The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

Rally for Gaza, August 7th 2022, Potsdamer Platz

Photos by Phil Butland and Erika Mourgues


08/08/2022

Putinisher Beobachter – Documenting How Nazis and far-right journalists in Russia Engage in War Propaganda

New Research from Russia shows the extent of Nazi Influence on State Media


06/08/2022

President of Russia Vladimir Putin declared denazification was the aim of the war in Ukraine or, the liberation of Ukraine from Nazi-minded people and Nazi ideology. Many Nazis and far-right media work for state propaganda to promote Russian antifascism, which was just a pretext for the invasion of Ukraine. Antifascist Europereported five such Russian far-right journalists and two media outlets.

The term denazificationhas practically disappeared from Russian TV channels. Russian media outlet Proekt says that this is because, surveys showed that Russian citizens do not understand the meaning of the word denazification. However, Russian authorities and officials continue to use the term Ukrainian Nazis, and Russian official media and pro-government Telegram channels call Russian soldiers antifascists. This term is promoted even by those who even recently openly embraced National Socialism.

Gleb Ervier – A neo-Nazi journalist with a fascist tattoo on a head

In May, Ukrainian journalists discovered among war correspondents of the Russian news agency RIA Novosti this outspoken neo-Nazi. Examining his photos they concluded that he has at least three neo-Nazi tattoos on his body: the fascist fascia (bundles) on the back of his head, the rune Algiz on his arm and the inscription Jedem das Seine“ on his chest.

Gleb Ervier is a far-right tattooist from Tomsk, the NEWS.ru investigation alleges. There, he was noted for participating in the Occupy Pedophiliaproject of the Restructmovement, created by Russia’s most notorious white power skinhead Maxim Tesak“ Martsinkevich. A video of Ervier’s involvement in catching a pedophilewas published online.

Gleb Ervier moved to Moscow in 2016 and, together with Andrei Dedov (nicknamed Ded, of the Tesak gang), opened Studio 18, a tattoo parlour at the hipster Flacon art factory. Ervier also propagandised far-right views through his Citadel project, which produced three documentaries under the general title The European Viewwith himself as a host. The title is from a book of the same name by the odious SS officer Leon Degrelle. Gleb Ervier has removed his film from the Citadel channel, but it is easily found on YouTube.

In 2020, a big investigation into the Tesak gang murders came out, suggesting that Ded might have been involved in three murders including beheading of a Russian prostitute. Tesak testified against him and his associates and died in prison. Ded sold his share of the tattoo parlour and fled to Ukraine to avoid life imprisonment. In 2021, a public campaign was launched to shut down the Studio 18 tattoo parlour of Gleb Ervier and Ded. A TV report was published about the Nazis’ activities at Flakon, and a petition reached municipal deputies and was sent to the prosecutor’s office. However, Russian authorities have not responded to the demand to close the neo-Nazi tattoo parlour in the centre of Moscow bearing Adolf Hitler’s name in the title. The studio still exists today, but under a different name.

In February 2022, Gleb Ervier suddenly changed his profession from far-right tattooist to war correspondent, becoming a propagandist for the Kremlin. The ‘RIA Novosti’ (current name Russia Today) is one of the largest state-run news agencies in Russia. The website RIA.RU is one of the leaders of the ‘Runet’ among online information resources, and the most quoted Russian media on social networks since April 2022. Although Gleb Ervier had not previously engaged in professional journalism or collaborated with the media,,four days after the war began, his first report on the shelling of Donetsk came out on 28 February.

Ervier stressed on radio RT: This is not the first time the scandal surrounding my tattoos has come up and each time it fades quickly because there is no substance to it. It’s clear to everyone that I come from a certain subculture. Yes, indeed, I was far-right, I was a near-football fan with all that entails. That was for a long time, while I had my adolescent maximalism. Then it all ended. The whole story is on the internet, I came out of it publicly, levelled up, changed my views. Do I repent of that story? No. Simply because it was an experience a very unusual one. We don’t have many correspondents who have that experience. This experience helps to find interesting details, stories.

Ross Marsov – A leading Russian Identitarian

One of Gleb Ervier’s closest comrades is the young far-right activist and former white power skinhead Ross Marsow. In November 2020, Ervier interviewed him for his Citadel project. One month later they visited Armenia together to cover the mass protests, where they gained their first experience as correspondents.

Ross Marsow founded Identitarians of Russiain 2017, after the example of the European Generation Identitymovement. In itsfour years of existence, the movement has firmly established itself as a new right-wing movement of Russia with dozens of direct actions, rallies, lectures, trainings and debates. It published its book Generation Identityand organised a public lecture by the British far-right politician, co-founder and former leader of the English Defence League, Tommy Robinson in 2020. Identitarian of Russia was dissolved in 2021 due to an internal crisis.

Ross Marsow stresses that he has supported ‘Novorossiya’ (Russian expansionism) since 2014. Therefore, he had no question in principle whose side to take in the war. In April 2022 he went to the Donbass as a military correspondent. However, unlike Gleb Ervier, who received his journalist credentials from a state agency, Ross Marsov works for the small projects Ledorub, Urgent Now and Your News, which are in fact Telegram channels. Already in early May Ross Marsov reported from Mariupol, where he covered the siege of the Azovstal plant, he then went to the front line in the town of Popasna. In July he returned to Russia, where he began to speak about The New Right in War”.

Dmitriy Steshin – The BORN identity

One of the most prominent far-right Russian journalists working for state propaganda is Dmitry Steshin, a war correspondent of the yellow newspaper ‘Komsomolskaya Pravda’. This newspaper is part of the publishing house of the same name, one of the largest in the country, and KP.RU has a monthly traffic of about 100 million people.

Dmitry Steshin has covered the war in Ukraine since 2013. When Putin announced a special military operation, Steshin was already in Donetsk and warmly welcomed the president’s decision. Steshin is well acquainted with the militias of the unrecognised Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, as he has travelled with them to the front lines on more than one occasion. Steshin also published a series of reports from Mariupol during the siege of the Azovstal plant, where one of Ukraine’s most notorious far-right units, Azov, was entrenched. The Nazis are going to Valhalla first class,Steshin mockingly wrote in his text, which sounds extremely ambiguous in the context of his biography.

Steshin openly calls himself a nationalist: Liberals have usurped journalism, decided that light comes only from their ideas and they are right by birth. According to them, a person with nationalist views should be a dumb jew-eater with a snaggletoothed handwriting. I don’t fit that standard, I’m tearing up the template. But in addition Steshin has befriended Russian Nazis from one of the most dangerous groups ‘BORN’ (2008-2011), and wrote texts for the far-right magazine ‘Russian Image’ – a front for underground terrorists.

Steshin was a witness in the BORN case, but miraculously escaped prosecution, although there were direct indications that he helped the killers to obtain firearms and then to escape. BORN conducted a dozen particularly serious crimes, including killing Eduard Chuvashov, (judge of the Moscow City Court), Stanislav Markelov (lawyer), Anastasia Baburova (journalist), and the antifascists Alexander Ryukhin, Fedor Filatov, Ilya Dzhaparidze and Ivan Khutorskoy.

Dmitry Steshin was an old friend of BORN leader Nikita Tikhonov. Steshin testified during interrogations, he met the neo-Nazi Tikhonov at the editorial board meeting of the ‘Russian Image’. Started by Nikita Tikhonov, the magazine grew into the political organization of the same name. Nikita Tikhonov said he had been hiding in Steshin’s flat when he was put on the wanted list for the murder of antifascist Aleksandr Ryukhin in 2006 and went on the run. With Dmitry Steshin we had a common interest in trekking. As an enthusiastic military archaeologist, he suggested that I travel to World War II battlefields for research and outdoor recreation. We became friends,Tikhonov said in his testimony.

It was Steshin, according to Tikhonov, who introduced him to arms dealers. Using Steshin’s friendly feelings, I begged him to help me get something to shoot,the BORN leader recalled. Steshin introduced him to a trader, from whom Tikhonov purchased a Suomi submachine gun, a rifle Mosin round and ammunition. Thus the neo-Nazi gang got an arsenal of weapons. Through these acquaintances of Steshin, Nikita Tikhonov also purchased the Browning revolver with which Markelov and Baburova were shot. During the search of Steshin’s house some of Tikhonov’s things were found, including Tikhonov’s real passport – as the neo-Nazi himself lived with forged documents.

Nikita Tikhonov was convicted of murder and weapons possession in April 2011 and sentenced to life imprisonment in May 2011. Steshin was not the only journalist among the friends of BORN to get away with it.

Andrei Gulutin – a neo-Nazi drummer and a head of the Kremlin media

Andrei Gulutin, nicknamed Most, is another journalist implicated in the BORN case. Andrei Gulutin is mentioned in the materials of the murder case of lawyer Stanislav Markelov and journalist Anastasia Baburova, as a friend of Nikita Tikhonov. In particular, he was mentioned in testimony by the leader of the neo-Nazi group Right Hook.

Gulutin started as a drummer in the neo-Nazi Band of Moskow, in early 2000. They played Oi!/R.A.C. with Ska elements. Their first song titles were Street Fight, Let the Blood Spill, Nazi-ska, Aryan Legion, White Struggle. The Federal List of Extremist Materialsincludes several Band of Moscow songs banned in Russia, including More and More of Us, Three Bright Colours, NS Squads, Race War, Vivat; 1488th After That You Talk About Tolerance.

Gulutin moved on to play drums in the neo-Nazi band Right hook (2006-2010), which declared itself the voice of the ‘Russian Image’ organisation. Despite a flamboyant musical career and a Nazi past, Gulutin achieved success in the corridors of Kremlin.

By 2010, the ‘Russian Image’ came under Kremlin control, having direct supervisors from the Presidential Administration. In 2011, under the pseudonym of Andrei Osipov, Gulutin became head of the United Russia’s Young GuardInternet page, for the ruling party’s youth organization. After the BORN trial, nationalists from the Russian Image tried to disassociate themselves from the murderers, renamed themselves into right-wing conservativesand created a new website Modus Agendi, which Gulutin also led. Then former neo-Nazi musician came to success.

On 1 April 2013, the initially liberal on-line media outlet Ridus underwent an ownership change. Andrei Gulutin became deputy editor-in-chief, in 2015 editor-in-chief. He began to pursue an orthodox-statist editorial policy. Gulutin still leads Ridus. While his subordinates talk about the Nazis in Ukraine, their leader writes caustic columns about antifa, who are given license to hate and violence. Now Ridus has dropped off the top of the online statistics having lost popularity. According to open counters, its average day attendance is 150,000 people.

Gulutin admitted to participating in neo-Nazi music groups, but claims it means nothing: Andrei Gulutin is not an ‘adherent of ultra-right views’ – i.e. an ideology of degrading one group of people by others based on race, nationality, or any other grounds. Andrei Gulutin is not a politician to impose any views at all on the public or even his inner circle. Gulutin is, as any philistine is, what they call for all that is good against all that is bad… The story of Gulutin’s fights at concerts in his youth is a complete joke, you have either to point out the specific victims or don’t embarrass yourself. The only thing Gulutin is ready to admit is his participation in the Band of Moscow and Right hook when he was young. Participation in these musical groups, however, in no way showed Gulutin’s adherence to any political views.

Vladislav Maltsev – a white patriot with a two-bedroom flat

Vladislav Maltsev (real surname Noskov) describes himself as an expert on the far-right at Ukraina.ru, one of the main Russian state-owned online media outlets about Ukraine, created in 2014 by the news agency Russia Today. Yet Maltsev glosses over the fact that he himself was recently a far-right and a very prominent one at that.

In the 2000s Maltsev became known as the author of the Nazi blogs white_patriot and nebo_ slavyan. He joined the National Socialist Society(NSO), established in 2004, and promoted it among the far-right on livejournal.com, which was then the main social network in Russia. The NSO attracted radical Nazis who tried to come to power through street terror, but things did not go according to plan.

The NSO split and the NSO-North terrorist group was formed. In 2008, thirteen gang members were arrested on charges of 28 murders mostly of migrants, as well as the antifascist Alexei Krylov and the gang member Nikolai Melnik. Melnik was suspected of treason and beheaded on a video. In addition, the gang was accused of robbery, illegal arms and explosives trafficking, explosions, arson, and preparation for a terrorist attack on a power station. NSO-North leader Maksim Bazylev killed himself during interrogation. In 2011, five members of the gang received life sentences, while others were sentenced to long terms of 10 to 23 years. One of the NSO leaders, Sergey Korotkikh, nicknamed Botsman, fled to Ukraine, where he made a career in the ranks of Azov and bought a plane.

In January 2008, Vladislav Maltsev was beaten in Kiev by antifascists, and already in October by former comrades. Maltsev moved away from radical Nazis, shut down his blogs and became a journalist. In 2009, he began to publish in the Religion section of ‘Nezavisimaya Gazeta’. As a professional Islamophobe he made headlines around the construction of mosques in the Russian hinterland and the establishment of Sharia courts in Moscow. In 2014, he became a contributor to Svobodnaya Pressa and switched to the topic of Ukrainian nationalism. In 2017 Maltsev moved to the government-affiliated scandalous on-line outlet Life, where he continued to write about the persecution of Orthodoxy in Ukraine and Ukrainian nazis.

In a conflict with an antifascist journalist on Facebook, Maltsev boasted that he had bought a two-bedroom flat in Moscow with Italian tiles, German appliances and porcelainusing the royalties for his articles. This message became a popular meme, after which the owner of the Life mocked him on itsmain page and fired Maltsev. Maltsev started publishing his texts about Ukrainian Nazis in the state-owned publication Ukraina.ru, as well as in the government-affiliated publication Lenta.ru and in the openly ultra-right-wing outlets Zavtra and Tsargrad. These are large Russian media outlets with a combined readership of millions daily.

Tsargrad – First Russian Fox News owned by Konstantin Malofeev

Speaking of far-right journalists in Russia, it is impossible to ignore the ultra-conservative media outlet Tsargrad, owned by Orthodox businessman Konstantin Malofeev (check Аntifascist Europe database for details). Tsargrad launched in 2015 as a cable TV channel backed by American conservative Fox News channel director Jack Hanik. We want to create a network on Orthodox principles, similar to the way Fox News channel was created,Malofeev said. The editor-in-chief of Tsargrad TV was the far-right philosopher Alexander Dugin. The channel was named Tsargrad, referring to the Old Slavic name of Constantinople, the capital of the former Byzantine Empire and Orthodoxy. Its slogan is First Russian.

The launch was unsuccessful and by the end of 2017, Tsargrad TV switched to a broadcast on YouTube. However, on 28 July 2020, YouTube, a video service owned by Google, blocked Tsargrad’s account due to the sanctions law. The US Department of Justice identified Malofeev as one of the main sources of funding for separatists in Crimea and the Donetsk people’s republic, imposed sanctions against him and confiscated millions of dollars in his accounts.

In April 2021, the Moscow Arbitration Court ordered Google to reinstate the TV channel on YouTube under threat of fines, thus applying for the first time the priority of Russian law over international law. A year later, Tsargrad announced that it had received 1 billion rubles from Google – the money in the company’s accounts was seized by Russian authorities and then seized in favour of the TV channel. Tsargrad donated the funds to support the special military operation“ in Ukraine.

Konstantin Malofeev is an unusual businessman. He lost all his assets in a dispute with VTB bank, after which he switched to public activities. In the West, Malofeev is described as a key link in Russia’s control of Donbass. Since the beginning of the conflict in eastern Ukraine, Malofeev has been suspected of the coordination and financing of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics in Donbass, in particular the allocation of money for the purchase of weapons for the militia. The Ukrainian media referred to him as a sponsor of the Russian Spring. The orthodox businessman himself repeatedly denied such accusations, calling the multi-million dollar assistance of his foundation to Crimea and Donbass solely a humanitarian activity. At the same time, Malofeev’s former PR consultant Alexander Boroday became the first head of the self-proclaimed Donestk Peoples Republic (DNR) in 2014. Another acquaintance, Igor Girkin (Strelkov) – described as the businessman’s former security chief – became defense minister of the self-proclaimed republic. For these two appointments, the nickname separatist sponsorstuck to Malofeyev.

Malofeev maintains contacts with European far-right politicians. At the end of May 2014, he organized and moderated a meeting of Russian and European far-right politicians in Vienna. In April 2014, he assisted Jean-Marie Le Pen to obtain a 2 million euro loan from a Russian-owned company. In March 2019, the orthodox businessman joined the party A Just Russia—For Truthto create a conceptually new social-patriotic party with elements of monarchist ideologyon the basis of the party Rodina.

Tsargrad now represents the far-right pole on the Russian media scene. Before the war, it published texts about the dominance of migrants, the harm of vaccinations, abortions and LGBTQ+, attacks on the Orthodox faith and the advantages of monarchy. After the invasion of Ukraine, Tsargrad turned the propaganda knob to maximum and switched to total support for Putin’s actions and the army. Even publishing absurdly patriotic pieces, such as the display of the face of the Virgin Mary on glass in the hospital where Russian soldiers are treated.

Tsargrad is part of the Tsargrad group of companies, which included more than a dozen online media outlets like OkoloKremlia, Segodnya, Chechnya.ru, as well as Russkaya Narodnaya Liniya, RIA Katyusha, Russia Forever and SM-News. These sites are engaged in mutual promotion, with a combined audience of several tens of millions of readers.

Readovka. A tiny urban forum became a mouthpiece of xenophobia

The online media outlet Readovka was founded in 2011 in Smolensk as a typical urban public forum in Russia’s main social network VKontakte. In 2014, its owner Alexey Kostylev created the Readovka website, specialising on regional news. In 2017, a federal website appeared, covering events in Russia and the world. The name Readovka comes from Readovka Park in Smolensk and from the English word read. In November 2020, the head office of the holding company was moved to Moscow.

Readovka’s main platform is itsTelegram channel, founded in 2018. In April 2022, it reached the one-million-subscriber mark and is one of the five most quoted media outlets in the country. In March 2022, the team created a new Telegram channel, Readovka Explains, where its’ experts briefly answer questions about current events, including in Ukraine and world responses to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

At the end of 2021, the liberal outlets Novaya Gazeta and Important Stories analyzed what pro-government media write about migrants. It came to the conclusion that Readovka purposefully creates a negative image of migrants by reporting on ethnic crime.

Alexey Kostylev insists that he receives no money from the Kremlin or other authorities, has no outside funding, and has built his own infrastructure for the past seven years. Kostylev justifies the abundance of overtly xenophobic publications by saying that there has been a huge response to the news about the rampages of non-Russians… We must be expressing the unconscious, you know, of a typical Russian. A Russkiy, I would even say,Kostylev noted.

In February Readovka unequivocally supported Putin and the military invasion of Ukraine. However, two days after the war began, the site was blocked by the state censor Roskomnadzor. The agency added the site to the register of banned sites because of a week-old post about the crimes of migrants in Kaluga Oblast.

The publication’s staff expressed their indignation at the censors decision because they did not oppose Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: After spending two days on uninterrupted on-line, probably remaining the only major media outlet that does not flirt with anti-war rhetoric, we were thanked for such support. Roskomnadzor has blocked our site, and it is now inaccessible in Russia.

Access to the site was restored, and the publication continued to whip up patriotic hysteria, joining the war party. In April, Readovka even declared a boycott of Russian presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov after his positive remarks about TV host Ivan Urgant. The latter had left Russia after Russia invaded Ukraine. Readovka urged other patriotic media outlets against publishing Peskov’s comments.

Conclusion – Soldiers of a different war

The presence of the far-right in the Russian media field is noticeable. The war will only increase their influence on the audience, as the demand for nationalism in society will naturally grow. The greatest concern is not the editors sitting in the office – like Gulutin and Maltsev. Rather it is the war correspondents journalists who work directly on the front lines, like Gleb Ervier, Ross Marsov and Dmitriy Steshin. They see the war with their own eyes and report first-hand experience of the military conflict. They quickly find common ground with the soldiers in the trenches, because they are also soldiers, but of a different war an information one. Like soldiers, journalists suffer bombings and explosions and the loss of comrades, and war cripples them just as much and toughens their views on the other side.

Communities of like-minded people have already been built around war correspondents, to raise money for humanitarian needs for the population of Donbass and equipment for military units; and also share a common ideology. War correspondents are new points of attraction and opinion leaders for a society at war. Audiences trust war correspondents, so far-right journalists can easily use the situation to promote their own narratives.

Meanwhile, far-right journalists are not ashamed of their views in Russia, and often openly declare them, emphasising themselves as experts on the far-right. As Gleb Ervier writes in his Telegram channel And since someone has taken to rewarding me with expertise on Nazism, here is my expert opinion in Ukraine we are not dealing with innocent nationalism and the struggle for independence. Europe, both directly and indirectly, spiced up with regional features, is breeding a new Reich for itself and the world. And it must be fought.

In the 1990s and 2000s with the Chechen campaigns, the Russian media promoted hatred towards persons of Caucasian nationality. In the USA, the root term ‘Caucasian’ is a synonym for white, but in Russia it is derogatory term, but became the most characteristic newspaper cliché of the time. We should now expect an increase in hostility towards Ukrainians.

These trends are most pronounced on Telegram the most politicised segment of Runet. Russians who consume information through traditional media (television and print) are more amorphous and passive and do not share radical views. This is best illustrated by the failed launch of Tsargrad on television networks, which degenerated into a niche Internet product. Meanwhile the successful launch of Readovka on Telegram, earned an audience on a clickbait about migrant rampages.

Admittedly, Russia has developed a community of ultra-conservative journalists and publicists who serve the interests of the authorities and influence public opinion by shifting it to the right. However, on the whole, nationalism in Russia is weak and the authorities are not yet mobilising the population for a full-fledged people’s war, as demanded by Igor Strelkov, the far-right leader of the social movement Novorossiya the man who launched the flywheel of war in 2014.

“Occupiers often collaborate. Why shouldn’t oppressed people exchange knowledge and network too?”

Interview with the activists cycling from Sweden to Western Sahara – via Japan


04/08/2022

Sanna Ghotbire and Benjamin Ladraa are two Swedish human rights defenders from the project Solidarity Rising are biking 48.000km through 40 countries to raise awareness about the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara, Africa’s last colony. They started in Sweden in May 2022, and will arrive in Western Sahara sometime late 2024 or early 2025. Phil Butland spoke to Sanna and Benjamin when they recently passed through Berlin.

 

Hi there. Could you just start by introducing yourselves. What are you doing in Berlin?

Sanna: I’m Sanna. I’m based in Gothenburg, Sweden. I’ve been a human rights activist for almost 10 years, and have worked on a lot of other issues like asylum rights. I did a lot of work with Latin America and was in Colombia and Ecuador. So I had already an interest for international solidarity work.

I heard about Western Sahara for the first time a couple of years ago, because there’s an organization based in Sweden called Emmaus that does work there. I was applying for a job in Spanish, and most work around Western Sahara is in Spanish. I was really surprised that we don’t know more about Western Sahara, and people don’t talk about occupation.

When I met Benjamin, he had this initial idea of doing something around biking, and then we started planning it together.

Benjamin: My name is Benjamin Ladraa. I’m also a Swedish human rights activist. Most of the projects I’ve done have been for Palestine. My main focus for the past couple of years is a walk from Sweden to Palestine, which took 11 months and visited 14 countries raising awareness about the occupation.

The idea for this project was born out of that one. I discovered that the most efficient methodology of raising awareness is doing an extreme adventure, and then meeting all the people along the way, who are interested in the adventure. This gives you an opportunity to speak about human rights, in this case about Western Sahara.

I’m also a musician, playing drums and percussion, I was a musician for most of my life until I discovered that the world was bigger than music. And then that discovery of injustice and human rights violations led me down this path, which I think is the path I’ll walk for the rest of my life.

The project is that you’re cycling from Sweden to Western Sahara, but not directly?

Benjamin: We’re cycling from Sweden to Japan, and then to Western Sahara, to emphasize that it’s a way around the entire planet. The distance is longer than the equator – 48,000 kilometres in total through 40 countries. Since it’s so long, it raises attention within itself. And this attention can be directed towards Western Sahara.

Sanna: The point of this trip isn’t just to raise awareness about Western Sahara, although that is the big focus. It’s important for us in this journey that when we’re visiting these 40 countries, we meet with human rights activists, and with similar like minded organizations which are also working with oppressed groups.

When we visited refugee camps, we met with a lot of local organizations, and we tried to create a map of all of their needs. They mainly need to be known by the wider public and to collaborate with more organizations globally. We’re trying to match them with people in other countries.

For example, now, when we’re going to the Czech Republic, where we’re searching for film institutions, organizations that could collaborate with the Sahrawi film school. We’re searching for feminist movements that would want to work with the Saharawi women’s union.

Benjamin: We could summarize it as the belief in intersectional solidarity. Rather than there being many causes to engage for, there’s really just one cause – of anti-colonialism, anti-occupation, pro-human rights, pro-freedom. Getting people to unite under that cause and occupied people working with each other sharing experiences, so that they all become stronger than before.

We hope that followers of the Palestinian question will join the fight for Western Sahara and vice versa. And also all the other places.

Sanna: We noticed that occupiers often collaborate, they sell weapons to each other, they exchange tactics in order to oppress each respective group. And we were thinking, why shouldn’t oppressed people exchange knowledge and network too?

When it comes to Palestine, the PLO did a lot of outreach… Palestine is occupied by a very well known Western ally… whereas people don’t really know that Morocco is a Western ally…

What sort of organizations you in touch with already?

Sanna: Usually, it’s informal networks of people. So it could be activist groups that work with specific human rights questions. It could be women’s groups, leftist journalists like yourselves, schools, universities.

Benjamin: We’d like to be in touch with everyone who falls under the umbrella of solidarity and human rights, no matter the cause, because we think we could also get them interested in the cause of Western Sahara.

Activists in the West know about Palestine. They know about Kurdistan. A lot of them don’t know about Western Sahara. Have you got an idea why that is?

Sanna: We’ve talked about this a lot. I think there’s could be several reasons. When it comes to Palestine, the PLO did a lot of outreach, they worked a lot with the Black Panther Party, and there were a lot of international conferences and meetings.

Benjamin: The PLO had a diplomatic push in the 1980s, when they set up embassies and got countries to recognize them. Today, they have over 150 Palestinian embassies in different countries.

Sanna: Added to this, Palestine is occupied by a very well known Western ally. This makes it relevant for the West, whereas people don’t really know that Morocco is a Western ally. Although we know that they closely collaborate with the US and France, it’s not common knowledge.

I guess Morocco isn’t as strategically important to the West?

Benjamin: I don’t think Western Sahara is “Important” for anybody when it comes to power relations and geopolitics. It’s just important if you care about principles. And I guess that countries don’t do that.

There is also the media blockade. You will never ever hear about it in any media. It is so rarely mentioned. And when it is, it’s so brief.

Sanna: It’s also in Africa.

Benjamin: In general, nobody knows anything about anything in Africa.

Sanna: It’s also seen as Arab on Arab violence. This is different to the occupations in Kurdistan and Palestine. Palestine has allies among a lot of Arab countries – on paper at least. It’s different with Western Sahara.

Benjamin: If you count the allies of Western Sahara, there isn’t a Popular Movement for Western Sahara in any country, except for Algeria.

We’d appreciate cultural guidance…There’s also the media – the radio stations, the newspapers, the bloggers, the podcasters, the social media influencers. Anyone who’s in any of the places we’re visiting should get in touch.

What sort of help do you need from international activists?

Benjamin: We need some guidance on political actions – what is possible and what is not possible in different countries? It would be good to have some insights what we can do in the countries we visit.

Sanna: It would be also be interesting to talk to politicians and have an honest conversation about what they can do.

We’re also making a documentary with the goal of intersectional solidarity. We really want to find interesting activists to interview. We’d be interested in contacting interesting people and groups from your network.

What’s next on your travels?

Sanna: After Berlin and East Germany, we’re going to the Czech Republic, Vienna and Bratislava. Following that it’s Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia.

Benjamin: Montenegro, North Macedonia, Kosovo, Albania.

We’d appreciate cultural guidance. Anyone who’s from the countries we arrive in is really interesting. There’s also the media – the radio stations, the newspapers, the bloggers, the podcasters, the social media influencers. Anyone who’s in any of the places we’re visiting should get in touch.

Our project is relevant in a lot of countries, but because it’s about anti-colonialism, Africa is particularly important. If the African media can talk about what we’re doing, that would be very useful.

On top of that, because of the language, we’re interested in being covered by the Spanish speaking world – Spain of course, but also the Spanish colonies such as Latin America. A lot of Latin American countries have recognised Western Sahara. So, they support us, but I don’t think they write about it that often.

How do you think we can work better in the future?

Benjamin: We don’t want to just take and take. We want to help you. We’re building our own network. If you’re organising another Left Journalism Day School and it’s online, we’d love to take part.

Sanna: And maybe share it with our network.

Benjamin: We can promote it, invite people to attend.

Sanna: I think it’s really interesting. This is something we’ve talked about before. How can we have a global conference for practising journalists and journalists working in occupied areas so they can exchange strategies? That could be different things. Some people have the need to understand how do I create a website? How do I promote what I have? Others just need how to build a good infrastructure.

How can international activists help what you’re doing?

We also thought that we could write to famous journalists or film makers… If anyone knows Javier Bardem and Penelope Cruz, please send them our way.

Benjamin: We have one campaign which is to fundraise for cameras for Sahrawi journalists and human rights defenders. They’re filming themselves, making small interviews, explaining that the Moroccans took their camera. We’re hoping to make this into a nice campaign video and poster.

We need to raise about $10,000 in order to afford a couple of cameras. They need good quality stuff. We’re also writing to camera companies asking for discounts and sponsorships, but we’re not optimistic on that front.

Sanna: We’re thinking of kicking off this campaign In September when people are back from the Summer.

We also thought that we could write to famous journalists or film makers, people who have a lot of following and get them to share our campaign. If anyone knows Javier Bardem and Penelope Cruz, please send them our way.

If we have a short video that’s about the basics of journalism and the campaign about people having their cameras stolen, people should stand behind it.

Benjamin: It’s also an amazing awareness raising opportunity to get the name Western Sahara mentioned.

You can follow the Solidarity Rising project on social media under the name @solidarityrising. Become a Patreon here or here.

#solidarityrising #bike4westernsahara #walktopalestine

Berthold Brecht and the 1953 East Berlin Workers’ Uprising

The socialist playwright’s ambiguous attitude to the mass action shows his contradictory attitude to so-called “State Socialism”


03/08/2022

On Sunday, 31st July, I visited the Brecht/Weigel house in Buckow as part of a trip organised by the Berlin LINKE Internationals and DSA Berlin (more information at the foot of this article). Inside the house, one subject dominated above all others – the East Berlin workers’ uprising of June 17th 1953.

There are at least three different places in and around the house where you can read Brecht’s poem Die Lösung (The Solution). That’s the one that ends “Would it not in that case be simpler for the government To dissolve the people And elect another?”. The poem was never published in Brecht’s lifetime, eventually appearing in Die Welt in 1959.

Other artefacts show Brecht positioning himself much more guardedly. There are typewritten letters to the government and to SED leader Walter Ulbricht, expressing his concern and pledging his friendship with the Soviet Union. We also see a copy of the front page of the State Newspaper Neues Deutschland in which Brecht is quoted as saying: “the workers’ demonstration was abused for warlike purposes” and “I hope that the provocateurs will be isolated and their networks broken.”

On the other hand, there are also transcripts from discussions in Brecht’s theatre, the Berliner Ensemble, on 17th and 18th June, where he clearly shows support for the demonstrators. We also see reports from his fellow actors and theatre workers who say that some of the quotes attributed to him in the Party media reflected neither his feelings nor his vocabulary.

The 1953 Uprising

Maybe it’s worth briefly explaining the 1953 uprising here. On 16th June, construction workers struck against work quotas. The next day, one million people demonstrated in East Germany, in particular in Berlin. 25,000 people demonstrated, but they were cleared away by Soviet tanks. When Brecht was expressing his friendship with the Soviet Union, he is implicitly supporting this action.

This was one of the first indications that one of the Eastern European “workers’ states”, which had been effectively imposed by the Soviet military after the Second World War, was actually acting against the interest of Eastern European workers. In the “workers’ state” of East Germany, workers were demonstrating against the government for better conditions.

One lesson to be drawn from this action is that the actions required to win reforms in the East were not fundamentally different to those in the West – strike actions and mass demonstrations. It also showed that the Soviet-backed states could deal with opposition just as ruthlessly as the capitalist states of the West.

This is not the place to have a detailed discussion about the class nature of post-war Eastern Europe, but briefly put, in East Germany a small number of people (let’s call them the ruling class) profited from the exploitation of the majority (who we can call the working class). As a State-sponsored playwright, Brecht found himself in an uncomfortable position between both groups.

The social democratic writer Günther Grass satirised Brecht’s dilemma in his play “The Plebians Rehearse the Uprising”. A dramaturg (“Der Chef”, known as The Boss in the English translation), who is clearly modelled on Brecht, is leading his actors in rehearsals for his new version of Corialanus (a play which Brecht did try to rewrite between 1951 and 1953). Meanwhile, real workers come into the theatre to report from a real workers’ uprising which is happening outside the theatre. They ask Der Chef for his support.

Martin Schofield describes what happens next: “The workers … accuse him [The Boss] of wanting to remain in favor with the authorities simply to save his theatre. The Boss tries on his side to involve the rebellious workers in his production, to help them see what went wrong with theirs. For the Boss, integrity resides in sticking to the artifice of of his production rather than in trying to play a part in the real uprising”.

What to make of it all?

First of all, although Brecht maintained an Austrian passport until the end of his life, he genuinely believed that the DDR was the least bad option – a belief that was confirmed by his experience in Hollywood, where he briefly became the eleventh member of the Hollywood Ten (more about this, below).

Secondly, his life in the DDR was one of relative privilege. The State gave him his own theatre, with full artistic control. He could afford this lovely lakeside house in Buckow alongside his Berlin home near Hegel’s graveyard in Chauseestraße.

But thirdly, the DDR was less than a decade old. West Germany had retained much of the old Nazi State apparatus. Nearly 100 former Nazis held high-ranking positions in the Justice Ministry (This was not a temporary phenomenon. Over half of West German lawyers and judges between 1949 and 1973 had been members of Hitler’s party).

This article started as a much shorter post on my facebook page. Reacting to the original post, someone remarked: “BTW Brecht was not allowed to live in West Germany, which tells a lot and is a scandal by itself. Few people of the establishment want to be remembered of this today. (The Trotskyist Ernest Mandel was also not allowed entry to West Germany decades later).”

In contrast, many of the East German leaders had spent the war in exile or in Concentration Camps. This was a country which called itself Communist and anti-fascist, and Brecht still considered himself to be a Communist and anti-fascist.

My friend Victor Grossman defected to the DDR in 1952 after facing a one year prison sentence for having been a member of the US Communist Party. In 1953, he was living in East Berlin. Victor was always a critic of the establishment – East and West, but he is adamant that the uprising was a manoeuvre by the CIA. Now I disagree fundamentally with Victor on this, but it does show that serious socialists were suspicious of the action. It is not too much of a flight of fancy to think that Brecht shared these suspicions.

What did Brecht really think?

We’re unlikely to ever know what Brecht really thought, but I think that both his private talks, as articulated in die Lösung, and his official statements, were made with a degree of sincerity. When workers rose up, he did feel automatic sympathy, but he also knew that the West was determined to destroy the country to which he had chosen to move for political reasons.

So, his reaction was typically Brechtian. Brecht’s plays are littered with opportunists, who ultimately act out of self interest – “Erst kommt das Fressen, dann kommt die Moral” (Food comes first, then morality), as he (or one of his characters) says in the Threepenny Opera.

Whether it’s Macheath in the Threepenny Opera in Victorian London, Mother Courage in the Thirty Years War, Galileo faced with torture and death by the Spanish Inquisition or Schwejk in the Second World War, a recurring theme in Brecht’s plays is the cocky individual who outwits the authorities and survives.

This is, in effect, what happened when Brecht testified before Joe McCarthy’s House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) in 1947. Accused of being a Communist, he spent 2 days in court willingly answering the questions put to him with a string of hilarious gibberish, before fleeing the country.

There was a slight difference in Brecht’s attitude to the 1953 uprising. He felt nothing but contempt for his US-American McCarthyite prosecutors. On the other hand, he had something invested in the East German government. But he wasn’t going to put his neck on the line, and ultimately chose to support the DDR against what he saw as the forces of agents of imperialism. Brecht never did speak out publicly in support of the uprising.

But he never destroyed the manuscript of Die Lösung.

We visited the Brecht-Weigel Haus on one of the €9 Travel Ticket tours organised by the Berlin LINKE Internationals and DSA Berlin to discover relatively unknown parts of Germany. Two further trips are planned – to the former concentration camp at Sachsenhausen on 14th August (date tbc) and to the DDR art archive in Beeskow on 21st August. No need to book up. Just turn up at Alexanderplatz station at the time given in the Event description with your €9 ticket.

New Book on the British National Health Service is a Useful Tool in Fight for Just Healthcare

Review: NHS Under Siege. John Lister, Jacky Davis (eds.)


02/08/2022

Like Woody Guthrie’s guitar (a ‘machine for killing fascists’), ‘NHS Under Siege’ is intended not just to educate, but as a weapon to inform and strengthen the fight for the National Health Service (NHS) and social justice. Edited by two veteran campaigners and with a forward by the writer Michael Rosen, the book has contributions from, trade unionists, academics, public and child health experts, health policy analysts and COVID bereaved relatives. With attacks on healthcare funding in Germany and across Europe, it is fruitful to compare the experience of struggle in the UK for for just healthcare system in a post-COVID world.

The first of these writers is Michael Marmot reminding us that while the NHS must be defended against attack, there is also a need to focus on the conditions that make people sick in the first place – the social determinants of health and health equity. Even before the pandemic, life expectancy increases had slowed dramatically, health inequalities were increasing and life expectancy for the poorest was getting worse. This was the direct result of fiscal policies that led to massive decreases in public expenditure and dramatic increases in child poverty.

A major section of the book draws on the People’s COVID Inquiry, elegantly summarised by Jacky Davis, exposing lack of preparedness, sluggish response, failure to protect both workers and the vulnerable, preference for the private sector, cronyism and corruption, and lack of accountability for tens of thousands of COVID deaths.

The adverse effects of austerity policies are explored in detail together with the ever present and misleading spin from government. For example, £34bn funding marking the NHS 70th birthday in 2018 was in fact only £20bn in real terms. The last decade ended with 9,000 acute and general beds closed, 22% of mental health beds lost, the pre-COVID waiting list increased from 2 million  to 4.5 million cases, deliberate lying to the public about the prospect of forty new hospitals, and unacknowledged needs related to a four million increase in population. The NHS now faces an existential crisis both from ten years of austerity that wiped out the growth of the previous decade and the huge challenge while ill-prepared and under resourced of dealing with the covid pandemic.

The authors argue that the ‘besieging forces’ (right wing politicians, private health care corporations, etc.) don’t want to replace the tax funded system, but to exploit it more fully by ensuring the greatest flow of profitable activity to private providers, while also maximising the numbers of patients who will opt to pay for elective treatment rather than face long delays. A core NHS would be maintained to treat emergencies, provide care for maternity, complex and chronic cases, train staff and foot the bill for the poor, sick and elderly. Ministers continue to gaslight the public about ‘spending more than ever before’ on health when the truth is quite the reverse. Each year since 2010, the health budget has grown less than the previous average increase in spending, bringing real terms cuts as resources lag behind rising costs.

Key expectations that there would be a ‘national upgrade in prevention and public health’ set out in the 2014 Five Year Forward View for NHS were not met, while service providers have been overwhelmed by a slew of undeliverable objectives, lacking the investment and workforce required to make them feasible. Policies, decisions and circumstances that have brought us to this situation, the actual and real term cuts in spending, the fragmentation, the privatisation, the so-called reforms, reorganisation and plans that have weakened the NHS and made it more dependent on the private sector, including the most recent reorganisation into Integrated Care Systems, are documented and deconstructed.

A devastating recent report from the parliamentary Health and Social Care Committee has characterised the current situation in the NHS as the ‘greatest workforce crisis in its history’, castigating government for an absence of credible strategy, with critical gaps in almost every area of care. Health policy analyst Roy Lilley concludes the book by pointing out that without a workforce plan the NHS will fail, leading to a poor service for poor people. While he also opines that ‘no one plans to fail, they simply fail to plan’, it is difficult to read this book and not conclude that government policy does indeed amount to planned failure.

The authors stress that the siege of the NHS has been opposed, and their intention is to arm and fuel the resistance. Defences could be strengthened now by new money, above inflation pay rises for staff, and all investment being channelled into reopening, rebuilding and expanding NHS capacity rather than squandering on private providers.

This book should be read by anyone interested in both defending and rebuilding the NHS and in addressing health inequity more generally as a matter of social justice, packed as it is with facts and insight presented in an accessible and well referenced form. It should also be read by anyone with any pretension to wanting to examine critically the claim by the conservative government that it cares for and has been generous to the NHS. John Lister reminds readers of the long history of campaigners fighting to defend and improve services, going back to the 1970s. This book should help inspire new generations of activists as well as stimulate the development of novel strategy and tactics. The question is raised that If the mission of the NHS is to put the equity of health and wellbeing at the heart of all policy, how much more should this be true for the whole of society? Read the book and join the fight.

NHS Under Siege. John Lister, Jacky Davis (eds.). The Merlin Press Limited, Dagenham, 2022