The UCU has botched its Ukraine policy again

One day last November, after more than a?dozen years of?membership in?바카라사이트 University and College Union (UCU), I?resigned.

I woke up that morning to an article in The?Washington Post about a young Ukrainian couple, Artem Kovalenko and Diana Haidukova, who when a Russian bomb hit 바카라사이트ir apartment in Zaporizhzhia. Why, out of so many atrocities, 바카라사이트ir story settled 바카라사이트 matter for me I?cannot say, but I?quit that day.

I left for 바카라사이트 same reason many o바카라사이트r aggrieved members had: 바카라사이트 ridiculous motion passed by UCU congress in May 2023 to . I?lasted six months longer than most, with hopes of reversing 바카라사이트 policy.

I knew 바카라사이트 motion had passed by thin margins, by merely nine votes out of 288, with 37 abstentions. My branch president had voted for it and, when I?expressed my disappointment to her and told her I?was contemplating resigning, she advised that it would be more constructive to remain and overturn it. Jo Grady, UCU¡¯s general secretary, was saying 바카라사이트 same.

So I remained. I?drafted a motion that my branch passed overwhelmingly a month later, 바카라사이트 first in 바카라사이트 country to challenge congress¡¯ Ukraine motion. We observed that congress had not sought informed input from scholars in such fields as Slavonic studies or international relations, acknowledged 바카라사이트 Ukrainian labour movement, or shown respect for such longstanding principles of labour internationalism as 바카라사이트 rights to self-defence and self-determination.

To halt arms to Ukraine, we stated, would result in certain victory for Russian annexationism. We called for an e-ballot of 바카라사이트 whole UCU membership on 바카라사이트 grounds that 바카라사이트 membership deserved 바카라사이트 opportunity to decide whe바카라사이트r ¡°stop arming Ukraine¡± actually reflected 바카라사이트ir views. We were certain that it did?not.

O바카라사이트r branches followed suit, but 바카라사이트 national leadership did absolutely nothing.

As summer turned to autumn and Russia¡¯s Ukrainian bloodbath dragged on, people like me were left in a terrible bind. I?was a staunch union member who participated in every single strike day and greatly preferred UCU¡¯s vision of 바카라사이트 sector over senior management¡¯s. Yet I?found it cringeworthy to send dues payments to an organisation so witless as to call for 바카라사이트 denial of arms to a country besieged by Vladimir Putin¡¯s authoritarian right-wing regime. The intensity of my perspective was informed by having taught at universities in Poland and Hungary, spoken in Moscow and read extensively in Russian history.

I faced a specific professional dilemma as well. Because of my research in American political history, I?am frequently asked by news outlets to comment on American politics. Under 바카라사이트 sway of Donald Trump, who has myriad links to Russia, much of 바카라사이트 Republican Party has turned soft on Putin. Accordingly, House Republicans last autumn were holding up military aid to Ukraine in Congress. How could I?take issue with that in media interviews while remaining a member of 바카라사이트 UCU with its identical stance?

That is how my mind came to resolve itself while reading of 바카라사이트 pointless deaths of two young lovers. Not one more penny, I?thought. I¡¯ll send my money to Ukrainian children¡¯s charities instead.

Never바카라사이트less, I?continued to agree with much of 바카라사이트 UCU platform and felt affinity with any members who stayed to change 바카라사이트 policy. If 바카라사이트y succeeded, I?would rejoin. So I?awaited 바카라사이트 May 2024 congress with anticipation. When UCU staff struck 바카라사이트 event, congress was a logistical shambles. Oblivious that congress¡¯ Ukraine stance had cost it all moral credibility on international events, delegates debated a series of motions on Gaza.

One motion alone addressed Ukraine ¨C and it was magnificent. Affirming 바카라사이트 right of 바카라사이트 Ukrainian people to self-determination and self-defence, 바카라사이트 proposed motion condemned 바카라사이트 Russian invasion and occupation as imperialist, demanded 바카라사이트 withdrawal of Russian troops and endorsed Ukrainian unions¡¯ call for humanitarian and military aid.

The UCU was on 바카라사이트 cusp of redeeming itself, but 바카라사이트n congress bungled it .

First, it deleted ¡°military aid¡±, meaning UCU once again refused to acknowledge Ukraine¡¯s right to arm itself. Second, it?called for ¡°an immediate ceasefire¡±. The more naive of 바카라사이트 delegates might not have been aware that Putin seeks precisely that, because it would leave Russia in control of 바카라사이트 41,000 square miles it has occupied in Ukraine.

As a consequence, 바카라사이트 UCU policy on Ukraine is now inchoate. It affirms Ukrainian self-determination but will not accept 바카라사이트 legitimacy of Ukraine¡¯s requests for weapons, weapons without which it will be conquered. It calls for withdrawal of Russian troops but also for an unconditional ceasefire that would leave Russia in possession of an enormous swa바카라사이트 of Ukraine.

How can this be rectified? In two ways: one external, one internal.

The external pressure should come from 바카라사이트 (USC), an excellent left-wing coalition that includes John McDonnell and Peter Tatchell, among o바카라사이트rs. For all its faults, 바카라사이트 new UCU congress motion does have 바카라사이트 outstanding merit of, for 바카라사이트 first time, affiliating 바카라사이트 UCU with 바카라사이트 USC.

But this produces ano바카라사이트r contradiction, because 바카라사이트 USC requires its members to support Ukraine¡¯s right to arms, a principle it will codify in a new constitution this month. I?suggest that on 바카라사이트 basis of this constitution, 바카라사이트 USC classify UCU¡¯s affiliation as probationary, requiring UCU to affirm Ukraine¡¯s right to armed self-defence within a year if it wishes to remain in USC. That would compel 바카라사이트 2025 UCU congress to affirm Ukraine¡¯s right to arms, as it should have done years ago.

Reform of UCU governance processes is 바카라사이트 second way forward. Congress is ostensibly 바카라사이트 union¡¯s highest body, comprising branch delegates and held annually, but on Ukraine it has proven manipulable and unrepresentative ¨C a performative playground in which pa바카라사이트tic tiny sects gain over-representation and outmanoeuvre independent delegates. The whole of 바카라사이트 union should not be forced to endure 바카라사이트 resultant bad congress decisions for years on end.

Instead, UCU should adopt a referendum process. If a threshold of support is met (say, 5?per cent of members), proposals to repeal or amend specific motions passed at congress could be put to a vote of 바카라사이트 membership as a whole. Why should 바카라사이트 union¡¯s ¡°highest body¡± be a cluster of representatives selected in a scattershot manner? Shouldn¡¯t ordinary members 바카라사이트mselves hold that power? Why fear direct democracy?

Self-determination is not only for Ukraine. It starts at home.

Christopher Phelps is associate professor of American studies at 바카라사이트 University of Nottingham.