The European/International Solidarity Network with Ukraine and its Opening towards Latin America

It is within the European Solidarity Network with Ukraine (RESU) that the question of its transformation into an international network is raised; in other words, it is about formalizing the fact that it is not just European. Formalizing, because in reality it has already expanded to include a few individuals or groups from the American continents. Not enough to debate, apparently.

For the Solidarity Union Solidaires, if comrades from other continents have not found it useful since 2022 to create continental solidarity networks with Ukraine and prefer to join an international network, it is simply a matter of taking note.

But this is an opportunity for us to draw attention to the motivations behind this proposal, over four years after the creation of RESU. This proposal was made following the international anti-fascist conference held in Porto Alegre at the end of March. To reiterate what has been said many times since January 2026 within the French committee of RESU:

Solidarity Union Solidaires did not participate in this international anti-fascist conference, for two main reasons:

– Firstly, the fact that it was convened by the PT, the PCdoB, and the PSOL. The fact that partisan organizations participating and/or supporting the Lula government convened this initiative did not elicit enthusiasm, especially as in the eleven scheduled conferences, there was nothing planned regarding the responsibility of left-wing governments in the rise of the extreme right;

– Second, and more directly related to the RESU, because in terms of war, imperialism, people’s resistance, Ukraine and Russia were never mentioned, neither in the call text nor in the eleven scheduled conferences. Therefore, we believe that this initiative had no relevance to solidarity with the Ukrainian resistance. Nonetheless, we clarify that we have no opinion to offer on the fact that organizations from RESU participate in this meeting, as each can do so for initiatives they support.

The highlighting of representatives from a French organization known for its lack of support for the Ukrainian resistance was not likely to spark regrets about our non-participation.

We decided not to weaken the French committee of RESU when it was noted within it that the presence of Ukrainian and RESU comrades in Porto Alegre was a good thing, in the name of a consensus that did not exist (and not just because of representatives of the Solidarity Union Solidaires).

Regarding us, before and after, it is clear that this initiative was not about supporting the Ukrainian resistance. To understand the context, we share what representatives of the Fourth International Committee say: “In fact, our organizations [of the Fourth International] – particularly the MES, a tendency within the PSOL particularly strong in Rio Grande do Sul – constituted a large part of the participants: on the one hand, it is a source of pride, but on the other hand, it reflects the fact that the struggle for unity, for the construction of a mass movement outside reformist organizations and unions, is still ongoing.”

If we revisit the subject today, it is because this dynamic, in our view, is crucial for common activities within RESU. We will not debate whether it is positive or not for a few dozen convinced people to participate in a workshop (out of 150) with Ukrainian comrades at this conference attended by several thousand people; nor the fact that the Ukrainian resistance and the Putin regime still do not exist in the final declaration.

The conditions under which the opening to Latin America becomes self-evident for many are questioning: this is explicitly following Porto Alegre and based on links with one of the internal currents of the PSOL, the MES. That a part of a Brazilian political party supports the Ukrainian resistance is obviously not questionable; however, in 2026, pretending to discover that there are union and political forces in Latin America, particularly in Brazil, that hold these positions is astonishing: it has been the case for four years, not only in terms of positions but also of related practices.

Within the French committee of RESU, and more broadly within RESU, we had the opportunity to explain on several occasions the common work we were carrying out through the international union network of solidarity and struggles with our comrades from the Central sindical e popular Conlutas.

Since 2022, these comrades have been involved in three union convoys to Ukraine, both in terms of individuals going there and for financial and material solidarity.

The CSP Conlutas launched a campaign for water initiated by the KVPU miner’s union in Kryvyi Rih. This campaign was launched at the last CSP-Conlutas congress in 2023 and continued with actions in São José dos Campos, Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte, Mariana, São João del Rey, and São Paulo, in the presence of a miners’ union representative.

They invited representatives from Ukrainian unions to their congresses where they spoke in front of 3,000 people.

The CSP Conlutas organized the campaign for the release of two social movement militants, Den ys Matsola and Vladyslav Zhuravlev, who were taken prisoner at the start of the large-scale aggression in 2022 in Marioupol.

Since the start of the large-scale Russian aggression in 2022, CSP-Conlutas has regularly participated in the monthly demonstrations of the Ukrainian community in São Paulo.

Additionally, comrades from the CSP Conlutas have carried out several local activities: conferences during university back-to-school events in several universities, debates within unions and the popular movement, as well as online activities with activists in Ukraine.

In short, since 2022, we have known that there are “non-campist” forces in Latin America, particularly in Brazil, who have been taking action for four years; the least we can do is to prioritize support for them, right? This would be a source of efficiency, although it will not solve the issue of “building a mass movement” solely through this means; it would represent a shared desire to continue building internationalist solidarity with the Ukrainian resistance together.

The recent text by Alfons Bech, the union coordinator of ENSU, is also highlighted as offering prospects for the future to build together. What is the conclusion of this text? It is this: “Porto Alegre showed that it was possible to come together and fight together. The Fourth International, the MES-PSOL, the LIS, the PSTU-LITCI, the UIT-CI, Democracia Socialista de Puerto Rico, La Aurora, as well as other political organizations and revolutionary journals agree to support Ukraine. Most of them participated in Porto Alegre. Would they agree to work together on organizing an anti-fascist conference in Europe around common points where the fight against all imperialisms, the freedom of peoples, and the united front of the working class would be the common reference?”

As for us, if we participate in ENSU/RESU, it is to build and/or amplify actions of solidarity with the Ukrainian resistance (and Russian dissidents opposed to the war, Belarusian exile union forces, etc.). Hence our decision not to participate in discussions about initiatives that do not fall within this framework. What constitutes an initiative that does not fall within this framework? For example:

– An initiative whose call does not mention Ukraine or Russia,

– An initiative where the organizers deliberately avoid mentioning these words and topics to gain the support of certain organizations,

– An initiative that does not include any specific sessions dedicated to Ukraine or Russia,

– An initiative where the final text does not mention Ukraine or Russia.

Certainly, every component of ENSU, every component of the French committee of RESU is free to participate without interfering with the activities and meetings of ENSU/RESU.

Nevertheless, since this meeting continues to be discussed in the meetings and exchanges of RESU and its French committee, it should be noted that the presence of an influence agent from the Islamic Republic of Iran at the conference, whose flag adorned a podium and whose intervention was applauded, even though this dictatorial regime had just murdered over 30,000 Iranians, showed the “particular political limitations” of the anti-imperialist and anti-fascist struggle field that the organizers had set up and, furthermore, Russia was considered irrelevant in their eyes, as it was not mentioned anywhere in the various statements.

This goes against the support for workers, to women, and all those who, on-site and in exile, have been fighting against this regime for years. This is unacceptable for comrades of Socialist Solidarity with Workers in Iran, for example; it contradicts the work carried out in interunion coordination, in France and internationally.

Regarding the European Solidarity Network with Ukraine and its French committee, it would be useful, in our view, to refocus activities on direct solidarity actions, nationally, locally, or sectorally:

– Through continued organization of specific campaigns;

– Through continued organization or co-organization of events to raise awareness about the Ukrainian resistance (publications, debates, films, etc.)

– Through support for other campaigns or initiatives (from other collectives, interunion movements, etc.).

Solidarity Union Solidaires, April 18, 2026

[1] https://inprecor.fr/la-conference-antifasciste-et-anti-imperialiste-de-porto-alegre-grandes-avancees-defis-et