdan Zronek, Director of ČEZ's nuclear energy division. "In ten-year cycles, our nuclear power plants undergo detailed and demanding 'periodic safety assessments'. Rigorous preparation and perfect knowledge of the condition of the plant is a prerequisite for any decision."

The company noted that 80 years of operation encompasses extensive capital projects and upgrade programmes. These include, for example, the renewal of some elements of the engine rooms - generators as well as other large units, the reconstruction of selected piping routes, valves and electrical elements as well as the gradual introduction of new control and safety systems.

ČEZ said the extended operation of the Dukovany plant "is a step that significantly strengthens the energy security of the Czech Republic and confirms ČEZ's long-term strategy as a stable and reliable supplier of low-emission electricity, even in times of dynamic changes on the energy market."

The company said analyses are now being carried out on the potential extension of the Temelín plant's operation. Two VVER-1000 units are in operation at Temelín, which came into operation in 2000 and 2002. The capacity of the two units has increased from the original 1,000 MWe per unit to 1,086 MWe.


(Image: Ministry of Industry and Trade)

At a press conference to announce the possible extension of the operation of the Dukovany units, Minister of Industry and Trade Karel Havlíček said: "We must decide on future energy sources at the same time as how long we can safely and effectively operate the existing ones, especially nuclear units. The operation of Dukovany for up to 80 years is not a replacement for new units, but their logical addition within the framework of the Czech energy strategy. The Czech Republic has extraordinary know-how in nuclear energy and we can operate our power plants safely, efficiently and with a high degree of reliability. Therefore, it makes sense to prepare for the long-term operation of Dukovany up to the 80-year mark. At the same time, however, this does not change the need to continue the construction of new nuclear sources and the preparation of small modular reactors, because the Czech Republic will need stable, safe and competitive electricity in the maximum possible volume."

Štěpán Kochánek, Chairman of the State Office for Nuclear Safety, added: "The service life of nuclear power plants in the Czech Republic is not strictly limited to a specific number of years. Simply put, it is governed by the condition of safety-relevant components. Extension of operation is possible only if the operator proves that the facility meets all safety requirements, has managed the aging management of the facility and the technical condition corresponds to current standards, and at the same time has the necessary personnel resources to ensure continued operation. We will always assess every step and every submitted assessment very strictly and in detail."

First criticality for Indian fast breeder reactor

The initiation of a controlled nuclear fission chain reaction at the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor sees India move into the second stage of a three-stage nuclear programme which ultimately aims to achieve a closed fuel cycle using the country's abundant thorium.
 

Celebrating initial criticality at PFBR (Image: BHAVINI)

The 500 MWe Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) at Kalkpakkam in Tamil Nadu attained first criticality on 6 April at 08:25 pm, the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) announced, with the milestone marking "a significant step toward strengthening India's long-term energy security and advancing its indigenous nuclear technology capabilities."

The PFBR technology was designed and developed by the DAE's Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (IGCAR). The reactor was built and commissioned by Bharatiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Ltd (BHAVINI), a government enterprise under the DAE. Construction began in 2004, with an original expected completion date of 2010. India's Atomic Energy Regulatory Board officially granted permission for the First Approach to Criticality - including the loading of fuel into the reactor core and the start of low power physics experiments - in mid-2024. Last August, Minister of State Jitendra Singh told India's parliament that delays in completion of the project had been mainly due to "first-of-a-kind technological issues" during the commissioning process.

The attainment of first criticality "follows the successful completion of all stipulated safety requirements, with clearance granted by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) after rigorous review," BHAVINI said.

"Today, India takes a defining step in its civil nuclear journey, advancing the second stage of its nuclear programme," Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on social media, adding that the PFBR "reflects the depth of our scientific capability and the strength of our engineering enterprise. It is a decisive step towards harnessing our vast thorium reserves in the third stage of the programme. A proud moment for India."

The PFBR uses uranium-plutonium mixed oxide, or MOX, fuel surrounded by a 'blanket' of uranium-238, which, through neutron absorption, is converted into fissile plutonium-239. This enables the reactor to generate more fuel than it consumes - it 'breeds' fuel. The PFBR is also designed to use thorium-232 in the blanket, which can be transmuted into fissile uranium-233.

"This unique capability significantly enhances the utilisation of nuclear fuel resources and enables the country to extract far greater energy from its limited uranium reserves while also preparing for large-scale use of thorium in the future," BHAVINI said. The fast breeder programme "strengthens strategic capabilities in nuclear fuel cycle technologies, advanced materials, reactor physics and large-scale engineering," and the knowledge and infrastructure developed through the programme "will support future reactor designs and next-generation nuclear technologies".

Fast breeder reactors form the second stage of India's three-stage nuclear programme, using plutonium recovered from the reprocessing of used fuel from the pressurised heavy water and light water reactors that form the first stage of the programme. The third stage envisages using advanced heavy water reactors to burn thorium-plutonium fuels and breed fissile uranium-233, achieving a thorium-based closed nuclear fuel cycle.

According to World Nuclear Association information, some 20 fast neutron reactors, including some that have supplied electricity commercially, have operated around the world since the 1950s - although not all have been breeders.

India currently has about 7,900 MW of nuclear generation from 24 operable nuclear power plants, and is planning a large expansion of its nuclear capacity. The country says that 17 nuclear power reactors with a total of 13,100 MW capacity are either under construction (7) or under pre-project activities (10). It is aiming to reach a nuclear energy capacity of about 100 GW by 2047 as part of its Viksit Bharat development strategy.

EDF, NTPC sign MoU to explore new Indian nuclear projects


The non-binding Memorandum of Understanding sees India's largest integrated power utility come together with the French international energy company to explore cooperation in developing new nuclear power projects in India.
 
(Image: NTPC)

The MoU was signed following approval from Indian ministries and government departments, NTPC said. It establishes a framework for both companies to jointly assess the feasibility and approach for collaboration, including understanding EDF’s EPR technology and its suitability for Indian requirements, exploring opportunities to maximise localisation for large-scale deployment, examining economic and tariff aspects, developing human resource capabilities through training programmes, evaluating potential project sites, and providing technical support as mutually agreed.

"This initiative aligns with NTPC’s strategy to expand into clean, reliable energy and contribute to India’s long-term energy security," NTPC said.

The MoU was signed by Arnada Prasad Samal, CGM (Nuclear Cell), on behalf of NTPC, and Vakisasi Ramany, Senior Vice President, International Nuclear Development, on behalf of EDF.

NTPC is a Public Sector Undertaking under India's Ministry of Power. It currently operates more than 89 GW of installed capacity, with another 32 GW under construction, with a target to reach 149 GW of total capacity by 2032, including 60 GW from renewable energy sources, with a balanced mix of thermal, hydro, solar, and wind power plants, ensuring supply of reliable, affordable, and sustainable electricity to the country.

Proposals for six EPR units at Jaitapur have long featured in India's energy plans, under the control of Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL).

Restrictions under Indian law have in the past presented a barrier to the participation of private companies like NTPC in nuclear power projects, but in 2024, the Indian government approved the creation of Anushakti Vidhyut Nigam Ltd (Ashvini), a joint venture between NPCIL and NTPC, to construct, own and operate nuclear power plants in India. The joint venture is now developing two Indian-designed 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, Mahi Banswara Rajasthan Atomic Nuclear Power Project units 1 and 2, for which excavation works began in late March. The Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India (SHANTI) Act 2025 - enacted at the end of last year - opens up India's nuclear sector to participation from private companies, including in plant operations, power generation, equipment manufacturing, and selected activities such as nuclear fuel fabrication.

Study highlights opportunities for Dutch nuclear supply chain



With the Dutch province of Zeeland under consideration as the location of two new nuclear power plants, a new report says local businesses could capture up to EUR4.6 billion (USD5.4 billion) in direct economic value during the 12-year construction period.
 
(Image: Impuls Zeeland)

The study - conducted by Tractebel and Technopolis and commissioned by the Province of Zeeland, Impuls Zeeland and VNO NCW Brabant Zeeland - outlines how companies in Zeeland, one of the preferred locations for new nuclear reactors, can position themselves within the nuclear supply chain and benefit from future investments.

Conducted between July 2025 and January 2026, the analysis explored prospects primarily for large nuclear new build projects, as well as for small modular reactors (SMRs) and the lifetime extension of the existing Borssele nuclear power plant.

The study identified 130 Zeeland businesses that could potentially supply nuclear projects, mostly as component suppliers and subcontractors. "Opportunities are strongest in construction, infrastructure, and transport & logistics, and during early construction phases and site clearance/landscaping," it says. "As a first estimate, local involvement could account for roughly 15% of total plant costs."

The direct economic potential for the business sector in Zeeland is estimated to be between EUR3.1 and EUR4.6 billion over a 12-year construction period. Direct economic benefits emerge from the direct supply to nuclear power plants, whether under construction or in operation. "The actual order size that can land in Zeeland will strongly depend on various factors, including the technology vendor chosen," the report says. "This estimate should therefore be considered a first estimate based on best available data and assumptions at this stage of the nuclear new-build project in the Netherlands." The indirect economic potential (resulting from regional spending of businesses directly involved in the supply chain and of on-site workers or visitors) for the business sector in Zeeland is estimated to be around EUR1 billion.

"Given the opportunities for Zeeland businesses in the nuclear supply chain, we recommend positioning Zeeland as a hotspot for nuclear energy and actively promoting its businesses in new-build projects," the study says." Stakeholders should be informed about nuclear developments, supply opportunities, and requirements, while businesses should be connected regionally, nationally, and internationally, and regional and national governments should align business support activities. Support should be provided to establish the right ecosystem for Zeeland companies to enter the nuclear domain, including further developing and implementing the proposed roadmap, backed by public and private investments.

"To facilitate this, we recommend establishing the Nuclear Delta platform, a public-private initiative bringing together businesses, government, and education institutions. The Province of Zeeland, Impuls Zeeland and VNO-NCW Brabant-Zeeland can play a part in this as well. Additionally, clear agreements with the national government should be made on conditions for hosting a new nuclear power plant, ensuring maximum economic benefit for regional businesses and reinforcing Zeeland’s ambitions as a nuclear energy hotspot."

The Netherlands currently has one 485 MWe (net) pressurised water reactor at Borssele - operated by EPZ - which has been in operation since 1973 and accounts for about 3% of the country's total electricity generation. 

In December 2021, the Netherlands' new coalition government placed nuclear power at the heart of its climate and energy policy. In addition to keeping the Borssele plant in operation for longer, the government also called for the construction of new reactors. Based on preliminary plans, two new reactors will be completed around 2035 and each will have a capacity of 1,000-1,650 MWe. The two reactors would provide 9-13% of the country's electricity production in 2035. The cabinet announced in December 2022 that it currently sees Borssele as the most suitable location for the construction of the new reactors. Three other locations are also being considered for the reactors: the Tweede Maasvlakte near Rotterdam, Terneuzen in Zeeland and Eemshaven in Groningen. A location selection is expected in September of this year. The government is also taking steps to prepare the Netherlands for the possible deployment of SMRs.


Friday, April 10, 2026

The Anti-Fascist and Anti-Imperialist Conference in Porto Alegre: Great achievements, challenges and opportunities (plus statements)


First published at Fourth International.

The First Anti-Fascist Conference for the Sovereignty of Peoples was a unique experience, nowhere else on the planet has anything like this been achieved. It represented a broad anti-fascist and anti-imperialist front, going far beyond revolutionary organizations. ⁠Nevertheless, it had limitations, stemming from the difficulties faced by internationalist resistance movements.

Nearly 7,000 people took part in the opening demonstration, with a significant presence of Fourth International organizations. We witnessed the militant fervour of the World Social Forums of the heyday and of the 2003 anti-war movement, in which thousands of people from very different backgrounds come together and discuss everything. These are the kind of militant moments in which shared understandings and common objectives are forged, and in which the consciousness of the militant vanguard is shaped.

From outside Brazil, the Argentine delegation was the largest, with 200 people, many of whom had travelled by coach, including our comrades from Marabunta. Comrades came from Africa (South Africa, Mali, Congo, Kenya, Ivory Coast, Morocco) and Asia (India, Pakistan, the Philippines, etc), particularly through the CADTM (the Committee for the Abolition of Illegitimate Debt, which played a central role in organizing along with the Local Organizing Committee of the conference). 

Delegations from imperialist countries (the United States, Canada, Australia and European countries such as Belgium, Denmark, France, Italy) were, of course, present. There were important delegations of Ukrainian and Russian activists.

The conference proceedings

Following a “parliamentarians’ panel” and an “elected representatives’ panel” which highlighted an essential link with actions taken within institutions, several thousand people took part in numerous debates on a variety of topics: analysis of the rise of the far right, the struggle against Milei, the resistance to Trump in the US centring on Minneapolis, the specific nature of struggles in the world of work, the situation in Brazil, the Palestinian resistance, the climate crisis, feminism, education, and many different forms of international solidarity.

In addition to taking part in the eleven plenary sessions of the “official” programme, organizations and activists of the Fourth International proposed a number of self-organized activities, among the 150 scheduled. Our comrades played a significant role in these, particularly through a presentation of our Manifesto for an Ecosocialist Revolution — Break with Capitalist Growth, which was attended by over 600 people. This meeting was led notably by Michael Löwy, one of the main drafters of the Manifesto, and Penelope Duggan, who represented the Fourth International.

We also organized or contributed significantly to debates on the anti-racist and anti-capitalist struggle, solidarity with Ukraine, with Russian prisoners, the situation in France and solidarity with migrants. The first of these in particular brought together several hundred people.

Important activities were organized by CADTM on immigration, Gen Z mobilizations, the hoarding of wealth, the grabbing of natural resources of Ukraine, DRC and Venezuela, the situation in Africa, and others.

The Fourth International distributed a statement, “Against Neo-Fascist Authoritarianism and All Forms of Imperialism”, (see statement below) to the conference participants in four languages.

The final declaration

The conference’s final declaration summarizes the broad agreements that made its organization possible: a reminder of the major mobilizations against Milei, against the far right in Britain, the No Kings! mobilizations in the United States, and solidarity with Cuba. 

It also sets out a series of social, environmental, anti-racist, feminist, and LGBTIQ+ demands, and of course demands against imperialism. It states clearly: “We oppose all imperialisms and support the struggle of peoples for their self-determination, by all necessary means.” In particular, the declaration opposes the genocide in Palestine, the attacks on Lebanon and Iran, as well as the invasion of Venezuela and the threats against Cuba. 

This broad consensus brought together extremely diverse organizations, which contributed to the conference’s success.

Limited mobilization by mass workers’ organizations

The great success of the conference does not blind us to some significant limitations. These were apparent during the preparation of the conference, and we tried, with limited success, to address them.

One was the lack of active participation from traditional mass organizations both in Brazil and elsewhere. While the conference secured the formal participation of both the Workers’ Party, and of the majority of the PSOL nationally, as well as the CUT Brazil, CTB Brazil, and other teachers and trade unions, these contributed little to the building of the mobilization outside the state of Rio Grande do Sul where Porto Alegre is situated. The Andes teachers’ union and the Communist Party of Brazil (PCdoB) had a larger militant presence. 

In fact, our organizations — in particular the MES, a tendency within the PSOL that is particularly strong in Rio Grande do Sul — made up a large part of the attendance: on the one hand, this is something to be proud of, but on the other, it reflects the fact that the struggle for unity, for building a mass movement alongside reformist organizations and the trade unions, still lies ahead of us.

From outside Brazil the conference was also supported by La France Insoumise (LFI), and a series of trade-union organizations notably from the Spanish state and Latin America.1 In the run-up to the conference, repeated attempts were made to convince many other organizations of the conference’s importance for their movements, but this struggle for the broadest possible unity within the movement must continue to be waged with the utmost determination.

Opposing all imperialisms

Another was the almost exclusive focus in practice on imperialism as US imperialism alone, despite the final statement’s opposition to “all imperialisms”. Thus, under the influence of the “campist” sectors of the conference, there was no condemnation of Putin’s Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, nor a clear stance on the nature of the dictatorial regime in Russia. 

This is a serious problem and potential obstacle to joint activity with anti-fascists from Russia and Ukraine. Russia is undoubtedly one of the regimes that most closely resembles fascism, whilst the Ukrainian people — and the Russian people too! — are suffering under this regime through deprivation and hundreds of thousands of deaths.

The presence of Russian and Ukrainian comrades, and the workshops organized with the support of the Fourth Internationalists giving a voice to Russian oppositionists, and a Ukrainian delegation of two leading trade unionists and a representative of Sotsialnyi Rukh, was an important counterweight. This was welcomed by the delegations concerned and in the words of the European Network for Solidarity with Ukraine (ENSU) representative: 

The presence of Ukrainian comrades, as well as that of Russian socialist opposition figures, was highlighted […] particularly during the conference’s closing session led by Roberto Robaina. They were also able to speak with activists from Brazil and other countries. And they gave interviews and filmed videos which are currently being circulated amongst left-wing organizations. 

They hope to build on this to broaden solidarity for their struggles, notably in Latin America. (See ENSU statement to conference below).

In several plenaries, Fourth International comrades (Penelope Duggan from the FI leadership, Rafael Bernabe from Puerto Rico, Sushovan Dhar from India,...) and others (Patricia Pol from ATTAC France and LFI) also spoke against these positions, defending Russian prisoners and oppositionists in exile, the right to self-determination of Ukraine and the battle of the Ukrainian people against the Russian invasion and the neoliberal and anti-democratic policies of their own government, and in support of the Iranian women’s and democratic movement. 

Our stance is for the right to self-determination of all the peoples of the world by their own action and not by aligning with any government, but it is clear that this fundamental battle was not fully resolved at the conference. In the self-organized workshops several FI comrades speaking (André Frappier from Canada, Eric Toussaint from Belgium, Bruno Magalhães from Brazil) also condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine and supported the right of Ukraine self-determination.

Mixed message on Iran

Although the final statement “upholds the self-determination of the Iranian people”, an unofficial representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran was present and justified — in very moderated tones — the regime’s policies. 

While we defend the Islamic Republic’s right to defend itself against imperialist aggression, and wish for the defeat of this attack, we fully support the social movements in Iran, particularly the feminist movements, which have nothing to do with the representatives of the Shah sponsored by the United States and Israel.

Strengthening democracy in the movement

It was undoubtedly inevitable in a conference of thousands of activists that there was the lack of real forums of debate among the participants, both on the political topics discussed in the central plenary sessions (the self-organized workshops were different), and in particular on the final statement and what it proposed. 

While we all agree with building the initiatives enumerated and the Fourth International will be present at them all, the organizing nucleus must be broadened and develop mechanisms of democratic accountability. This is important both in terms of political representativity but also — as had been pointed out in the international organizing committee — gender parity. 

Moreover, while we can note a presence of women speakers in all the panels, the problematics of feminism were largely absent from the official panels, although of course present in a number of self-organized workshops.

Let us continue the struggle

In conclusion, the conference is an extremely important step forward in the battle against fascism and imperialism: let us not forget that it has been years since any social forum brought together so many people.

The practices of building international and internationalist movements have been lost and must be rebuilt.

The decision to seek a united anti-fascist and anti-imperialist front entailed some loss of clarity in the common statements, given that understanding on the left and among popular sectors regarding such basic questions as who are the fascists or neo-fascists, or who are the imperialists, vary greatly. 

Thus, the decision that guided the organization of the Conference — and which was also the position of the Fourth International — was that it was important to hold the conference, even at the cost of a significant loss of clarity. The only alternative would have been not to hold the Conference, to renounce the possibility of bringing together thousands of activists to discuss points of agreement and disagreement and commit to the ongoing struggle against fascism and imperialism.

Political battles are fought in practice, by participating in the movements that actually exist; we can only exert influence if we participate fully. The organization of this conference, and the series of pre-conferences notably in Brazil that were an important aspect of mobilizing for the conference, relied largely on activists from the Fourth International, particularly our organizations in Brazil — notably the MES, Centelhas and Ecossocialistas — our comrades involved in broad-based organizations and associations, and other internationalist, anti-colonial and anti-imperialist organizations.

There is no doubt that the debates and struggles will continue, and the next events are already set: the G7 counter-summit in France and Switzerland in June 2026, the anti-NATO gathering in Turkey in July 2026, and the World Social Forum in Benin in August 2026. Also proposed are continental conferences, notably in North and South America, as well as the Ecosocialist Encounters in May in Belgium.

It is through all these events that the alliances necessary to counter fascism and imperialism are being forged. It is up to us to involve the trade unions, human rights organizations, feminist and LGBTQI+ movements, anti-racist organizations, those campaigning for Palestine, and those standing in solidarity with the Ukrainian and the Iranian people. It is in this way — and by defending our eco-socialist revolutionary perspectives — that we will build the movement needed to change the world.

Manuel Rodriguez Banchs, Penelope Duggan, Israel Dutra, Antoine Larrache, João Machado, Reymund de Silva and Eric Toussaint are members of the Fourth International Bureau and International Committee.


Against neo-fascist authoritarianism and all forms of imperialism

Declaration of the Fourth International at the 1st International Anti-Fascist Conference for the Sovereignty of Peoples

Unite the anti-fascist struggle throughout Latin America! For a global anti-fascist and anti-imperialist front! 

Donald Trump's second term, with its far-right agenda, has brought about a shift in the international situation. In his eagerness to reaffirm a hegemony as weakened as his economy, he tramples on the United Nations Charter and the sovereignty of peoples with a foreign policy of recolonization and war.

Together with his partner in massacres, Netanyahu, Trump is bombing Iran to ensure complete domination of the oil and gas market. This comes after the genocide of the people of Gaza, the invasion of Venezuela, the attempt to strangle Cuba, and threats to annex Greenland.

The tyrant is striving to normalize genocidal language, blackmail, and interventionism, as well as racism, misogyny, and hatred of migrants — attempting to expel millions of workers from the United States. He supports Bolsonaro, Milei, Bukele, and the "patriotic" (read: far-right) European parties.

Bloody authoritarianism is the central instrument of imperialism in our time, because it needs to impose policies of hunger, the proliferation of ecocidal technologies and practices, the excessive power of Big Tech, the dispossession of natural and energy resources from all peoples, and increased military spending. If it is not defeated, Yankee imperialism will embark on a blind march toward ecological disaster.

The peoples of the US, Argentina, and India show the way

But imperialism's march is already beginning to encounter tremendous obstacles. The victorious struggle of the people of Minneapolis/Saint Paul and of all the community and popular resistance in the United States to the persecution of migrants points the way to defeating the extreme right. Only the combination of the international struggle of the peoples with a defeat of Trump on his own turf can stop their joint project.

The same is true of the working classes in Argentina against Milei and the peasants in India against Modi's policies. In Argentina, Milei faced the fourth general strike, now against labour reform, in an example of unified struggle that has the left as one of its pillars, with 90% of the population opposed to this measure. In Brazil, the victory of the indigenous resistance struggle against Cargill and the privatization of large Amazonian rivers points to hope and paths forward.

A united front of the exploited and oppressed!

There is an urgent need for a united front of the exploited and oppressed, free from subordination to governments and parties, capable of acting with full independence to confront the new faces of fascism with mobilization and coordination among the oppressed.

This 1st International Anti-Fascist Conference for the Sovereignty of Peoples is an extraordinary opportunity to deploy across the globe, starting with the American continent, a strong united action by the forces present here against hegemonic imperialism. New conferences and meetings must be held on other continents and in other major regions: the United States, Europe, Africa, Asia. Let us make this meeting a modest but strong starting point for an international campaign that serves the struggles and, at the same time, the construction of an alternative program to that presented to us by the representatives of capital.

The far right is growing by presenting itself as a radical alternative to the status quo, its elites, and its parties. We know that it does so demagogically to defend the system it claims to challenge, but there is a key lesson here: in order to grow, resistance must also be a radical alternative to the crisis of the prevailing system, its policies of hunger and repression, its worn-out institutions, and its parties.

The crisis of capitalist civilization (economic, political, ecological, climatic) raises the possibility and necessity of linking immediate concerns, including the anti-fascist struggle, with the need to overcome capitalism. A set of demands is needed that, based on the most urgent popular concerns, leads to the questioning of private control of production and to an understanding of the need to place it under the democratic control of working people and their communities.

No illusions in capitalist ‘models’

Trump's national security strategy states: 

The disproportionate influence of the largest, richest, and strongest nations is an immemorial truth of international relations. 

It is, quite simply, an invitation to divide the world among the most powerful.

There is no room for illusions here. Neither the European Union or its components, nor the governments of Russia or China represent an alternative or a wall of defense against US imperialism — as their sterile actions in the face of US attacks on Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran have shown us.

China has become a capitalist power more interested in consolidating its business and its own areas of military (in Asia) and economic (Eurasia, Africa, and Latin America) influence. More regional in nature, Putin's Russia seeks to reestablish what was once the Tsarist empire, with a militarized economy and an increasingly authoritarian regime. In this context of tensions between old and new or aspiring powers, the task of the left cannot be to celebrate the multipolarity resulting from the confrontation between capitalist projects.

Solidarity with the oppressed of the world!

To Trump's supposed "immemorial truth" of the domination of the powerful, we oppose three orientations: the defense of the right of all peoples to self-determination, solidarity with the exploited and oppressed in all countries, and therefore opposition to all forms of imperialism.

We reject the United States' aggression against Venezuela and the kidnapping of its president and former deputy, and we also reject the Russian Federation's aggression against Ukraine. We recognize the right of Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, and any country attacked by the United States to defend itself, including militarily, and to seek the material means necessary for that resistance wherever they can find them, and we recognize the same right for Ukraine, which is under attack by Russian imperialism.

We denounce and combat anti-immigrant, xenophobic, and Islamophobic policies in the United States and Western Europe. We take the same stance toward the Chinese government's repression of various peoples and ethnic groups.

We repudiate the persecution, repression, and censorship in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and other countries of protests against the genocide in Palestine, and we also denounce the repression and imprisonment in Russia of opponents of the war of aggression against Ukraine.

We do not support the Maduro government. We denounce its anti-democratic and anti-worker actions. But no objectionable action by the Maduro government can validate the United States' aggression against Venezuela. We therefore demand the withdrawal of the US from Venezuela and the release of former deputy Cilia and President Maduro.

We propose the dissolution of NATO, as well as the Collective Security Treaty Organization. We do not support the Zelensky government in Ukraine. We denounce its anti-worker, corrupt, anti-democratic, and chauvinist policies. But no questionable policy of this government justifies the Russian invasion and bombing. Therefore, we organize our solidarity with the Ukrainian people.

Reject intervention, support the struggles

Bourgeois governments refuse to recognize that popular mobilizations against them are the result of deep social contradictions. Typically, they attribute them to the action of internal or external “agents”. We cannot accept this conspiracy conception of history. Undoubtedly, imperialism and its agencies try to take advantage of struggles, such as that of the Iranian people against authoritarian theocracy, but that does not reduce those struggles to an operation of imperialism. We must oppose such intervention, while continuing to support those struggles.

Preaching to the people that they must accept dictatorships that oppress and mistreat them as the “lesser evil” turns those who do so into promoters of resignation and submission. Oppressed peoples will have little interest in anti-imperialism or geopolitical analysis that excludes their most pressing democratic and economic demands. It is up to us to ensure that activists see our anti-imperialism as their ally, or that, tragically, they will find encouragement and support only in the camp of imperialism that seeks to exploit them.

Universal demands of the working class

Historically, US and NATO imperialism have acted in the name of freedom, democracy, etc. The left is not fooled by these proclamations. But we must be consistent. The same is true of rival imperialisms: we must explain how, in the name of multipolarity, anti-hegemony, rejection of the hypocritical model of Western democracy and Eurocentrism, attempts are made to justify the denial of democratic rights to the working class, women, religious minorities and LGBTTQI+ people.

In the face of cultural relativism tailored to authoritarian governments (in Russia and China, among others), we affirm that trade-union rights, women’s rights, freedom of expression, assembly, and association, and the election and recall of rulers are not “Western values” or “liberal models” or Eurocentric ideas that imperialism seeks to impose: they are historical demands of the international working class. That is why we defend them throughout the world, in all countries, without exception.

We reject the blackmail that any criticism or demand made of progressive governments, or those that proclaim themselves progressive, is destructive and favorable to imperialism. What weakens the struggle is not criticism and debate, but their suppression.

The hypocrisy of the West and consistent anti-imperialism

We are familiar with the hypocrisy of Western imperialism when it denounces repression in Iran or the invasion of Ukraine. What moral authority can the accomplices of genocide in Gaza claim? What respect can those who have just kidnapped the president of Venezuela deserve? But denouncing the hypocrisy of the West and its crimes cannot become our silence on the abuses of the governments of Putin or Xi Jinping, or the idea that these abuses are “inventions of imperialism.”

We do not oppose the double standards of Western imperialism with another double standard, but with the rejection of all those who exploit and oppress.

Today more than ever, we must practice consistent internationalism, a solidarity without borders that encompasses the struggles of workers, the oppressed, and for self-determination in all countries of the world, without exception. It is a policy that opposes all forms of imperialism. It does not subordinate the struggle in any country to that of another country. It is the policy that corresponds to the slogan Workers of the world, unite!

For solidarity without borders! For internationalism without exceptions! 


Antifascism must fight all tyrannies

Statement by the European Network for Solidarity with Ukraine for the 1st International Anti-Fascist Conference for the Sovereignty of Peoples.

The European Network for Solidarity with Ukraine (ENSU) strongly supports the goal of this conference, namely “to confront the expressions of the far right and fascism and put into practice solidarity among resisting people.”

In championing the national and social rights of the Ukrainian people, our network of social movements, trade unions, solidarity groups and political parties from Eastern and Western Europe also shares the internationalism and anti-imperialism this goal expresses. As ENSU’s founding statement says, 

we fight for peace and equality, democratic freedoms, social and climate justice through cooperation and solidarity between peoples.

We believe that antifascism must oppose every violation of human rights by regimes and rulers that elevate maintaining their own power above everything else, including the rights of peoples to determine their future. For ENSU, “from Ukraine to Palestine, occupation is a crime” and the Ukrainian people must be recognised as a resisting people fully deserving of solidarity in the face of terrible aggression.

Over the last four years, the Russian armed forces implementing the Kremlin’s “special military operation” against Ukraine have: illegally occupied 20% of internationally recognised Ukrainian territory; unleashed a murderous campaign to destroy Ukraine’s energy and water supply infrastructure and freeze the population into submission; bombarded the country’s schools, hospitals and residential districts; deported thousands of Ukrainian children from the territories occupied by Russia (a crime for which Vladimir Putin has been charged by the International Criminal Court); imposed a campaign of compulsory Russification in these regions; targeted cultural sites as part of a deliberate policy of erasing Ukrainian culture and language; imprisoned tens of thousands of non-combatant Ukrainian citizens, and used assassination, torture and sexual violence to compel obedience from an occupied population. All this after years of abuses against the Crimean Tatars, including forced disappearances.

But despite this wave of genocidal crimes, Ukraine survives, and not only through the efforts of its armed forces but because of the persistent self-organisation of its civil society — the trade unions, community, neighbourhood and veterans’ organisations, women’s and LGBTIQ+ collectives and environmental and civil liberties associations.

Putin’s ‘antifascist’ holy war

There is, however, a feature of Ukraine’s resistance that differs from that of other peoples fighting for freedom: the Russian aggressor brands Ukraine’s defensive struggle as itself “fascist” and defines its own goal as “eliminating the neo-Nazi regime in Kyiv” (Putin). In short, the Kremlin invokes antifascism … to justify its own war crimes.

This cynical manipulation of the concepts of “antifascism” and “anti-Nazism” is best analysed in the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation’s publication Putin’s Four Antifascist Myths — How Russia Uses ‘Antifascism’ to Justify the War in Ukraine, by Anastasia Spartak

It explains how the present rulers in the Kremlin converted the original antifascism, born of the heroic anti-Nazi resistance of the peoples of the Soviet Union, into exaltation of Russia as a historic power destined to “embrace” the peoples around its borders. Those like the Ukrainians who opposed this imperial project became “fascists” and “Nazis” — irrespective of the real presence of the far right within their societies.

As for those brave people inside Putin’s Russia who have denounced his criminal invasion of Ukraine and sought to maintain genuinely democratic and antifascist values — they have been murdered, jailed, locked up in psychiatric “hospitals”, exiled or ostracised as “foreign agents” and “undesirables”.

Behind the smokescreen of its annual UN General Assembly motherhood resolution against Nazism, the Russian Federation has implemented a domestic policy of setting far-right gangs against democrats and leftists and a foreign policy of giving lavish support to xenophobic outfits like the French National Front (now National Rally).

Russia has become central to a reactionary international alliance that includes Trump’s USA, Orban's Hungary, Le Pen’s National Rally, the Alternative For Germany and Reform UK. This league of ethno-nationalist, anti-democratic authoritarians is opposed to everything this conference stands for. All of them seek to deflect responsibility for Putin’s invasion onto Ukraine or “the collective West”, an alert to anti-fascists as to the true nature of the Russian imperial project.

No to an imperialist ‘peace’

The “antifascism” of a regime dedicated to Making Russia Great Again has many sinister parallels with the operations of Putin’s “partner” (his term) Trump. The bomber of Iran endlessly pressures Ukraine to agree to a ceasefire on Russia’s terms, cynically cancels agreed embargoes on Russian oil and gas exports, and has his envoys check out opportunities for “deals” with Putin and his oligarch mates.

If forced on Ukraine, the outcome of this sort of imperial “peace”, would be to perpetuate the cruel injustice and suffering the country has experienced, with no guarantee that Putin would not restart hostilities when he judges he could get away with it. The only acceptable ceasefire is one Ukraine itself can negotiate and its people support.

Support Ukraine as a sovereign nation, its people and its working class

Let’s never forget that the only way the concept of antifascism can strengthen the interests of oppressed peoples is if it is applied without exception. If a blind eye is turned to the oppression of any people or nation it will serve the interests of their oppressor — even if unintentionally. Moreover, if the antifascist movement neglects the rights, suffering and struggles of any one people, its action in support of other oppressed peoples will lose credibility and the power that comes from mutual solidarity.

Give unreserved support to Ukraine’s resistance struggle! This does not in any way entail supporting the undemocratic neoliberal policies of the Ukrainian government. Indeed, ENSU has supported all the struggles of Ukraine’s workers, students, feminists, LGBTI+ collectives and civil rights organisations against the government’s attempts to impose a radically pro-corporate economic policy, cut back the rights of workers and their unions, and protect the corrupt within its own ranks from investigation by the country’s independent anticorruption agencies.

Again, if you want to understand this experience, please take time to speak with the representatives of Ukrainian trade unionism and the Ukrainian left present at this conference. Their fight should also be yours.

For the European Network in Solidarity with Ukraine, the only possible position for a consistent antifascism is to support Ukraine’s right to self-determination and self-defence; to demand the removal of all Russian forces from its internationally recognised territory; to support the return of its kidnapped children and other civilian prisoners; and to call for full reparation for the damage inflicted by the Russian invasion and accountability in international law for those who initiated it.

  • 1

    Including the two main Basque trade unions ELA and LAB, the Intersindicals of Valencia, Galicia and Catalunya, CTA A Argentina, CTA TT Argentina, PIT CNT Uruguay, SME Mexico, CUT Chile, CUT Colombia.