The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

Category: Articles

“Bloody unacceptable is what it is”

A look at the international response to atrocities in Sudan ahead of the conference in Berlin on the third anniversary of the war


16/04/2026

Yesterday the war in Sudan entered its fourth year. While the satellite images of the blood spilled during the El-Fasher massacre, that saw up to 10,000 people killed by the RSF, caused a momentary flurry of media attention, the world’s most devastating war was quick to be re-hidden among the chaos of things.

It is often termed the forgotten war, as though one could simply forget the at least 150,000 killed, 14 million displaced, 11,000 missing and 33 million people in need of assistance. 

“Bloody unacceptable is what it is. Unacceptable that the world focuses on other crises and leans into it entirely to find solutions: why not here?” Denise Brown, United Nations Resident Coordinator in Sudan, decried the paltry international response to the deepening crisis.

Yesterday, on the anniversary of the start of the war, the Third International Sudan Conference, organised by Germany, France, the UK, the USA, the African Union and the European Union, took place in Berlin. So far the scale of the crisis has continued to be underrepresented in the media as well as in diplomatic efforts, while the inclusion of Sudanese voices in discussions has been largely neglected.

While the magnitude of the devastation in Sudan is unquestionable, the search for solutions for ending the war remain elusive. “How about focusing on finding a solution to end the war?” asks Denise Brown.

Following the international failure to seek and pursue concrete solutions to ending the war, Sudanese political analyst Kholood Khair and founding director of Confluence Advisory Hend Kheiralla were sceptical of the conference. Unless the war is reframed as an attack on civilians aimed at rolling back gains made during the 2019 revolution, rather than a war between two generals, the conference ‘will remain an exercise in optics and will not be a genuine pathway to peace.’

The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) led by Hemedti aim to erase all hope of a civilian led government. Yet the Sudan conferences held in London and Paris in the last two years appeared to miss the point when they excluded all Sudanese representatives from the conference, from both the SAF and RSF, as well as civilian representatives. This resulted, unsurprisingly, in uninspiring diplomatic outcomes following disagreements between Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates; all of whom stake a claim in the region.

Frequently misrepresented as a civil war, the war in Sudan is rooted in colonialism and hinges on the expropriation of its natural resources by government elites and international actors. Sudan’s main exports amounted to $5.09bn in 2023 and include crude oil, gold, animal products, oilseeds and gum arabic. 

Despite Sudan’s wealth in natural resources, the extreme inequality caused by the ousted Omar Al-Bashir, alongside crony capitalism and systemic corruption, kept entire regions in poverty, eventually leading to the 2019 revolution and Al-Bashir’s downfall. The subsequent international inaction failed to secure the civilian government Sudan so desperately needs.

Meanwhile, three years into the war that has cost millions of Sudanese civilians their lives and loved-ones, including many in the Mediterranean Sea or Greek prisons, inaction and hypocrisy has continued to dominate the international response to Sudan’s worsening prospects.

“The true scandal is not a failure of international peacemaking, but the sustaining and escalation of this war by outside interests,” writes the Guardian. Saudi Arabia and Egypt are the SAF’s key supporters, while it is widely claimed the UAE is funding the RSF, allegations the UAE denies. The Guardian further alleges indirect EU involvement through the supply of weapons, as well as funding meant to curb migration which ended up in the hands of the RSF.

Writing for The German Institute for International and Security affairs, Dr. Gerrit Kurtz bluntly dashes any hopes of any immediate sustainable steps towards peace: “It is important to note that this is not a peace conference. No one should raise their expectations too high. Even a humanitarian truce, which the United States wants to broker with its partners Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, is not currently in sight.”

Unlike the previous Sudan conferences in Paris and London, 40 Sudanese civilian representatives were invited to the conference with the aim of building a new civilian-led political order. This is much to the dismay of the Sudanese government who, along with the leaders of the RSF, were excluded from the talks.

Although a diplomatic breakthrough is unrealistic at this stage, it is hoped that the conference will mobilise awareness and aid for the nation devastated by war and substantially decreased aid pledges in recent years. Aid budget cuts by countries including the USA, the UK and Germany, led to only 40% of the humanitarian aid plan for Sudan being funded in 2025, a shortfall of €2.2 billion.

Humanitarian aid is desperately needed to fund the life-saving work of community kitchens, emergency response rooms and mutual aid groups. But humanitarian efforts are no substitute for holding those responsible for the atrocities accountable and pushing for a lasting peace.

Sudan researcher at Human Rights Watch, Mohamed Osman warned: “The conference in Berlin should not be another box-ticking exercise, but instead finally galvanize international momentum to deter further atrocities, advance justice, and protect civilians, including local aid workers. This conference should not have to be remembered as the first day of yet another year of atrocities against civilians in Sudan.”

While the €1.5bn in aid pledged at yesterday’s conference will go some way to fill the gap left by previous cuts, what stands out is the lacklustre approach to accountability, the abandonment of civil society, greed, and the self-serving role of international powers.

Suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement

Call for support of the European Citizens Initiative


15/04/2026

Appeal to organisations and inititiatives

On 21st April 2026, there will be a real possibility for the EU Foreign Affairs Council to suspend the EU-Israel Association agreement. Based on Israel’s continuing violations of international law and human rights—particularly in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon—the EU must suspend the Agreement, if it is to comply with its fundamental values. As organisations and initiatives in civil society, we call on everyone to come together, take a united stand, and support the European Citizens’ Initiative to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement!

Why this moment is decisive

The EU-Israel Association Agreement contains a human rights clause in Article 2, which states that the observance of human rights and democratic principles is an “essential component” of the Agreement.

The reality in Palestine shows a clear violation

  • Israel has killed at least 65,000 people in Gaza since October 2023, including 20,000 children. Israel has consistently violated the ceasefire.
  • Systematic destruction of hospitals, schools and civil infrastructure.
  • Blockade of humanitarian help and the use of hunger as a weapon of war.
  • The expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank. Destruction of houses, the forced displacement of the indigenous Palestinian population of East Jerusalem, and advancing annexation plans.
  • Passing of a law introducing the death penalty exclusively for Palestinians.
  • Countless violations of international and humanitarian law.

Now Israel is threatening to make Beirut a second Gaza (“Dahiyeh will look like Khan Younis (Israeli finance minister Bezalel Smotrich on 5th March 2026). Carpet bombing of civil infrastructure, expulsion of 1 million Lebanese people so far, and the systematic bombing of South Lebanese villages show that the Israeli state is serious about this threat.

The European Union has the obligation to observe its treaties and to act on violations. The suspension of the Association Agreement is not a radical step, but simply a necessary measure against Israel’s continued violations of human rights.

The European Citizens’ Initiative—Our collective voice

We support the European Citizens’ Initiative Justice for Palestine EU, which calls on the EU Commission to submit a proposal for the full suspension of the Association Agreement of the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

With over one million signatures throughout Europe, we have already showed that civil society demands a clear position. To become even stronger, we need the support of more organisations in Germany.

Why Germany plays a special role

Despite serious violations of international law, Germany continues to support Israel. Germany is the second largest provider of weapons to Israel (just between 7th October 2023 and 13th May 2025, Germany sent Israel armaments worth €485,103,796). This continued partnership provides Israel with international legitimation. Wide support for the Initiative from Germany increases the pressure on the decision makers—but so far there have been too few signatures from Germany.

Germany intensifies military and political cooperation with Israel

Germany is an important purchaser of Israeli armaments and security technologies. These are being tested on a population whose country Israel has been brutally and illegally occupying for decades. In January 2026, the German government agreed on a new cyber- and security package with Israel in the area of cyber defence, police and secret services. These areas of the Israeli state are responsible for violations of international law and civil rights.

Germany could stop the suspension of the Association Agreement in the Council

Germany already opposed the suspension of the Agreement and further sanctions on Israel in 2025 and could block suspensions once again, despite its obligation to international law, EU law, and the constitutional requirement to prosecute international crimes.

Other EU countries are already acting decisively

Spain, in particular, is showing a clear commitment to international law and is demanding a suspension of the Association Agreement. Slovenia has also announced support and has already called for a weapons embargo against Israel.

Why this Citizens’ Initiative is important

Legal obligation: The EU must react to violations of Article 2 of the agreement. This is not a political option. It is a legal necessity.

Moral obligation: As organisations from civil society, we have the responsibility to stand up for compliance with international law, even if it is uncomfortable. We also have the duty of political responsibility to insist on the compliance with international law.

Strategic impact: A suspension of the Agreement would noticeably hit Israel’s economy (the EU is the largest trade partner with Israel, with €42.6 billion trade volume in 2025) and could change the behaviour of the government.

Credibility of the EU: the EU cannot claim to uphold human rights while maintaining an Association Agreement with a country which systematically violates them.

Call to Action

  • Share the ECI on your websites, social media and Newsletters, pointing out the meeting of the EU Foreign Affairs Council on 21st April 2026 (Note: we have collected 1 million signatures, but we will carry on collecting until we have 1½ million, as some signatures may be disqualified).
  • Ask your members and networks to sign
  • Follow and repost Justice for Palestine on Instagram: @justiceforpalestineeu
  • Organise panels, protests, and actions
  • Write to German parliamentarians

Further Information

Translated from the original German by Phil Butland

Socialists expelled 

A tragedy for the UK Left


14/04/2026

The crisis engulfing Your Party has moved beyond the level of internal disagreement. What is now unfolding is the effective collapse of a political project that once appeared to carry the hopes of a recomposed left. We can see this with the resignation of the entire interim Scottish executive committee, coming after the wholesale expulsion of organised socialists from the party. That collapse represents a deeper political failure, and one whose consequences are sharpened by the big picture of British politics. At a time when the Far Right is gaining ground, becoming more confident on the streets and more embedded in political discourse, the disintegration of even a partial left alternative is a blow.

When Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana launched Your Party, the conditions appeared favourable. The Labour Party under Keir Starmer had completed its turn away from even limited reformism, leaving a political vacuum to its left. At the same time, the residue of the Corbyn movement still existed in the form of politicised activists, trade union militants and campaigners shaped by years of struggle. There were, and still remain, massive movements against racism and imperialism. There was a real appetite for an organisation that could link parliamentary presence with movements on the ground, providing a political voice. In fact 800,000 people expressed an interest in the new formation.

But from the beginning, the project was shaped less by a clear strategic break from Labour and more by hesitation at the top. Corbyn’s approach was marked by a reluctance to decisively enter the fray and launch the organisation. That hesitation created space for a layer within the organisation—a tight-knit clique oriented toward “respectability” and control—to assert itself. Their perspective was not to build something qualitatively different, but to reconstruct a version of Labour in miniature: a controlled, top-down electoral machine, wary of independent socialist organisation and suspicious of rank-and-file initiative.

Observers in Germany will recognise elements of this dynamic from the long-running tensions inside Die Linke, where leadership manoeuvres have often substituted for political clarity. In both cases, the absence of a decisive break with old organisational habits has fed instability rather than cohesion.

The recent move by the Your Party leadership to ban dual membership with other socialist organisations represents a decisive moment in this trajectory. It is entirely consistent with the outlook of those who sought to shape the party as a Labour Party Mark 2.

This has taken place in the context of intensifying internal conflict. Disputes over leadership authority, organisational control and the basic functioning of the party have increasingly dominated its internal life. What should have been spaces for political discussion and strategic orientation have instead become arenas of procedural struggle. Activists who entered the organisation with the intention of engaging in outward-facing political work have found themselves drawn into internal disputes. The energy that might have been directed toward organising in workplaces, communities and movements has been dissipated in factional battles. Despite this, many activists formed proto branches looking outwards and to forthcoming local elections—few of these were recognised by the central leadership.

These conflicts are not accidental. They flow from the attempt to impose a controlled, quasi-parliamentary model onto a membership that expected something more open and movement-oriented. The party has reproduced many of Labour’s worst features in compressed form.

The effective collapse of Your Party leaves a significant vacuum on the left. The social conditions that produced interest in the project have however not disappeared. Anger at inequality, frustration with mainstream politics and a desire for radical change remain widespread. But without a coherent political form through which these sentiments can be organised, they exist in a fragmented and unstable state. The contrast with Germany is instructive. Despite its problems, and there are many, Die Linke still provides a national political reference point for parts of the left, whereas in Britain fragmentation now runs deeper.

This vacuum is not politically neutral. In the current context, it creates space for the Far Right to advance. Across Britain, far-right forces have been testing their strength with increasing confidence. Street mobilisations have become more frequent, networks more coordinated and narratives more sharply defined. While this differs in form from the electoral rise of Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), the underlying dynamic is comparable. In both cases, disillusionment with mainstream politics is being reorganised along reactionary lines.

The timing of Your Party’s collapse therefore gives it a tragic character. It is not that the project was never capable of attracting support. It clearly was. But its leadership failed to consolidate that support into a durable and politically coherent organisation. Instead, hesitation at the top and control from within combined to hollow it out.

This collapse highlights the centrality of democracy in socialist organisation, not as an abstract principle but as a practical necessity. An organisation that excludes organised socialists undermines its own capacity to develop, debate and act. Most importantly, it demonstrates the need for a firm orientation toward struggle. Without roots in real movements, organisations become inward-looking and brittle, prone to fragmentation under pressure.

It would be mistaken, however, to conclude that the underlying forces that gave rise to the project have dissipated. Activists continue to organise in workplaces, to mobilise against racism and to build campaigns in their communities. These activities are not dependent on any single party structure. They reflect deeper social processes and a continuing willingness to resist. Similar questions are being posed across Europe about how such activity can be connected to political organisation without being subordinated to it.

The question that now emerges is how these dispersed forms of activity can find political expression. The answer will not come from simply reconstructing the same organisational model under a different name. It will require a more grounded approach, one that connects political organisation directly to ongoing struggles and that builds from those foundations outward.

Your Party, as a project capable of shaping events, is finished, but the conditions that produced it remain, and in some respects have intensified.

In a period marked by crisis, instability and the advance of reactionary forces, the absence of a coherent, left alternative is not simply a disappointment. It is a problem with real consequences.

The need for a socialist alternative has not diminished. If anything, it has become more urgent.

20 April 1914: Ludlow Massacre

This week in working class history


By 1914, Colorado’s mineral wealth had attracted waves of European settlers whose expansion cost the lives of the Ute, Arapaho, and Cheyenne Native Americans—massacred in the name of the same settler greed that would soon turn on the workers who replaced them. Industrialist John D. Rockefeller, also the lauded owner of Standard Oil, controlled most of the state’s mines, mills, and plants through his Colorado Fuel and Iron Company (CF&I). Workers faced low pay and abysmal conditions. In late summer 1913, roughly 10,000 miners—many of them Greek and Italian immigrants—organized with the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) and went on strike. CF&I evicted them from company towns, so the strikers built tent colonies, the largest housing about 1,200 people in Ludlow.

CF&I called in the Colorado National Guard, led by Lt. Karl Linderfeldt, to intimidate the strikers. Rockefeller-hired detectives attacked strikers indiscriminately. By March 1914, the organizing efforts of Greek union leader Louis Tikas had calmed some of the violence, but tensions remained high. The National Guard burned the Forbes tent colony as retribution for allegedly “harboring murderers,” killing men, women, and children. Each side accused the other of provocations, and the situation was a powder keg.

On the morning of April 20, 1914, the day after Orthodox Easter Sunday, soldiers lured Tikas to the Ludlow train stop on the pretense that a woman wished to speak with her husband in the colony. Tikas urged his fellow Greek strikers to remain calm, but seeing machine guns positioned above the camp, they disobeyed and took cover in hastily dug fire positions. Fighting erupted and 177 militia and soldiers joined the assault. Gunfire raged from 9:30 AM past 5 PM as families huddled in cellars beneath their tents. Twelve-year-old Frank Snyder was killed leaving his shelter, and the colony was eventually set ablaze.

When the smoke cleared, Tikas and other strikers were found shot in the back. Eleven children and two women were found suffocated in a subterranean cellar. At least 18 on the union side lay dead—while the National Guard suffered only one confirmed casualty. During 1915 Congressional hearings, Rockefeller denied any knowledge of the militia’s animosity or responsibility for the massacre, despite accusations from activists including Margaret Sanger and widespread condemnation from the national media.

The Ludlow Massacre was a landmark moment in American labor relations, prompting Congress to investigate; the resulting 1915 report proved influential in promoting child labor laws and the eight-hour work day. Sanger attacked Rockefeller in her magazine The Woman Rebel, urging readers to remember the men, women, and children sacrificed so that Rockefeller might continue his “noble career of charity and philanthropy.” Labor organizer Mother Jones, who had rallied the miners with fiery speeches daring the men to rise up or step aside for women brave enough to fight in their place, saw the massacre vindicate her warnings about corporate brutality. Today, the Ludlow tent colony site is owned by the UMWA, who erected a granite monument in memory of those who died, and the site was designated a National Historic Landmark in 2009. From the Ute and Cheyenne to the miners of Ludlow, Colorado’s history shows that wherever there is extraction, there is exploitation—and wherever there is exploitation, there is resistance.

Defend the Czech Elbit 10

Statement in Solidarity


12/04/2026

Since last week, police have arrested five pro-Palestine activists in Czechia, one person in Slovakia, one person in Bulgaria and three in Poland. Without sufficient evidence, the Czech state has charged these individuals with terrorism in connection with a fire on 20 March 2026 at a facility owned by Czech arms manufacturer LPP Holding and Elbit Systems in Pardubice, Czechia. Five individuals are currently imprisoned in Czech prisons, awaiting trial under harsh conditions and without any indication as to when they may be released.

Additional local activists are facing house raids, detention, interrogation, and device confiscation in attempts to uncover any shred of evidence.

This is not an isolated event, and repression against those who speak out against genocide is not new. It joins the long string of arrests and remanding of those who oppose Zionism witnessed across the world.

This is a witch hunt — plain and simple.

This current wave of persecution only reflects and builds upon the Czech state’s historical uncritical allegiance to Israel — an allegiance that has meant vetoing any attempt within the EU to shrink support for Israeli crimes against humanity. In keeping with the long standing worldwide practice of suppressing dissenting voices using terrorism laws, this criminalisation is an authoritarian tool used to silence those denouncing Czechia’s complicity in this genocide.

LPP Holding is a key manufacturer of drones and other weapons technologies in Central Europe, and recently announced plans to open a production and training facility in collaboration with Elbit Systems. Elbit is Israel’s largest arms producer, providing 85% of combat drones used by the Israeli military. It plays a principal role in the 75,000 deaths of Palestinians in Gaza — as the most conservative estimates suggest — since 7 October 2023 and over 720 since the declared “ceasefire” of 11 October 2025. An additional over 11,000 dead continued to be pulled out of rubble, and over 16,000 have been documented as killed through Israel’s man-made starvation campaign. It is estimated that over half a million Palestinians in Gaza are in some stage of malnutrition, illness and starvation. Between 7 October 2023 and 28 March 2026, 1,073 Palestinians — at least 233 of them children — were killed in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

The Czech state’s strategy is clear: to leverage this moment in order to harass, criminalise, and silence broad swaths of the Palestine solidarity movement. This is mirrored across Europe, the UK, the U.S. and all of the West, where we are consistently seeing Zionism driving state policy and police practice towards authoritarianism. While this current surge in authoritarianism may have started through the targeting of Palestine solidarity activists, as history shows us again and again, it will not end there.

We, the undersigned individuals and organizations, pledge our unwavering solidarity with the people of conscience in Czechia facing persecution for speaking up against the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

This moment demands swift international opposition and solidarity across borders. We join with the CzechElbit10 and our fellow people of conscience against the use of arbitrary and undemocratic accusations of “terrorism” to silence opposition to genocide and rising authoritarianism.

As part of our ongoing demand to stop the Czech government’s participation in the genocide in Palestine, we demand:

  • Immediate release of the CzechElbit10 and all charges dropped
  • End the witch hunt — no more terrorism allegations against people of conscience speaking out to stop the genocide in Palestine
  • Independent investigation into LPP’s participation in the war crimes committed by Elbit Systems, and immediate termination of and divestment from Elbit

Individuals and organisations can sign this statement here.