1. In the four years that have passed since the 19th Congress, the same tendency for realignments amongst the capitalist economies has basically continued, which has been apparent for the last 15 years. In brief, the basic features of the developments are:

a) The strengthening of China in relation to the USA and Eurozone, with their share of the Gross World Product as a criterion. As a result of this fact the competition between China and the USA is sharpening, which is still in the first position, despite the trend for its share to shrink.

b) The slowdown of the rate of growth of the international capitalist economy in the last three years, without any imperialist centre emerging in order to function as the motor force to increase the rate of growth. An important feature is that fact that certain imperialist centres (EU, Japan) have not in essence exceeded the pre-crisis levels of 2008.

c) The large quantity of over-accumulated capital and the inability of the bourgeois governments in all the imperialist centres to devalue it in a controlled and satisfactory way (e.g.in the form of an inflated state debt).

d) The sharpening of the basic contradiction, the reinforcement of the trend for the absolute and relative destitution of the working class, above all in the most developed capitalist economies, the increase of the level of the exploitation and the sharpening of all the social contradictions.

e) The impact of uneven development amongst the various member-states of the inter-state imperialist alliances, such as the EU. This fact, in combination with the increase of the divergence of interests between the bourgeois classes of these states, increases the uncertainty regarding the cohesion of these specific alliances.

The global capitalist economy is permeated by the following contradiction: On the one hand, the trend for capital expansion (both in the form of Foreign Direct Investments and also through the movement of money capital) intensifies the international synchronization of the periodic outbreaks of crises of capital over-accumulation, and on the other, the various competing interests of the imperialist centres and the various bourgeois states impede the joint management of capital devaluation.

2. More generally, the developments confirm that the objective trend for the internationalization of the movement of capital in the framework of the capitalist market cannot negate the impact of the law uneven development, or cancel out the reality that the reproduction of social capital is chiefly carried out in the framework of the nation-state formation of the capitalist economy.

The conditions for the expanded reproduction of the capital of the monopoly groups, the stock companies, continue in their majority to be formed in the framework of the nation states and the various inter-state imperialist alliances which they participate in. The bourgeois nation state remains then the basic organ that safeguards the economic dominance of capital, the monopolies, the concentration and centralization of capital in competition with similar processes and aims in other states. It remains an important arena for the relentless class struggle between capital and labour.

The inter-imperialist contradictions and the intra-bourgeois struggle inside every bourgeois state are intensifying, on the basis of this contradictory functioning of the capitalist economy.

In this period, the bourgeois current of nationalism and protectionism is being temporarily strengthened in the economy, both in the USA and G.  Britain as well as in powerful Euro zone states like France and Italy. Various parties of bourgeois euroscepticism express this specific current in the EU. The current of protectionism is developing as a choice of sections of the bourgeois class in the USA and EU in order to defend themselves against the deterioration of the conditions of competition, above all of their industrial capital, particularly in conditions of the slowdown of the international capitalist economy.

The intervention of the bourgeois political line in order to curb a significant devaluation of capital in essence delays the beginning of a new phase of dynamic capitalist recovery and increases the impasses of the bourgeois political system. The apparent strengthening of the political line of protectionism will have a negative impact on the development of international trade which is already at relatively low levels. At the same time, the inter-imperialist antagonisms and contradictions are sharpening. The danger of more extensive, more generalized imperialist military conflicts is objectively increasing. The possibility of realignments and the disturbance of the cohesion of imperialist alliances, like NATO, is also increasing.

The KKE consistently and comprehensively fights against both bourgeois nationalism and the cosmopolitanism of capital which are two aspects of the ideology of the ruling class. It is in favour of the international unity of the working class and its movement.

Every communist and workers party, the international communist movement, the working class and its movement in all countries must be prepared for the possibility of a more generalized imperialist war. They must oppose the various warmongering nationalist battle cries and the creation of an atmosphere of hostility of the people towards another people. They must chart a line of struggle that does not detach the defence of borders and sovereign rights-from the standpoint of the working class and popular strata-from the struggle to overthrow the power of capital in every country. The communist and workers movement, representing the interests of the working class, of the peoples, which do not have any relationship with defending the plans of the various imperialist poles and the profitability of the various monopoly groups.

3. The USA continues to be in 1st place as regards its share of the Gross World Product, however with a marked tendency towards this decreasing. It is predicted that 2016 will end with a minor slowdown of the US economy, with the main factor acting as a brake being the reduction of exports, which is related to the revaluation of the international dollar rate and the slowdown of trade transactions at an international level. 

The share of the Eurozone in the GWP is showing a reduction, while the share of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) is increasing.

China is in 2nd place as regards it share of the GWP. Its rate of growth in 2015 (6.9%) remains high, even it has decreased significantly and is at its lowest point during the last 20 years, with a trend for a further decrease. This fact is causing more general concern in the centres of international capitalism, due to the possible major consequences that a significant decrease of the growth rate of the Chinese economy would have for the global capitalist economy. These are fears are provoked by its large share of the international market (large share of international trade, of financial investments in foreign bonds etc.).

Respectively, the predictions for a very slow and weak recovery of the EU focus on the comparatively lower rate of productivity in comparison to the USA and on the consequences of the tight monetary and restrictive fiscal policy, which in turn hold back the rate of new investments. The difficulty in managing the indebted states and the international banking groups, as well as the major deficits in the balance of payments of states, are continuing and causing "headaches" for the state and inter-state apparatuses.

The global state debt increased by 27 trillion dollars in the 2007-2014 period, increasing its percentage in relation to the GWP by 20.8% (Mckinsey Report, 2015).

Leading European banking groups (Deutsche Bank, Credit Suisse, Barclays, RBS, Monte dei Paschi di Siena, etc.)are undergoing a significant devaluation of their share capital and losses. Deutsche Bank, the largest German bank, announced losses of 6.8 billion euros and has exposure to derivatives worth 55 trillion euros. The banking sector in Italy is burdened with non-performing "red" loans of 360 billion euros, 16.7% of all loans.

4. The competition between the USA and China and between the USA and Russia is sharpening at the economic-military level.

China is already the USA' s most significant creditor-state. The USA's relative share of the GWP decreased from 31% in 2000 to 23% in 2015, while China's share has increased from 3.6% in 2000 to 14.9% in 2015. In relation to their trade transactions, 8.95% of imports to China come from the USA, while 21.8% of imports to the USA come from China, a fact that explains the current concerns of the US bourgeois political system. China’s export of commodities to the EU has also increased. China’s share of imports to the EU increased from 5.2% in 2000 to 13.8% in 2015, while in the same period the share of the USA decreased from 14% to 10.2%.

The USA still possesses the first position in the pyramid of the international capitalist system, in terms of economic, political and military strength. In parallel with its supremacy in the IMF and World Bank, it formed two basic proposals during the period of the Obama administration in order to reinforce its presence in the European and Asian markets.

As regards Europe, the "Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership" with the EU (TTIP), while as regards Asia, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was proposed, from which China is excluded. The US proposal for the TTIP has been aptly described as a proposal for the creation of an "economic NATO". If it is implemented, and there are already inter-capitalist contradictions being expressed over such a prospect, it is assessed that it will cover 50% of global production, 30% of global trade and 20% of Foreign Direct Investments internationally. The so-called "Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement" (CETA) that was recently between the EU and Canada is a precursor and a launching pad for the TTIP.

A section of the German and French bourgeois class assesses that the US proposal is in essence a "Trojan Horse" in order to safeguard US hegemony in Europe. The negotiations have been proceeding tortuously since 2013, with the characteristic reactions of the French President Hollande, the German Vice-Chancellor Gabriel and various leaders of the "eurosceptic" current, like Le Pen.

The strengthening of the bourgeois current of nationalism and protectionism of the economy, which was reflected in Trumps' victory in the US presidential elections, signals the re-examination of the aforementioned plans of the previous US government.

Before the elections, Trump took a negative position towards the inter-state free trade agreements of the USA in the Pacific (TPP) and in the Atlantic (TTIP), talking about the need for tariff protection of domestic production with the aim of boosting US industrial production. At the same time, he posed the issue of re-examining the current agreements of the World Trade Organization (WTO).In addition, he also highlighted as prospect the radical renegotiation of the US foreign debt, leaving the possibility of a haircut open, while he also talked in essence about the need to re-examine US foreign policy, with as its basic features rapprochement with Russia on the one hand and targeting China as the main opponent of the USA on the other. After his election, he has already softened some positions with milder statements in relation to his tough line before the elections; this softening is due to the fact that as President he now expresses the general interests of the US ruling class. Despite all this, he has clearly announced the US withdrawal from the TPP..

5. On the other side, China in 2014 presented the initiative "One Belt, One Road" (OBOR), i.e. the creation of a free trade zone, a network that will unite China with the rest of Asia, Europe and Africa through preferential economic agreements. The plan includes a land and a sea route which are called the "21st-century Silk Road and Maritime Silk Road». At the end of 2014, the state fund to finance the infrastructure for the Silk Road (Silk Road Fund) was activated with 40 billion dollars of start-up capital (e.g.in order to finance high-speed railway lines, the modernization of ports etc.)

At the same time, China played a leading role in establishing the New Development Bank (NDB) of the BRICS, as well as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which numbers amongst its 57 members Britain, France, Germany but not the USA. These are two initiatives that constitute an "economic response" to US hegemony in the IMF and World Bank.

Despite the disagreement of the rest of the BRICS members (Brazil, Russia, India and S. Africa), China imposed its leading role in the New Development Bank (NDB), both through safeguarding the greater share in composition of the start-up capital and also through the choice of Shanghai as its headquarters.

6. At the level of economic competition, a significant development is the testing of the continuing cohesion of the EU and the future prospects of the Eurozone, especially after the victory of the Brexit in the referendum held in Britain. This reality makes the inter-imperialist competition even more complex and increases the fluidity of the current inter-state collaborations. The developments in the EU impact on the developments and contradictions in Greece, an issue that is examined in more detail in the following chapter.

The new, more synchronized economic crisis which is on the way, the sharpening of the struggle to control markets, energy resources and oil and natural gas transport routes, the existing war flashpoints in the Middle East and Ukraine, the friction in Eastern and Central Europe in relation to Russia, in the Arctic and South China Sea, increase the danger of a wider imperialist war.

7. Class inequality is constantly expanding at a global level. The unequal distribution of the world's wealth was further intensified after the international synchronized capitalist crisis. According to the annual research on global wealth (carried out by Credit Suisse), 90% of the population possesses about 10% of the wealth, while the poorest 75% possess less than 3% of the wealth. Indeed, of the 10% of the population that possesses 90% of the wealth, 1% alone possesses almost 50% of the wealth. At the same time, 71% of the world's population lives with less than the equivalent of 8 euros per day.

The results of these class inequalities are also reflected in the lack of access of 780 million people to clean water, the lack of access of 2.5 billion people to health facilities and 1.3 billion people's lack of access to electricity.

Almost 3 billion people gather wood and biomass residues in order to cook, a practice that is connected to 3.5 million premature deaths due to poor indoor air quality.

Finally, almost 800 million people are recorded as being chronically malnourished, while 3.5 million people die from hunger every year.

8. The very sharp inter-imperialist antagonisms and the major contradictions of powerful capitalist states and interests are today leading to continuous upheavals in the alliances, to the constant phenomena of the creation of axes and anti-axes internationally.

The intensity of the inter-imperialist antagonisms has led not only to an increase in military spending, but also to changes in position amongst the capitalist states in terms of military strength. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), global military spending in 2015 reached 1.7 trillion dollars, with an increase of 1% in relation to 2014.

The USA remains the strongest military power on the planet, spending more than 600 billion dollars a year, i.e. what the next ten strongest military powers spend combined.

Russia is the second strongest military power. With the modernization and reinforcement of its military strength, it seeks to safeguard the economic interests of its monopolies. So, in 2015 it spent 66.4 billion dollars, a 7.5% increase in relation to 2014 and a 91% increase in relation to 2006.

The "race" in this period of China and India (the 3rd and 4th military powers in the world) to cover deficiencies and upgrade their military power in order to correspond to the economic strength and reach of their business groups is also noteworthy.

Other states that are allies of the USA have also concentrated significant military strength, either in the framework of NATO, such as France (5th), G.Britain (6th), Turkey (8th), Germany (9th), Italy (10th) or outside NATO, like Japan (7th), S.Korea (11th) and Israel (16th).

Of course, military strength is not determined just by calculating military spending, the arms potential and control of the global production of weapons and arms trade, but also by a more complex issue that is related to the overall ability of each bourgeois class to defend its interests, both inside the country and also at an international level, using military means, when economic and political-diplomatic means are not sufficient.

So, apart from annual military spending, military power is also related to the size of military forces acquired over time, technological superiority, the existence of bases outside borders in combination with the control of territories of strategic importance, the superiority in collecting information, the ability to conduct unorthodox warfare. Military power depends on economic power, although a strong economic presence of a state does not necessarily mean it is militarily strong. The latter presupposes a strong military industry, the ability to train and retrain forces in the art of war and the relevant new technologies, the continuous modernization of the military means and a high level of expertise that as regards some types of weapons, such as nuclear weapons, requires many years of research and a great deal of spending.

9. Nuclear weapons are of great importance in today's era. The states that possess nuclear weapons are the USA, Russia, China, India, Britain, France, Israel, Pakistan and N.Korea.

Nevertheless, there are also enormous differences amongst these nuclear powers, as the USA and Russia stand out amongst them in terms of their nuclear potential. Apart from these two countries, which have thousands of nuclear warheads ready for launch, only Britain and France possess nuclear weapons ready for use, and possibly Israel.

Russia is potentially the only military power that can respond to the USA, if it is on the receiving end a nuclear strike, causing enormous destruction. It is thought that this danger acts in a way to prevent the use of nuclear weapons. However, it has been demonstrated historically that in the instance of a sharpening of the inter-imperialist competition and its escalation into a military conflict, the capitalist states do not hesitate even to utilize such weapons.

Based on the above, it is understood the reason why one of the crucial issues related to the current confrontation between the USA and Russia is the installation of the US anti-missile "shield" in Europe and the Pacific region. These moves serve the aim of impeding a possible Russian response, if the USA and the NATO alliance attempt a "first nuclear strike".

The potential for military rapid response is also of great importance. NATO pays a great deal of attention to forming military rapid response units, which of course need modern infrastructure, like aircraft carriers or strategic bomber aircraft in order to be able to carry out their tasks, as well as new territories as a form of geopolitical support, something that is served by political-military alliances and  bases in foreign countries.

In the next period, the military correlation of forces will be decisively influenced by the utilization of new technology, 5th and 6th generation aircraft, laser weapons etc.

10. Every bourgeois class seeks to increase its strength through political-military alliances. NATO continues to constitute the strongest political-military alliance, despite the sharpening of the contradictions inside it and the apparent trend for the formation of an independent EU military apparatus. The decisions taken by NATO in Warsaw "set the tone" regarding the determination of the US and European imperialists to defend their interests against the bourgeois class of Russia, utilizing the military means they possess along the entire perimeter of the Russia-NATO borders.

NATO and the USA are developing similar plans to strengthen their presence in the Pacific region (with the "pivot to Asia" strategy), as well as in other regions.

As regards the arenas of existing or potential military confrontations, the SE Mediterranean, SE Asia , N.Africa and the Arctic Circle stand out, without ruling out other possible flashpoints or volatile regions, like the Caucasus, the Persian Gulf, the Aden region and the Balkans.

In addition, the military confrontations in Europe (SE Ukraine, Crimea) as well as the reinforcement of NATO in the Baltic, Black Sea and also in the Balkans and Aegean, are factors that militate in favour of a possible outbreak of military conflicts on European soil.

Besides NATO, however, other political-military alliances have now emerged (Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Collective Security Treaty Organization etc.), which despite the fact that they are still "looser" and less developed than NATO have the same class character, i.e. they are alliances of capitalist states.

At the same time, in a number of regions, like Latin America and Africa, political-economic alliances are being formed that are connected, amongst other things, to specific political choices and collaborations, for example, with the EU. In addition, separate states in Latin America (such as Colombia, Peru, Chile, Mexico) and also elsewhere (such as Australia) are integrated into the more general promotion of NATO's "partnership" relations.

In recent years, there has been a significant growth of mercenary armies, i.e. private military businesses which under various pretexts (e.g. piracy, the drugs trade, military training, "terrorism") undertake missions in dozens of war zones as the envoys of capitalist states. These armies are integrated into the imperialist plans, the so-called unorthodox warfare, provide the bourgeois governments with the potential to better manage the human losses that they undergo in the interventions in which they participate.

11.  The military confrontations are being conducted over the following issues:

• The control of the energy deposits and the transport routes of the energy resources (e.g. oil, natural gas, pipelines etc.)
• The control of land and maritime transport routes for commodities (e.g. the Silk Road, the sea passages in the Mediterranean, the Bosporus, the Horn of Africa etc.)
• Control of the subterranean wealth in the Arctic region, the mineral wealth, rare earth elements, as well as water reserves.
• The utilization of space for military goals.
• The struggle over the market shares, over the course of which military means are used not only to acquire new market shares, but also to reduce the share of their competitors.

In these conditions, the activity of the so-called "Islamic terrorist" groups is a substantial feature of imperialist war in the 21st century. And this is true, regardless of the extent to which the activity of such organizations is formed with the support or toleration of imperialist centres or manifests itself as an element asserting the independence of these forces from those powerful centres that reinforced them in the past.

The activity of these organizations is being objectively utilized either as an element of the "unorthodox warfare" of a state or certain sections of it against the interests of another capitalist state or as a pretext for imperialist intervention. Of course, in parallel with these goals, the activity of these organizations is also utilized to reinforce the repressive mechanisms of a number of bourgeois states, as well as for the ideological preparation of the workers in the face of the possible involvement of their countries in new imperialist interventions, in the name of combating "terrorism".

Of course, along with the fierce competition for the profits of the monopolies, efforts are under way for compromises, agreements, the temporary suspension of any generalization of the confrontation, even the rearrangement of alliances, as the developments inside the Euro-Atlantic "camp"  itself demonstrate.

The developments in Turkey and Syria are characterized by fluidity and mobility in terms of the formation of alliances between different capitalist states and by the possible realignment of alliances. However, neither the trend towards maintaining old alliances nor the trend towards differentiations in the alliances should be treated as absolutes. It is important to continuously monitor such processes because they are related to upheavals in the correlation of forces in alliances and imperialist centres as regards Europe as well, and can trigger more general developments.

In this phase, despite the fact that NATO is developing and expanding even further, always maintaining the Euro-Atlantic states at its hard core, we cannot say that it has totally safeguarded a permanent, stable and undisturbed trajectory, as the alliances are formed in the context of sharpening contradictions.

12. The Greek bourgeois class and the Greek government are already actively promoting NATO's plans in the region (armada in the Aegean, utilization of bases, support for operations in the Balkans, Ukraine etc.)

The sharpening of the contradictions between the Greek and Turkish bourgeoisies is directly influenced by the developments in the wider region of the Eastern Mediterranean, the Middle East, North Africa and can constitute a basic factor that provokes the direct involvement of Greece in a war.

The bourgeois class of Turkey-which other powerful capitalist states are trying to weaken at this moment, to an extent, -is attempting to upgrade its position through the control and acquisition of new territories and maritime regions. It continues the military occupation and the violation of the rights of the state of Cyprus, as well as the provocative disputing of the sovereign rights of the Greek state (disputing of borders, violations of air and maritime space, "grey zones" in the Aegean, climaxing in the recent repeated statements of Erdogan that call the Treaty of Lausanne into question etc.). It seeks to utilize minorities (religious, national etc.)  in order to realize its plans in the wider region of the Balkans.

The regions of the Aegean and Thrace are potential arenas for a military conflict between the bourgeois classes of the neighbouring states of Greece and Turkey, with the possible involvement also of the inter-connected  plans of Albania and FYROM, which in recent years have been developing a close political-military cooperation with Turkey. The provocative statements of the Albanian Prime Minister are integrated into this framework (stirring up the non-existent issue of the Chameria etc.) as well as the stirring up of irredentist slogans on the part of FYROM. The rise of Albanian nationalism against Greece and other states in the region feeds nationalist circles in Greece and other states. The enlargement of the EU and NATO leave their mark on the developments in the Balkan region as a whole and as a consequence they are more directly entangled in the imperialist plans and competition in the region.

Aside from these Balkan states, Turkey in this period is taking initiatives to approach and cooperate with Russia. These initiatives are a new feature and need to be constantly monitored.

The fact that both states, Greece and Turkey, are NATO members complicates the situation. A possible escalation of the confrontation would mean a rupture inside NATO in a sensitive region in terms of its interests, but which could at the same time be utilized by the USA and NATO to reinforce their role in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean. Of course, a very serious rupture inside NATO will mainly be the result of a total disintegration of any agreement or balance between the basic imperialist centres and not merely due to friction or confrontations between Greece and Turkey.

The stance of the Greek bourgeois class towards the possibility of a more general confrontation between Russia and the USA or even China and the USA in the future needs to be constantly monitored. Today the Greek bourgeois class, through the policies of the SYRIZA-ANEL government, participates actively in the NATO plans that are aimed against Russia. It supports the decisions that are taken against Russia, facilitates the increased NATO presence in the Aegean under the pretext of managing the flows of refugees-immigrants (but with as its real goal the better control of the passages of the Russian fleet), participates in joint airforce activity with Bulgaria, which has its basic objective the warding off of the "Russian threat" in the Black Sea.

At the same time, the government seeks to form special relations with Russia, as well as with China, in the framework of the aim to enhance the position of the Greek bourgeois class via the particular role of Greece in connecting the Asian market with the European market.

In the previous period, the Greek government advertised its role as a "bridge" between Russia and the West", a role that had the toleration or even support of the USA. In any case, a possible sharpening of the contradictions between Russia and the USA-NATO will be a factor that intensifies the contradictions and dilemmas inside the bourgeois class of Greece, as its participation in the Euro-Atlantic framework is to its benefit.

The axis of cooperation between Greece and Israel is not a factor for peace in the region, regardless of whether the rapprochement between Turkey and Israel proceeds.

13. In the framework of the competition between the bourgeois classes of Turkey, Greece and Cyprus , as well as the negative role that has been played historically up until the present day as regards the resolution of the Cyprus problem by the USA, G. Britain, NATO and the EU, plans are developing that are negative for the peoples.

The Cyprus issue is an international problem of the invasion and occupation of the northern part of Cyprus by Turkey. Its international character is reflected in the relevant decisions of the UN Security Council.

The new processes are leading to the finalization of the partition of Cyprus, in essence to the formation of two separated state entities that only formally and in the short-term will form a federation.

We oppose-just as we fiercely and decisively opposed the Annan plan that was rejected by the Cypriot people-any effort to impose a solution that will perpetuate the partition and will not provide a viable and reliable solution for the Cypriot people as a whole, Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots, Armenians, Latins, Maronites.

Our struggle is directed to the aim of a united Cyprus, independent, with one single sovereignty, one citizenship and one international personality, without foreign bases and armies, without foreign guarantors and protectors.

14. As a whole, war is phenomenon inherent to capitalism, as well as to every exploitative society. Imperialist "peace" prepares the new imperialist wars. In any case, "war is the continuation of politics by other means", especially in the conditions of the deep crisis of capital over-accumulation and important changes in the correlation of forces in the international imperialist system, where the redivision of markets rarely occurs without bloodshed, on the basis of the experience of the entire 20th century.

The KKE, in contrast with the other parties, consistently reveals to the Greek people the dangers created by the imperialist wars, contributes decisively to strengthening the struggle against the country's participation in the imperialist plans, against the foreign bases, against the changes to and redrawing of the borders in the region that the imperialist centres are systematically attempting. It stably struggles for the disentanglement of Greece from the imperialist unions and the capitalist development path which is the root cause of the wars.

The KKE examines the developments with the peoples' interests as its criteria, as well as the necessity to coordinate their struggle to confront the regime that is the cause of every invasion-occupation. It integrates this struggle into the goal of the total liberation of the people from the shackles of capitalist exploitation and imperialist barbarity.

15. The discussion is intensifying at the level of the EU and each bourgeois state in relation to the so-called "new security doctrine of the states".”Security" is being promoted as the number one issue for the states of the European Union. The activity of the jihadists is used as an opportunity and pretext, as well as the control of the refugee flows and more general issues related to the internal stability and cohesion as necessary conditions for the recovery and for dealing with the consequences of the crisis.

What lie behind this are the aims of the bourgeois classes at home (prevention of the possible sharpening of the class struggle) and abroad (defence of the interests of the EU and its member-states through more active interventions in international conflicts).It is characteristic that the German "White Book on Security" directly connects the issue of internal security with the Germany's aim to strengthen its military role internationally. We had the following developments in the previous period:

• The decisions of the NATO summit in Warsaw regarding the enhanced cooperation with the EU on security matters.
• The imposition of "states of emergency" in France, in Belgium, in cities in Germany, activating relevant provisions that exist in the bourgeois constitutions and EU treaties.
• The reinforcement of the trend to upgrade the Euro-army and reinforce the EU's military bodies through the formation of the "European Defence Agency".
• The formation of new military-police mechanisms (e.g. G. Britain)
• The invocation of Article 42.7 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU by France, after the murderous attack in Paris, in order to carry out the coordinated bombing of Syria together with other European states.
• The replacement of Frontex by the European Border and Coast Guard that will have the ability to intervene directly wherever it considers that there is a lack of security measures and vulnerable borders.
• The "Radicalisation Awareness Network" which has already been set up by the EU and seeks to equate terrorism with every activity that is aimed against or disputes the capitalist system. It is directly connected to the reactionary EU legislation about the protection of "crucial infrastructure" (energy companies, transport companies, telecommunications etc.)

These mechanisms and trends serve the aim of further buttressing the bourgeois states in the framework of the sharpening of the inter-imperialist contradictions and the possibility of their participation in more generalized conflicts. At the same time, they aim to control the working class and popular strata, to restrict popular freedoms and rights through further militarization and increasing tendency to reaction.

Of course, the ability to form a "common security policy" of the EU states depends on the level of cohesion and the course of the contradictions inside the EU itself that is certainly not only expressed at the level of the economy.

The communist movement must confront this expanded network of repressive and surveillance mechanisms, by reinforcing coordinated class struggle at a regional and international level.

16. 

The uneven capitalist development and also mainly the imperialist interventions and wars, the activity of new reactionary political and state formations ("Islamic State", Al Qaeda, Boko Haram) in the region extending from Ukraine, the Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean, to North and Sub-Saharan Africa, have led to major flows of immigrants and refugees, to the sharpening of the problem of the flows from these countries to Europe.

In 2015, the number of refugees and internally displaced people all over the world saw a new increase, reaching 65.3 million people (i.e. 1 out of every 113 inhabitants on Earth), 50% of whom are children. Syria, Afghanistan and Somalia are the countries from which more than half the refugees come from. At the same time, Syria and Iraq are in the 2nd and 3rd place respectively as regards the number of internally displaced people.

In recent years, Greece has become the main country for the entry and passage of refugees that seek shelter in the EU. Especially in 2015, about a million refugees, the majority of them Syrians, were channelled via the Greek islands in the Aegean to EU member-states in Central and Northern Europe. These refugees also utilized the policy of "open borders" that was adopted by bourgeois governments and forces in the EU member-states for a short period of time, with the aim of providing their monopolies with cheap scientific personnel and workforce, who would have very few rights, from the ready supply of refugees. Later, when the flows of refugees and immigrants intensified, the policy of "closed borders" became prevalent. The essence of the EU's policies on refugees and immigrants is, despite the contradictions and controversies, the sorting of a number of refugees-immigrants for the needs of the capitalist economy and the turning on and off of the "tap' of these flows, according to these needs.

The most important decisions of the EU that are being implemented in relation to the refugee-immigration policies are: the decisions regarding the sorting of the refugees via the hot-spots and the programmes to distribute the refugees amongst the member-states (relocation), the adaptation of the Dublin Regulations to the demands of the implementation of the more general EU policies on the refugee-immigrant issue and the control of the flows to benefit capital, the new more reactionary legislation on asylum, the EU-Turkey agreement that openly violates international law on refugees and -in combination with the closing of the borders-led to the entrapment of refugees in Greece, the military-naval operation of the EU "SOPHIA" off Libya, NATO's operation in the Aegean and the creation of a European Border and Coast Guard that can carry out operations along the borders of a member-state, even without its permission and the developments around the Schengen Treaty.

The SYRIZA-ANEL government, despite the differences in rhetoric in comparison to its predecessors, supported and implemented all the decisions of the EU and NATO that further entangle the refugee-immigration issue into the competition between the imperialist centres in the region. These developments had a particular impact on Greek-Turkish relations, with the pressures for the implementation of the EU-Turkey agreement being a characteristic example.

The government has formed conditions of permanent entrapment for the majority of refugees and immigrants, is responsible for the wretched living conditions in the majority of the refugee camps, the consequences for the lives of residents and the activity of the members of Golden Dawn, fascists and other reactionary groups and mechanisms which orchestrate provocations at the expense of refugees, immigrants and local residents. It has handed over service sector related to refugees and immigrants to NGOs. The SYRIZA-ANEL government has also taken temporary and makeshift measures in relation to the long-term economic immigrants, many of whom are being tormented due to the non-renewal of their residence permits, which in some cases, like in the case of agricultural workers, have an even more anti-worker direction.

In opposition to the policies of the imperialist unions, capital and the Greek governments, the KKE is struggling to relieve the consequences of the problems, for the disentanglement and safe transport of the refugees to their destination countries, for humane conditions for their temporary accommodation. It has contributed with its forces in the labour-people's movement to the organization of genuine people's solidarity, which has nothing to do with cosmopolitan charity. It prioritized and continues to prioritize the highlighting of the root causes of mass immigration and refugees, as well as organizing the struggle of the people, regardless of their national background-race-language-religion, against imperialist war and its creator, capitalism. The anti-capitalist struggle, the struggle against the consequences of the capitalist crisis and the imperialist wars, is necessary in order to eradicate the factors that stop the people from living with dignity and security and from becoming the masters in their own lands.