A year and a half ago, we published a bigger text titled “When ideology stands in the way of solidarity” about how certain anarchist groups in various Western European countries manipulate facts to exclude Eastern European anarchists from discussions about the war in Ukraine.
Since then, unfortunately, the situation has taken a turn for the worse, and the popularity of old anti-militarist and pacifist perspectives within the Western European anarchist movement has only grown. This month, we received another refusal from Berlin regarding our participation in the anarchist book fair, whose organizers emphasized that they had no connection to last year’s organizing group.
For transparency’s sake, we were well aware of the high probability of rejection before submitting our application for this book fair. On the one hand, we were pleasantly surprised that the rejection did not come in the form of a single rude sentence, as it did last time, but with detailed reasoning. However, the arguments presented in the letter confused us even more than the attempts to accuse us of supporting the war, as the organizers of last year’s anarchist book fair did.
“We are done here, here our powers are over…”
The organizers cited “distrust of the ABC collective due to numerous previous violations of agreements with other collectives” as the main reason for their refusal, although they also mentioned that they consider it “unacceptable to give space to positions calling for joining the state army during an anarchist fair.”
In particular, the organizers mentioned two previous cases of violations of agreements:
At the presentation in Bremen, we allegedly violated the agreement with the organizers “not to praise participation in the war / be apologetic about military service”[1]. Moreover, we did so not only verbally, but also brought a distro that violated these agreements.
The same materials were laid out on the table during the presentation in Berlin, although they were not “part of the presentation topic” [1]. We were also accused of starting the presentation three hours late and of one of our group members constantly talking on the phone with someone.
We took these comments very seriously and asked for more details, which the organizing group was unable to provide. In a private conversation with one of the organizers of the event, we were also unable to clarify the details of the accusations.
We also contacted the organizers of the event in Bremen, who confirmed that we had absolutely no agreements regarding the censorship of presentation content and that they had no complaints against us. Nor did they prohibit certain materials on the table. We contacted a person who was part of the organizing group in Berlin and were also told that the organizers had no complaints about our distro.
We passed all this information on to the organizers of the book fair in Berlin. A few weeks later, we received a response in which their position had changed. Now, the Berlin anarchists are no longer insisting on a breach of agreement, but simply write that the difference in our views on the war in Ukraine is so profound that they do not see the possibility of constructive dialogue with us at the fair. Moreover, in the new letter, they wrote that “we see no benefit for us or for you in a presentation or stand where joining the state army and serving in the army can be justified.”
One of the important features of the Belarusian regime is the extreme formalization of repression. Very rarely do detentions and arrests take place outside the framework of existing laws. Even though people are sentenced to 20 years for completely fabricated cases, there will still be a trial, presentation of evidence, and dozens of days of closed-door hearings. Political life in the country is also often limited by such formal procedures. You are not imprisoned for opposing the regime, but for “actions that violate public order”
Until 2020, any public protests were banned on trumped-up grounds, and no one pointed to the incorrect political views of the organizers of a demonstration or rally in the refus letter. Instead, the regime referred to the law on mass events, which prohibited gatherings near metro stations, for example. At the same time, the wall of bureaucracy was impenetrable, and all attempts to question the officials’ silly wording were met with closed doors.
In such an atmosphere, we have become accustomed to the state using formal, non-political reasons to exclude political opponents. What we did not expect was a repetition of this approach within the anarchist movement. But this is exactly what we encountered when submitting our application in Berlin.
Why did this moment remind us of Belarus? Most likely because of the feeling of absolute powerlessness in communication and the lack of any desire on the part of those whom we could have considered comrades yesterday to clarify the situation. It feels like we are working with bureaucrats who are not interested in the real facts.
The problem of manipulating facts to exclude groups/people
In our statement a year and a half ago, we already wrote that in the situation surrounding the war in Ukraine, objective reality is being sacrificed for the sake of an anti-militarist colossus with feet of clay. The presentation in Berlin once again convinced us that facts are often simply invented in order to discredit opponents.
Thus, we are not in a situation of equality where we can debate different political views on the situation in Belarus, Ukraine, or even Germany. Instead, we are forced to justify ourselves, saying that we have never violated any agreements. We are forced to write a text explaining that an ABC-Belarus activist was late for a presentation in Berlin because of Germany’s crumbling transport infrastructure (which the Germans themselves are well aware of). We are forced to justify that an activist from our team found out about the death of a comrade in Ukraine right before the presentation and had to urgently organize transportation for this comrade’s family from Germany back home.
The latest situation reminded us of an essay by Dina Naeri, who left Afghanistan as a child and was granted asylum in the United States. In her text, she describes how, in order to be accepted into Western society, refugees must be eternally grateful for the privilege of being where they are. Moreover, refugees are obliged to constantly express this gratitude to those around them and under no circumstances enter into conflict with the locals. There is nothing worse than an ungrateful refugee. Similarly, in the anarchist milieu, we must be extremely grateful for the opportunity to speak in Berlin and do everything possible to show our gratitude to each of the organizers of the presentation in one form or another. And under no circumstances should we express problematic views that would make Western anarchists feel uncomfortable…
The willingness to exclude anarchist organizations from public events based on such “facts” shows a part of the anarchist movement in Berlin in a less than favorable light. Why are fabricated incidents enough for them to exclude an anarchist organization from Eastern Europe that has been engaged in solidarity work for the last 16 years? It is ironic that Western anarchists and Western leftists often take Russian propaganda at face value without attempting to understand it in depth.
As a result, we are forced to spend time trying to prove our own innocence in response to fabricated accusations. Our task should not be to seek refutation of such statements based on unverified facts. The organizing group could have checked them themselves by writing a few letters, instead of shifting this work onto our collective, which has enough other tasks in anti-repressive solidarity work.
In reality, we are being excluded precisely because people consider us “militarists” who support Ukraine’s military machine and praise the state army.
Such is the price of solidarity with the Ukrainian people in their struggle against the Russian invasion. It does not matter how critical we are of the Ukrainian state and the Armed Forces of Ukraine. It does not matter how much effort we have spent in the past fighting Belarusian militarism. Once again, none of this matters, because someone told someone else that ABC-Belarus supports the Ukrainian government.
Often, we cannot even respond to these accusations because they are raised behind closed doors, and those who shout the loudest about boycotting ABC remain silent about it in public. And here we can note the cowardice of a certain part of the German anarchist movement, which uses lies and incitement to try to exclude people who do not share their political views.
Not our war?
Over the past few years of speaking in Western Europe, we have become convinced that a significant part of the anarchist movement there deeply believes that the war in Ukraine is not their war, based on outdated political analyses. We see how these people have chosen to sit comfortably in the back rows of history and simply wait to see how the situation in Eastern Europe will develop without their participation. In the event of the political rise of the far right in our countries, it will always be possible to say, “Well, we told you so,” and in the event of alternative scenarios, to pretend that this was the plan all along.
And perhaps somewhere one can sympathize with the position that “it’s not our war.” After all, for the average resident of the Western empires, this war concerns people they have never seen. Places they have never been to and most likely never will. Contrary to all public statements, in the minds of many anarchists and leftists in the so-called first world, the border of civilization still lies somewhere in Eastern Europe, and depending on how much you agree with Western analyses, it can begin in Poland, Belarus, or Ukraine. Not our war means that Ukrainians are still not seen as part of that mythical European “we.” Not our war means that we have to try every day to prove that we are worthy of being equal to anarchists from Germany or other “developed” countries. This is precisely why myths about the ABC being an organization that violates agreements, spreads war propaganda, and is incapable of dialogue so easily take root in the minds of many Western activists. In their minds, we are still the same barbarians who have not learned the civilized way of political interaction, we continue to break the rules in the anarchist community, and the only way out is to exclude those very barbarians and ensure the triumph of Western thought at events such as the anarchist book fair in Berlin.
But, fortunately, there are enough people in the world who have overcome xenophobia and the arrogance of empires. People who put in a tremendous amount of effort every day to support the anarchist movement in Belarus and in the diaspora. During this time, we have found a huge number of comrades in the West who are passionate and have been engaged in solidarity work for many years. And yes, we believe that these people often do not receive enough attention because of anarchists like the organizers of the book fair in Berlin described above. Instead of positive examples of organization, cooperation, and victories, we are forced to once again talk about the failures of that very solidarity. About the struggle for equality within the anarchist community. About the lies that become part of the movement and may even be written into history as fact.
Despite this, we still want to thank the hundreds of people who organized our events across Europe. Thousands who donated to support Belarusian anarchist prisoners. To the dozens who support the anarchist Black Cross Belarus on a monthly basis. You are one of the parts of our belief that solidarity works, and that somewhere ahead of us, a just society may await us if we push a little harder.
1: Quote from a letter sent to us by the organizer:
You can send a letter of protest or publicly condemn the approach of the anarchist book fair in Berlin on your own resources. At the time of writing, we know that the book fair has also refused to allow Solidarity Collectives from Ukraine to participate.
Comments
anti propagandist
anarhija (not verified) Tue, 10/28/2025 - 13:16
On the one side, I am agreed that western anarchists are following interest and they give place to sleep to americans but not to east europeans, they will never travel to poor countrires and they dont need thirld world country anarchists, they need americans, on the other side, I don't trust to any collective traveling all over europe making propaganda against russia. First, Ukrainians dont have money to travel all over europe, in and outside of the war, ukrainians are poor people and they don't have money to pay ticket to travel 1000km, so, this solidarity collective gets money from somebody, maybe from ukrainian or nato military secret service, so, they make propaganda against lukaschenko and putin who are not good for western colonists, the same as assad, gadaffi and saddam hussein, iranian ayatolah, slobodan milosevic, maduro, etc.....we, anarchists, must be careful that we dont serve interests of any ruling class in any country and we should not help to colonists to make propaganda against """autocratic regimes who break human rights""" hahaha like that western colonial racist capitalism/slavery is democracy....
very good points. but we…
anon (not verified) Wed, 10/29/2025 - 20:40
In reply to anti propagandist by anarhija (not verified)
very good points. but we must remember democracy was invented in a slave state
Somewhat surprising. I…
Wayne Price@ (not verified) Tue, 10/28/2025 - 14:19
Somewhat surprising. I would expect that ALL anarchists (whatever they think about the Ukrainian side of the war) would be opposed to the Russian imperialist invasion, which is strongly supported by the Belarusian state. And therefore give some support to Belarusian (and Russian) anarchists, despite other disagreements.
Meanwhile the campist Anarhija seems to think that we cannot condemn Russian and Belarusian "autocratic regimes," because, after all, "western colonial racist capitalism" is undemocratic. Being anarchists we condemn all states and regimes.
and you, and the other commenter, have once again shown
CalvinSmith Wed, 10/29/2025 - 07:23
In reply to Somewhat surprising. I… by Wayne Price@ (not verified)
that the comment section here is just trash and rarely addresses some of the finer points of these articles.
The article has absolutely nothing to do with choosing the correct side in these state conflicts, nor does it (in reference to the other comment) have anything to do with comparing money and privilege. The whole article is about the indirect, woefully pithy, and bureaucratic forms of communication used in anarchist bookfairs...which is not at all surprising considering that these tribunals often do things like demand racial dress codes ("no white people wearing dreadlocks, only Persons of Color are allowed to do this", "no white people wearing mohawks, only mohawk indians are allowed to do this", etc.). While it's a little hard to untangle all of the politics related to the grievance above, draw clear historical/ideological lines, and make further judgements about the situation, I completely respect their frustrations when it comes to dealing with fucking idiot managers, who do not want to hear open expression or un-filtered emotion.
So clearly, every second I spend reading these articles, or trying to participate "in good faith" with this website, is wasted...because most of the people who comment here just want want to bark these very simplistic forms of advocacy.
I also think that maybe inclusion of the entire rejection letter somewhere may improve this article, but what do i know?
Why are people who say that…
anon (not verified) Tue, 10/28/2025 - 22:00
Why are people who say that we should work for the Ukrainian state and follow state orders in wartime, and that their preferred state, Ukraine, should get more weapons from other states, complaining about being excluded from an anarchist bookfair? If you were being excluded from a statist bookfair, a NATO bookfair or whatever, your complaint would make sense. But in this case, it makes no damn sense at all. Anarchists are too dogmatic for you because they're against the State? Have you considered that you're not an anarchist but a statist then? Give your head a shake. It's not that complicated.
I doubt either side of this…
anon (not verified) Wed, 10/29/2025 - 11:27
In reply to Why are people who say that… by anon (not verified)
I doubt either side of this is representing themselves honestly. You are clearly denying the existence of some leftist anarchists hanging onto Russia good west bad tropes. And the other side won't own up to how some of their own have absolutely supported the Ukranian Army.
I honestly am not sure which side sucks more but I think its the former cause at least they are not faced with their own immediate destruction.
Let's concede to your…
anon (not verified) Wed, 10/29/2025 - 15:50
In reply to I doubt either side of this… by anon (not verified)
Let's concede to your psychoanalysis and your point that some anarchists think Russia is good (you seem to be confusing anarchists with marxists, but nonetheless, let's concede your point for the sake of the argument.) Let's even play along with your fantasy that only people in Ukraine face warfare and death, despite the other obvious wars going on (some of which Ukraine is complicit in by way of the arms trade, in either direction). That could all be true and none of that would make it make any sense for people who support the Ukrainian state and its arming by NATO to whine about being excluded from an anti-statist bookfair. It's like cops or politicians complaining about being excluded from an anti-statist bookfair. You are statists, you work for the state, why are you trying to be included by anarchists? You also already have more resources than anarchists. Why do you need handouts from anarchists? Make your own statist pro-war bookfair with tax-payers money.
YES! Exactly! Moreover there…
anon (not verified) Fri, 11/07/2025 - 09:30
In reply to Let's concede to your… by anon (not verified)
YES! Exactly!
Moreover there's so much hypocrisy in the statement. The bookfairs in Prague, for example is banning anti-militarists every year.
Your previous whining about…
anon (not verified) Wed, 10/29/2025 - 09:35
Your previous whining about this was funnier. At least there was some funny blackmail involved.
In response to the call of ABC Belarus to condemn ACABB
copypaste (not verified) Thu, 10/30/2025 - 14:33
In response to the call of ABC Belarus to condemn ACABB
30.10.2025
We began our exchange with ABC Belarus saying: “Basically, we would really like you to present the topic of the uprising and current situation in Belarus.” We are now finishing it – in relation to ACABB 2025 – with the following 1500+ words. The short reason for rejections can be read on Indymedia here. For commentary on our communication with ABC Belarus, you can continue to read below.
We twice considered the ABC Belarus proposal for a table and a talk on the situation in Belarus and their view on the Russian-Ukrainian war, but rejected it both times. Contrary to what ABC Belarus write in their callout, the main reason was clearly that “it is not acceptable to host positions that encourage joining a state army on an anarchist bookfair.” We are open to sharing both our emails if anyone asks.
The idea of asking ABC Belarus to be diplomatic about the Russian-Ukrainian war – like it was done in Infoladen Scherer 8 in Berlin two months before – or to offer a more suitable format for that subject was floated but dismissed due to the general distrust toward a particular presenter from ABC Belarus. When it was found out that some of the allegations against that person were wrong, we apologised and reconsidered the proposal in full. However, it was ultimately decided in a bigger plenary circle that a presentation or books where state army participation can be glorified are not a good basis for rebuilding relations with anarchists of anti-militarist views.
No dialogue?
The main claim of the ABC Belarus’ callout – that ACABB were not interested in dialogue – is simply untrue. Because:
a) We actually invited them anyway in our emails
Quote from an email: “You are nonetheless welcome to come and participate at the event otherwise. We find it important to be able to debate and learn from each other not in a toxic setting.”
The word ‘nonetheless’ refers to the complaints about unreliability and provocative behaviour of the specific presenter.
b) Explained in a private chat (since we are now referring to such things) that people from the organising group would prefer to restart the exchange of arguments on the Russian-Ukrainian war not in the public environment of an open book fair event but in smaller, closed circles.
What we actually wanted to avoid was a monologue. Experience of other anarchist events with strong anti-militarist participation shows that public talks or tables defending participation in state armies have a high potential to turn fiery. It is not a good way of restarting dialogue. The events in St-Imier and Ljubljana, for example, ended up in pointless shouting instead of constructive exchange. If anything, the format of giving a talk at a book fair like ABC Belarus applied for is more a monologue-like communication. We collectively decided that this format is not suitable at this moment of the anarchist debate on the RU-UA war and invited them come to the event not under the banner of an organisation.
Onto online fronts
Yet, the monologue has now moved online. The stage ABC Belarus seem to set now with their scandalising outburst is the one for self-victimisation. Placing an event that has never happened before – initiated by anonymous individuals from different anarchist tendencies, many not even from Europe – at the centre of a narrative about the powerful ‘Western European anarchist’ consensus aligned with ‘old anti-militarist and pacifist perspectives’ fed by ‘Russian propaganda’ seems frankly more like seeing ghosts or imagining a perpetrator. At the moment of their callout’s release, neither the event programme, nor a list of book fair tablers had been published to draw any judgement of such proportion.
To exaggerate so blatantly – comparing an anarchist event organising to the Belarusian state (like, what?), calling out a first-time event ‘the’ book fair, like it is the only one and claims to represent someone, inserting a lie about refusing dialogue in the title, so it sounds heavy, and releasing it in social media pictures – all this resembles rather a clickbait online marketing move, not a responsible communication to the comrades on the ground. What kind of a marketing strategy is that at the expense of other anarchists?
In our emails, we stated that the general distrust toward ABC Belarus stems from the provocative and escalatory communication style of one of its presenters. (For example, even if we condemn the sabotage against their talk in St-Imier, many will remember the rain of person’s abusive language and generalisations coming from the stage. The event transcript can be found online.) The group stood behind this person, shielding their irritativeness under ‘the collective’s political position’. It’s telling that in their callout they admit they expected rejection due to ACABB’s anti-militarist stance, and then applied anyway.
For what purpose, then? To deliberately provoke and dramatise the rejection? To knit ACABB into their narrative about the fight against a grand ‘Western European anarchist’ plot to take them down? Is this just cynically creating drama to generate views and fundraise?
In this regard, comparing the promotion strategies of the different groups engaged with a war theme, it’s noteworthy that working with highly emotional, uplifting and heartbreaking topics like life and death of war heros or nation’s defenders is much better suited for fundraising and click-based engagement than sharing sobering and humiliating stories of deserters, arbitrary conscription, or post-war trauma. Maybe that is the way to go for anarchists, too?
So, ABC Belarus encourage you to condemn ACABB. For what exactly?
1) “Manipulation of facts”?
In our exchange with ABC Belarus, we brought up the presentations in Bremen and Infoladen Scherer 8 in Berlin as the latest examples of why distrust had arisen toward their presenter.
Indeed, the allegations from Bremen turned out to be false – and we apologised for that to ABC Belarus in our very next email. Somehow, the author of the callout fails to mention our apology – isn’t it a manipulation of facts they meant to condemn?
As for Infoladen Scherer 8: the ABC Belarus presenter had been warned by the venue that supporting the state army participation may provoke backlash. Yet, they decided to lay out such materials at their distro. The venue (and ACABB) did receive a complaint about one zine eventually later. When ABC Belarus presenter reached out for the feedback to the venue, they actually confirmed the issue and named the zine that has been the trigger. (It was this one, for some reason with an anarchist in state military uniform on the Russian-language version cover.)
So, the claim in the callout that there has been ‘no complaints from the venue’ is simply not true. The distortion of facts to fabricate arguments seems to be a political tool available not only in ‘Western European anarchist’ consensus forges.
2) Formalisation of censorship?
Our phrasing of “no value seen for you” was indeed inelegant, and we take that critique on the chin. This is our first time organising a book fair, and we will learn from it.
What we meant was that a possible escalation at a book fair around the RU-UA war topic will not advance debate between the anti-militarists and those who defend state army participation, let alone bring some reconciliation. We didn’t think about another value for them though: if ABC Belarus want to profit from drama.
(dramatic look)
As already mentioned, our solution for restarting dialogue is to actually informalise it. That is why we told ABC Belarus (and Solidarity Collectives) to feel welcome to come to the event as private persons to be able to learn from each other. To call that ‘formalisation of repression’ is baffling. Our approach is the opposite of ‘no dialogue’.
Needless to say, there are plenty of anarchist spaces where the presentations of groups out of the now released ACABB event programme might be rejected. It is delusional to expect neutrality from venues, especially if they draw their lines already on their web home page.
3) The West against us
ACABB 2025 never put themselves in a position to represent the opinion of Western European anarchists, simply because we are only a bunch of individuals from very mixed backgrounds. It is beyond comprehension what from a clear and minimalistic anti-militarist position ACABB communicated to ABC Belarus – namely that we are against ‘glorification of state army participation or being apologetic of military service’ – coincides with ‘Russian propaganda’. What curiously does remind of it though is ABC Belarus painting ‘the collective West’ as an Enemy.
We are also unsure whose analysis is ‘outdated.’ The war has raged on for more than three years with no end in sight. The Ukrainian army has been supported by the US and Europe just enough to keep Putin satisfied with slow territorial gains of the Russian army – just to keep his bloody hand off the nuclear bomb button. Since the Ukrainian army blocked any idea of an anti-authoritarian platoon and the Kursk incursion was rolled back, anarchist revolutionary ideas play no role in this war. If by ‘not our war’ the author means “not an anarchist war”, we completely agree. It surely can be called anti-imperialist or anti-fascist, but not anarchist or not anymore anti-authoritarian.
We don’t encounter such kind of analysis from anarchists who see state military participation as the primary option often. Nor do we see any attempt from them to engage anti-militarists on equal footing. As the last email of the ABC Belarus put it, they laid out provocative informational material at Scherer 8 ‘to educate western anarchists and leftists’. We wonder if anyone looks forward to be “educated” at anarchist events.
i'm really not sure what you are trying to gain here, as others
CalvinSmith Tue, 11/04/2025 - 09:38
In reply to In response to the call of ABC Belarus to condemn ACABB by copypaste (not verified)
pointed out, the simple explanation that:
“it is not acceptable to host positions that encourage joining a state army on an anarchist bookfair.”
actually does make sense from an extremely principled anarchist position...so if you are really trying to help Ukrainians, then help the Ukrainians, don't waste time arguing with people on a toxic and ideological website. Maybe the charity work focus should be either survival inside of Ukraine or immigration to somewhere else.
issue 2# is that "principled anarchist" is an oxymoron, how can people who reject rulers of any sort embrace a fixed code of principles.
issue 3# is that this Ukraine conflict will undoubtedly be a very, very long war, that tends to serve either the NATO/Ukraine, the Russian Federation, and arms dealers. It was easier to sympathize with the fighting Ukrainians with so-called "anarchist positions" earlier on in the way, but would you be willing to die for a stalemate?
*sigh*, i was hoping for the chronicled and drier communications so i can read into some of the dynamics here, but you're just adding more and more ideology to the exachange, and the german anarchists aren't here to talk about it...
Sorry to break it to you but…
anon (not verified) Fri, 11/07/2025 - 09:26
In reply to i'm really not sure what you are trying to gain here, as others by CalvinSmith
Sorry to break it to you but anarchism absolutely has a fixed principles. For example anarchism is against state and capitalism and for class struggle.
This is what happens when people get their politics from memes instead of books.
statment part2
copypaste2 (not verified) Thu, 10/30/2025 - 14:34
Concluding note
The jerky hints in this text questioning the integrity of ABC Belarus’ intentions are, of course, jokes. We genuinely appreciate all the years of their committed anti-repression work. If the attention generated by their fight against the ‘Western European anarchism’ translates into love and freedom for Belarusian anarchist prisoners, all the better. The reason for their ridiculing language and scandal-mongering is much more likely to be some bruised egos from not being recognised as a desirable speaker for an anarchist event. The only thing that doesn’t fit here for us is that the group picked ACABB as a scapegoat for an older communication breakdown with anti-militarist anarchists. Surely, some anti-militarists are also to blame for that, but, hey, here are some new ones to talk to in person.
As already implied in our invitation text, ACABB aspires to be not a politicised festival for people to just consume ideas and come to watch an explosive discussion, but a space where people actively engage in deliberation on collective solutions (and hopefully build new gangs 🙂 ). We are not interested in deepening the divide between the anarchists defending the participation in state armies and the ones opposing it. It would be far more useful at the moment of such division to sit together as individuals at eye level and try to re-build connections. We have already confirmed such an event at ACABB about the RU-UA war and welcome everyone who seeks conversation, not escalation.
one of the acabb
(https://acabb.noblogs.org/statements/)
Add new comment