Apparently, when the war broke out, Russia thought that it was going to reach Kiev in a di-da, that it was going to put a government in its shape and that it would move forward easily. What do you think led Russia to miscalculation? They had long been talking about invasion, the
CIA said it was going to happen, and the Russians announced it could also happen, but they didn't listen to each other. It was later discovered that Ukrainians gathered troops at the borders of Donetsk and Luhansk facing an invasion. Since 2014, it was being said that the wolf was going to come, but I also did not expect that this war would come quickly. It is to be assumed that the Russian intelligence services have suffered a great mistake.

However, I believe that the Russians have a plan B which is based on waiting for the explosion of the contradictions of the Western coalition. Some of these contradictions have occurred in the case of missiles launched by Ukraine to Poland. And there are, among other things, contradictions about the payment of gas that Europe needs.

The currency also has the advantage that the financial penalties of EE.UU. and the European Union (EU) against Russia had to cut the country, and Russia suffers a lot, but it does not seem to be enough and the EU suffers too. Could it be a Western mistake? I don't think so. I think the intelligence service of
EE.UU. knows to what extent [Vladimir] Putin has put everything at stake in this war, and Russia has thought in advance how to deal with sanctions. In the first weeks of the war, we saw the Cremlinology of a time: Putin was sick, with cancer, crazy, isolated, that they were going to give him a coup d'état -- but any serious analyst knows that Russia has been set up as a regime, the former police, the armed forces, the secret services, the military and aerospace industry -- they're almost in every ministry and Putin at the head of all this. That is the team that rebuilt Russia, which Boris Ieltsin left totally destroyed. This regime will not fall in any way, the EE.UU know it, but not that army of analysts who are unfounded in war.

NATO's aid is increasing and the situation has become more complicated since the outbreak of the war. These have been very complex moments, such as the missiles launched in November from Ukraine to Poland. It may be the first time EE.UU. And NATO is turning back [Volodymyr] from Zelensky, deepening into war -- has prudence been seen in the end? Yeah, it looks like that. I think it has
been a strategic rethink of the war, and that both the Pentagon and Kremlin have been well placed to stage a small firewall. What's the problem? That this conflict is very complex. There is the coalition formed by the USA, the EU and the Visegrad Group of the latter. Poland, for example, is symmetrical to the Moscow regime, but on the other side. Putin is said to be reactionary, transfob, anti-communist -- that is the same as the law of Poland and the justice party, but as it is in the western part there is no problem. The same applies to the strength of the right end of the Visegrad Group. And this team wants historic revenge against Russia.

Today we are at the beginning of a world war, at any time an accident can occur, such as the missiles you mentioned. Ukraine believes that at the moment the West cannot leave it alone, because that would be to give in to Russia. In view of this, Ukraine is making progress in the war by creating very dangerous situations.

But this war cannot end with a clear winner, in the classical sense. The West cannot destroy Russia, a nuclear power, and Russia cannot constantly resist Ukraine … In his book he talks about the need to return to the Minsk Agreements before or after.

In the early days of the war, many decisions were taken against Russia, and to do so, we needed to create the campaign and the atmosphere of Russia’s weakness, to spread out that the war could be won quickly... but today it has been seen that this is not true. This war cannot end in Ukraine. What is winning for Ukraine? Why Russia? The issue of the republics of Donetsk and Luhansk will be there for negotiation, the crime will probably continue in Russia, the movement of maritime forces in the Black Sea ...

However, this may seem like the Pentagon, but the neoliberal vision that has ruled Europe in recent decades is building another kind of story: that we dominate ethically and morally vis-à-vis Russia, even technologically, that Ukraine has been invaded, that Russia falls by parts – an absolutely false vision. Unfortunately, if something feeds Putin, all that speech against him. For the West, Putin gives Hitler, and for Russia, the puppet of the Zelensky Banderizos, a former right-wing driver. Both approaches maintain war and strongly suppress the positions of desertion or disobedience that exist in both countries in the face of warfare.

In his book he condemns war and proposes disobedience and desertion. Does this mean that Ukraine should not defend itself against the Russian invasion? I say that we are not to tell Ukraine how it has to defend itself, when its territory has
been invaded. Its inhabitants have to see it. I am faced with the vision that is spreading in Europe and especially in part of the Left that this war can be won in the military sphere; two, that NATO support is a guarantee of triumph and that, furthermore, if the Russian regime is weakened, opportunities arise for the revolution of its left-wing forces. Even in Ukraine something similar could happen, but it makes no sense, among other things, to see how fourteen leftist parties accused of being Russians have been illegalised by the war.

No, the continuation of the war will bring tremendous death, the destruction of Ukraine. It is a suicide and a stop effort must be made, even if the territory is lost. We know what the First and Second World War brought, and for the emancipating forces it is essential to avoid these scenarios at all costs. The demand for the right to desertion and the policy of support for refugees must therefore be strengthened. That is why the approach must be internationalist, let us stop this war between all.

In this context of war, you propose the constituent of peace. What is that? How can we build? I'd like to know that. This war consists of three layers, one corresponding to the global hegemony system (AEB-China), the other between empires (NATO–Russia) and a national liberation war (Ukraine and Russia) responding to the invasion of 24 February. In addition, war occurs in the context of a harsh global situation (pandemic, climate change, energy scarcity, food shortages...). So, for the global left, it's fundamental to create a new subject that can deal with these situations, so that collectively decide what is immediate, what is important, and what can't go backwards. Hopefully the III that was created in 1915 against war.
Be more successful than the international.

Every day the war lasts, there is less democracy, less empowerment... Convergence is needed among many (trade unionists, feminists, municipalities, collective LGTB, migrants, etc.) To build new constituent powers wherever possible -- toilets, soviets -- I'm surprised how some left don't realize the historic turning point that we live, with that risk of world war. Consequently, they think that this war is short-lived, two that propaganda tells the truth and three that, to deal with all kinds of protests, the consequences of the war regime will not come into force in their countries.

During the invasion of Iraq in 2003 there were large demonstrations. Now, however, it has not been seen. Is left distribution key to this? Yes. The war in Iraq was a totally criminal, absolutely illegitimate war, against which the
liberal and left-wing vision of Europe, especially in the Spanish state, was opposed. He was also opposed to what I call neo-Stalinism zombie, which claimed as an alternative everything that was against the United States. That is what I was doing with Saddam Hussein, despite being anti-communist and killing the communists, or even illegalising the communist party. Again, this left, both in Spain and in Latin America, reads the war in Ukraine as a defence against the attack by the Western forces, which resists the Putin regime and is therefore the strength of the oppressed peoples. There can be no more lies.

The situation of European dependence on the US has also increased at all levels with this war.

That's what we're seeing, yes. The reading being done by the Biden administration is being supported from the EU from the top down. The US is monitoring the EU’s energy transition through fracking gas that sells at disproportionate prices. The current situation is reminiscent of the great European dependence of the United States during the Second World War. This control of energy will generate many contradictions in Europe, which will probably lead to conflicts between citizens and governments in Europe.

It says in the book that the far right also expects it to happen. And perhaps more can be said than waiting, because in some states governments have been welcomed. They are waiting there, yes, to make simple readings of complex situations, pointing to the guilty and stimulating aggressive nationalisms. There is the risk, and that can really prevent the citizen and democratic response. If we leave the flow of events as such, if we do not do something, we go there. The Western vision sells a framework between democracy and dictatorships, but we are
really living in a situation similar to that of the First World War.

For fascism the most important thing is the will of death. Build struggle and death as a moment of truth, give it strength and political power. When weapons are valid against an enemy, they always end up being ready to kill by the competition. Western fascism was formed: there were former World War I fighters, conspiracy of betrayal, dream of resurrecting the nation and building an incompatible internal enemy. These narratives are getting stronger. Their signals are the 2% increase in military budgets and the militarisation that is taking place. In addition to the military conflict, we are experiencing a war of infos, a war of tequno, and all these difficulties we have are being called a Fuhrer to direct the fight against the enemy in a vital situation. This logic is totally opposed to democracy and the logic of emancipation. That is why stopping war as soon as possible is winning that battle against fascism, because war is in its privileged realm.

On the other hand, it is also true, in the face of the invasion there is the struggle for the national liberation of Ukraine, but this cannot be read in isolation, the war between blocs and systems must be placed in a context in which the first victim is the Ukrainian people and the second, if the war spreads, will be the rest of Europe.