Michael Lanson, Patrick Le Tréhondat
‘For us, there is no contradiction between military support for Ukraine and criticism of NATO and the arms industry’
Bjarke Friborg, a member of the Danish Red-Green Alliance, has just returned from Ukraine, where he visited Solidarity Collectives with Helene Vadsten.
9 September 2025
Source: Interview by Michel Lanson and Patrick Le Tréhondat for the Réseau Bastille
August 27, 2025
The Nordic left is making great strides in its thinking on issues of popular defence and security in Europe. This thinking is fuelled by its strong and ongoing commitment to Ukraine. It actively supports Ukrainian trade unions and social movements, as well as progressive anti-fascist fighters who are combating Russian imperialism.
Can you tell us about Enhedslisten (Red-Green Alliance), its history and its political orientations?
The Red-Green Alliance (Enhedslisten) was founded in 1989 as a united front of several radical left-wing traditions in Denmark, including left-wing socialists, the Communist Party, the Trotskyist SAP (Fourth International) and a Maoist group. After initially struggling to cross the 2% electoral threshold, the Red-Green Alliance entered parliament in 1994 and has since become an important parliamentary and extra-parliamentary force on the Danish left.
Today, the party combines a strong eco-socialist and internationalist profile with a focus on growing social inequalities and general working-class issues. We consistently criticise capitalist austerity and a slow and inconsistent ecological transition in the face of the climate catastrophe. The party works closely with popular movements and trade union activists and remains a pluralistic organisation with strong internal democracy. Since 2011, we have generally obtained 5-7% of the vote nationally, and in the last local elections in 2021, we obtained 24.6% of the vote in Copenhagen, making us the most popular political party in the city.
In recent years, debates have taken place on issues such as the EU, NATO, Ukraine and Palestine. Some accuse us of having ‘betrayed our principles’ because we now field socialist candidates for the European Parliament instead of advocating for leaving the EU, because we support arms deliveries to Ukraine, even if they transit through NATO, and because we defend a free Palestine while condemning Hamas as a far-right terrorist group. However, for the majority of party members, we are simply defending consistent and practical international solidarity in favour of the rights of workers, women and minorities.
The Red-Green Alliance is strongly committed to Ukraine and more specifically to the Ukrainian left. What is the political significance of this commitment and how does it translate in concrete terms?
From the outset of the large-scale invasion, we have argued that this is a matter of fundamental solidarity with people resisting imperialist oppression and aggression. The Russian invasion is clearly an imperialist war of conquest, and Ukraine's right to self-determination must be defended, which in practice includes military support. However, this does not mean that we support the Ukrainian government, the oligarchs or corruption.
On the contrary, we are collaborating with the Ukrainian left, trade unions and civil society organisations that are fighting not only for national independence, but also for democracy, social rights and workers' control. In collaboration with the Green Alternative party, and since 2023 via the Danish Institute for Parties and Democracy (DIPD), we have secured direct financial support for the progressive organisation Sotsialnyi Rukh (Social Movement). Thanks to this support, it has been able to open social centres in Kyiv, Lviv and the industrial city of Kryvyi Rih in the east of the country. We continue to be impressed by the work of these activists, which unequivocally confirms that Ukrainians are not mere pawns on the geopolitical chessboard, but actors in their own struggle for liberation.
Do you think there is a Russian threat to Europe? How would you characterise it as a left-wing organisation?
It is obvious that Russia is a large European country. However, if you are referring to the European Union and allied countries such as Norway, as well as other countries neighbouring Russia, the threat posed by Putin's regime is undeniably very real. Not necessarily in terms of “tanks rolling into Paris”, but certainly as a threat to democracy, sovereignty and the principle that borders cannot be changed by brute force. As a left-wing organisation, we oppose Russian imperialism just as we have opposed American and NATO imperialism: not by supporting one bloc against another, but by defending the right of peoples to self-determination and supporting democratic and progressive forces in Russia and its client state, Belarus.
How do you articulate a policy of popular defence and your social policy of emancipation? And how is this perceived by the ‘left’ in general?
For us, the key concept is that of popular defence – a democratic defence based on citizens and rooted in civil society, not a militarised state apparatus serving the interests of business, the arms industry and imperialist interventions in Africa, Central Asia or elsewhere. Defence is not just about weapons and armies, but about the collective capacity of people to organise and protect their communities.
Some on the left see this as a contradiction, but we argue that it is consistent: opposing militarism does not mean ignoring the need for people to resist aggression. The alternative to popular defence is to leave the field open to authoritarian powers.
Faced with the Russian threat, the Western left has found itself powerless. Its mostly obsolete anti-militarist traditions place it in insoluble contradictions. On the one hand, it denounces the military-industrial complex and rearmament, but on the other, it calls for arms deliveries to Ukraine. It denounces NATO but remains silent on the military alliances between Russia and China. And it says nothing about the latter's extraordinary arms build-up. How do you approach these defence and military issues, both at the level of your country and at the European level?
The left has always been divided on security issues, but the large-scale invasion of Ukraine has clearly led to a new rebalancing and a rejection of certain dichotomies. For us, members of the Red-Green Alliance and the Nordic left in general, there is no contradiction between military support for Ukraine and criticism of NATO and the arms industry. We strongly condemn Russia's aggression, but we also oppose massive military build-ups based on arbitrary targets set by Donald Trump.
At the same time, we call for the socialisation of the arms industry, a ban on EU arms exports to countries such as Israel and China, and a global security architecture based on mutual disarmament, cooperation and popular sovereignty – not a new arms race.
At your last conference, which focused in particular on defence issues, the SAP (Danish section of the Fourth International) (1) criticised you, explaining that ‘Enhedslisten does not have a defence policy that is radically different from that of the mainstream in Parliament’ and that you had therefore aligned yourselves with bourgeois parties. How do you respond to this accusation?
The conference approved a new defence and security policy that supports the supply of arms to Ukraine and the strengthening of the territorial defence of Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Islands, while rejecting a general strengthening of military capabilities, an international arms race and the granting of military powers to the EU. This clearly distinguishes us from all the other parties represented in parliament. With regard to the SAP, the group mainly warned the Red-Green Alliance against any illusions about reforming NATO or the EU. Both organisations are composed of imperialist states pursuing their own interests, and any military build-up will ultimately serve those interests rather than international solidarity or the protection of democracy in countries such as Moldova and Georgia. I understand and respect this criticism, while pointing out that the SAP has always supported the arming of Ukraine and does not explicitly oppose investment in civil preparedness or better protection against hybrid warfare and cyberattacks.
https://socinf.dk/el-aarsmoedet-hvilket-forsvar-snakker-vi-om
On the other hand, some members of the Red and Green Alliance proposed an alternative statement that rejected without distinction any type of investment related to the idea of territorial defence, while effectively abandoning Ukraine and warning against ‘choosing sides’ in a war that is ‘also’ a proxy war. I am glad that this statement was rejected.
Denmark is unique in that it has a union of non-commissioned officers that is a member of the LO labour federation. What do you think of the functioning and organisation of the Danish army?
In all the Nordic countries and the Netherlands, soldiers and officers have unions with collective bargaining rights and elected representatives. The unions are integrated into the labour market system, but their role is to represent subordinates as employees, which differs from the popular democratic control of the armed forces envisaged by the Red-Green Alliance.
Historically, relations between the Danish left and the main military union HKKF (Soldiers and Corporals Union) have alternated between cooperation and tension. In the 1970s, the so-called ‘red soldiers’ movement among conscripts challenged military hierarchies, NATO and Danish defence policy, demanding better conditions and more democratic influence. The HKKF, which represents professional soldiers, adopted a more moderate and loyal position, which some members of the left considered too close to the system, even though collaboration was established on practical issues such as housing and working hours. Today, the HKKF functions as a traditional trade union focused on wages and working conditions. It should be noted that in 2018, its president was the chief negotiator for 180,000 civil servants on the verge of a general strike. Danish soldiers are joining the protests in uniform and supporting the campaign on social media, notably through posts by personnel deployed in Afghanistan brandishing slogans of solidarity.
From this perspective, following your recent trips to Ukraine, what can you tell us about the Ukrainian army? Both in terms of its social composition (mainly working class) and its functioning, the Ukrainian army is surprising. We know, for example, that there is an LGBTQ military union within it and that unionised workers in uniform are in constant contact with the unions of which they are members.
As part of a delegation from the Red and Green Alliance, I met with several progressive civil society organisations and trade unions in Ukraine, all of which demonstrated a strong commitment to the defence effort and the performance of the army. This included general and targeted support for soldiers, specific groups and units, and veterans. From a left-wing perspective, I find the Solidarity Collectives particularly noteworthy as they channel direct aid to anti-fascists, trade unionists and eco-activists on the front line, with the support of a vast international grassroots network.
In addition to their humanitarian efforts, they are also involved in the artisanal production of drones, which has clearly become an important part of international solidarity efforts (https://www.goethe.de/prj/jad/de/ges/26335813.html). These forms of civil-military interaction are very different from the situation in countries such as Denmark, but they are of course entirely understandable as missiles continue to rain down on Ukrainian homes, farms and towns.
Fundamentally, this reflects the fact that Ukraine's defence clearly does not rely solely on a standing army of professionals and conscripts, but on a popular war effort, with the army made up of ordinary workers, trade unionists, students, LGBTQ people and volunteers fighting for their communities. As a result, there is an extraordinary degree of interaction between civilians and the military, with activist networks and non-profit organisations providing everything from medical supplies to homemade drones.
The mainstream media tends to focus on sophisticated Western weapons and billions of dollars in financial aid. However, what often goes unnoticed are the grassroots fundraising campaigns and self-organised production networks that support the Ukrainian resistance on a daily basis. At the same time, soldiers still lack basic rights, even in wartime. There are no transparent rules regarding rest, demobilisation or rehabilitation, and official trade unions are banned. However, new initiatives have emerged to fill this gap. Initiatives such as the LGBTQ Military Union of Ukraine and the ‘Invisible Battalion’ (which focuses on women in the war) have gained prominence, while the progressive organisation Sotsialnyi Ruk has set up its own helpline and provides free legal aid to soldiers, veterans and their families.
Other left-wing parties in Scandinavia and Northern Europe share your positions to a greater or lesser extent. How do you collaborate or plan to collaborate?
The Red-Green Alliance works closely with left-wing parties in the region – the Swedish Vänsterpartiet, the Norwegian Rødt and the Finnish Left Alliance – as well as with movements in Iceland and the Baltic states. We do not always agree on all tactical issues, but we all recognise that solidarity with Ukraine is essential and that we need to redefine left-wing security policy for a new era. Our goal is to build a Nordic and European network that links support for Ukraine to a broader, socialist, feminist and ecological vision of security, beyond militarism.
NOTES
The SAP's position is expressed in John Jessen's article, ‘Red-Green Alliance in Denmark: More defence – but what kind of defence?’ published in French on 31 July 2025 on the INPRECOR magazine website.