Building a Revolutionary, Decolonial Internationalism

Introduction: The Urgency of a Decolonial Anti-War Movement

War is no longer an occasional rupture in global politics—it is a constant, systemic condition. Across the globe, people endure the brutal consequences of conflicts that are not merely local disputes but part of a complex architecture of empire, capitalism, and racial domination. From Gaza to Yemen, Ukraine to the Congo, and from U.S. drone strikes to NATO-backed proxy wars, the violence inflicted on ordinary people is relentless. Cities are reduced to rubble, livelihoods are destroyed, entire generations grow up in trauma, and the human cost is measured not in statistics but in daily suffering and loss.

Yet much of the anti-war movement in the Global North remains reactive. It often confines itself to marches, petitions, or symbolic acts of solidarity, without addressing the deeper structures that generate conflict. The focus is on “ending wars” as isolated events rather than challenging the systemic imperatives that create them. This limited framework allows imperial powers to continue their projects unimpeded while giving the appearance of resistance abroad.

To genuinely oppose war, we must confront the structural roots of global violence: imperialism, colonialism, and racialized capitalism. The wars we see today are not exceptions—they are the system functioning exactly as designed. Anti-war activism that ignores the political economy of empire risks being ineffective, or worse, complicit in sustaining the very structures it claims to oppose.

A revolutionary anti-war movement requires decolonial internationalism. This approach is more than moral opposition to violence; it is a political commitment to linking struggles across borders, centering the voices of oppressed peoples, and building the capacity to challenge global power. Without it, protests may momentarily disrupt, but they cannot dismantle the machinery of empire.

The task is urgent. Militarization continues to expand, sanctions kill silently, and corporate profiteering fuels endless conflict. Meanwhile, domestic repression mirrors international campaigns of violence. To oppose war abroad without confronting oppression at home is to fight half a battle. For this reason, the anti-war movement must be deeply intersectional, anti-imperialist, and committed to decolonial praxis.

Imperialism: The Engine of Endless War

Imperialism is not an abstraction or an accident. It is a system, a logic of power that links economic exploitation to military domination. Lenin described imperialism as the “highest stage of capitalism,” when financial monopolies merge with state power to dominate markets, labor, and resources globally. In this framework, wars are not unintended consequences—they are the predictable outcome of a world organized to serve the few at the expense of the many.

The United States, as the dominant global power, exemplifies modern imperialism. It maintains over 750 military bases in more than 80 countries and spends more on its military than the next ten nations combined. Its interventions are not motivated by abstract ideals like “democracy” or “freedom,” but by access to resources, strategic positioning, and the protection of transnational corporate interests. Economic sanctions, intelligence operations, and proxy wars extend U.S. influence across continents without the need for formal occupation, demonstrating the flexibility and sophistication of modern imperial power.

Case Study: Iraq

The 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was framed as a mission to liberate Iraqis from dictatorship and secure democracy. In reality, it unleashed unprecedented violence and long-term destabilization. More than one million civilians died, infrastructure and public services were destroyed, and the country’s oil industry was privatized for Western corporate benefit. Beyond the immediate human cost, the invasion destabilized the region, creating conditions for the rise of extremist groups and ongoing conflict.

Anti-war movements mobilized millions during this period, but the lack of a coherent anti-imperialist framework limited their impact. Protests condemned the violence but did not always challenge the systemic structures that made occupation and exploitation inevitable. Without addressing the roots of empire, the movement could not prevent the continuation of occupation, illustrating the limits of morality-based activism in the face of global power.

Case Study: Libya

In 2011, NATO intervened in Libya under the guise of a “humanitarian mission” to protect civilians during the Arab Spring. While framed as a morally justified campaign, the intervention overthrew one of Africa’s most prosperous nations, triggered ongoing civil war, and enabled human trafficking and open-air slave markets. Western corporations secured Libyan oil interests, illustrating the economic motives behind what was publicly justified as moral intervention. This case demonstrates a key lesson: imperialism often cloaks itself in the language of human rights and democracy. Without political clarity, even well-intentioned anti-war activism risks being co-opted.

Imperialism as a System

Across continents, imperialism functions through a combination of military, economic, and ideological tools. Direct invasions, regime-change operations, economic sanctions, arms deals, and proxy conflicts maintain global hierarchies. Militaries and multinational corporations operate in tandem to secure resources, suppress resistance, and ensure the dominance of imperial powers. These actions are not anomalies; they are systemic features of a world built on inequality, exploitation, and racialized hierarchy.

Colonialism at Home and Abroad

Opposition to imperialism abroad requires confronting settler colonialism at home. The United States is founded on genocide, dispossession, and racialized exploitation. Indigenous peoples were forcibly removed from their lands, African peoples were enslaved for centuries, and the country maintains occupation over territories such as Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Colonialism is not merely historical—it shapes modern policy, governance, and militarization.

Indigenous lands are routinely exploited for pipelines and extractive projects, while Black and Brown communities experience over-policing and systemic oppression. Police forces, trained in counterinsurgency techniques developed abroad, implement those tactics domestically, linking internal repression to imperial intervention. This illustrates a profound truth: domestic colonialism and global imperialism are two sides of the same system.

Case Study: Gaza

The U.S. provides over $3.8 billion annually in military aid to Israel, funding weapons deployed against Palestinian civilians. Simultaneously, U.S. police forces adopt counterinsurgency techniques similar to those used in occupied territories. Militarism, policing, and occupation are inseparable; effective anti-war activism must address colonial violence at home and abroad.

Colonialism is not only physical occupation; it is also economic, cultural, and environmental. Corporate exploitation of Indigenous and marginalized lands fuels resource wars abroad. Extractive industries degrade ecosystems and force migration, while frontline communities bear the brunt of militarized policing and environmental destruction. Anti-war movements that ignore these links risk treating war as a discrete phenomenon rather than a systemic condition.

The Danger of Neutrality

Many anti-war organizations adopt a “neutral” stance, condemning “all violence” and avoiding explicit support for liberation struggles. But neutrality in asymmetrical conflicts is not neutral—it is complicity.

History offers stark examples. Vietnamese resistance during the U.S. war was condemned as terrorism in the Global North, yet today it is celebrated as a struggle for sovereignty. Algerian revolutionaries were brutalized under French colonial rule, and South African anti-apartheid activists faced international vilification. In each case, neutrality obscured power imbalances and effectively sided with oppressors.

A revolutionary anti-war movement must choose sides, supporting those resisting occupation, exploitation, and plunder. To remain neutral is to remain passive in the face of injustice, allowing empire to function unchallenged.

Global Interconnections of War

War cannot be understood in isolation; it is interconnected with global economic, political, and environmental systems. Economic sanctions function as silent warfare, creating famine, medicine shortages, and humanitarian crises in countries such as Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe. Meanwhile, NATO expansion destabilizes regions, often under the pretense of “security,” while securing access to strategic resources and geopolitical advantage. Militaries are among the largest global polluters, and extractive industries devastate frontline communities, linking environmental destruction with militarization.

Militarized policing technologies further connect domestic repression with imperial projects abroad. Techniques used in U.S.-occupied territories or in foreign counterinsurgency operations are mirrored in domestic policing, surveillance, and border enforcement. These interconnections demonstrate that global peace cannot be achieved without addressing systemic, interconnected forms of oppression.

Case Studies

In Venezuela, U.S.-led sanctions and economic pressures have created severe shortages of food, medicine, and energy. The resulting humanitarian crisis has been widely misrepresented as domestic mismanagement, obscuring the imperial context of external economic warfare. In Iran, decades of embargoes have debilitated infrastructure and health systems while enriching multinational corporations that profit indirectly from economic instability. In the Congo, mineral conflicts are sustained by multinational mining interests, while local militias, often armed through proxy interventions, perpetuate cycles of violence. Each example underscores the need for an anti-war movement that sees the global system as interconnected.

Lessons from History

The anti-war movement has a mixed record of victories and failures. During the Vietnam War, mass mobilizations successfully pressured U.S. policy, yet they often failed to center Vietnamese voices or connect with domestic struggles such as Black liberation, limiting their transformative potential. In the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, protests were unable to halt occupation due to a lack of sustained organization and clear anti-imperialist analysis. During the Arab Spring and NATO’s intervention in Libya, anti-war rhetoric was co-opted to justify military campaigns under the guise of humanitarian intervention.

These historical lessons demand a movement grounded in decolonial, internationalist politics. Activists must recognize that victories require sustained pressure, political clarity, and strategic alliances across borders. Moral appeals alone are insufficient; understanding systemic power and acting accordingly is essential to building effective resistance.

Building a Revolutionary Anti-War Movement

A transformative anti-war movement must combine political education, direct action, transnational solidarity, domestic demilitarization, and resistance to co-optation. Political education involves teaching histories of imperialism, settler colonialism, and global liberation struggles. Direct action targets corporations, banks, and institutions profiting from militarization. Transnational solidarity builds deep alliances with movements resisting imperial domination abroad. Domestically, activists must oppose police militarization, surveillance, and immigration enforcement operations. Vigilance against co-optation is critical, as nationalist or isolationist rhetoric can divert the movement from its global, anti-imperialist focus.

Grassroots organizing, coalition-building, and sustained campaigns are crucial. Movements such as the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel, anti-sanctions coalitions supporting Cuba