We need to talk about peace Peace, the state of existence all sane human beings desire, yet not everyone shares the same understanding of what it truly means For the Kremlin, "peace" is a useful term for subjugation, aided by certain Western useful idiots. This is how

The KGB's infiltration, financing, and control of parts of the so-called "peace movement" began more than half a century ago. Today, we still particularly feel the effects of the anti-Pershing missile movement of the 1980s.

Not everyone noticed the Soviet influence and unbalanced narrative within the peace movement; some genuinely desired peace. Yet Soviet, East German, and Czech intelligence shaped its anti-Western direction.

"Generals for Peace," founded in 1980/81, was backed by the KGB and East German Stasi. Led by Stasi agent Gerhard Kade, the group aimed to push anti-American sentiment in the peace movement, featuring former NATO generals.

The World Peace Council (WPC), founded in 1949 by the Cominform and backed by the Soviet Union, acted as a Cold War propaganda tool, criticizing the U.S. and its allies while defending Soviet actions in various conflicts.

There were many other organizations with close ties to the Kremlin. Marxist groups and openly communist parties were traditionally pro-Moscow and exclusively criticized the West. Russian embassies in Europe supported and covertly financed their activities.

Some participants in peace demonstrations against "mutual destruction" criticized the movement's pro-Soviet bias and lack of solidarity with those trapped behind the Iron Curtain.

On the other hand, individuals from the Social Democrats, "Young Socialists," and Christian groups participated without criticizing the anti-Western bias.

Many of them are still alive today, maintaining their old networks, and perhaps more significantly, they have retained their anti-Western, anti-NATO, and pro-Moscow mindset, at least to a certain extent. For some, it doesn't matter that the USSR no longer exists.

We know of individuals from the Communist and Social Democratic parties and the church who participated in the "Peace Marches" against NATO rockets in the 1980s and now advocate against weapons support for Ukraine.

Let’s jump to 2014 — after the Russian annexation of Crimea and the covert invasion of Eastern Ukraine, new peace rallies emerge in Gerny and Austria, but this time they face criticism for being infiltrated by far-right individuals, conspiracy theorists, amand antisemites.

Besides parroting the usual Kremlin talking points, speeches were given about the "world finance conspiracy," "chemtrails disseminated by airplanes," and, of course, how evil the West, the U.S., and the "lying mainstream media" are.

2022, after the full-scale invasion, Russian aggression against Ukraine became undeniable. Previously, many peace activists had denied Russia's actions in Donbass. Now, we hear, similar like after Crimea 2014: "The US, NATO, Ukraine provoked it or share equal blame for the war"

Now the far right seeks to participate as well. Some far-left peace activists collaborate with them due to their shared positive stance on Russia, while others exclude them from their events despite their common views on foreign policy.

There are several "peace organizations" around the world that have shared the same view for decades: The West is to blame, the West needs to negotiate with Russia (as well as Iran and China), and we need to disarm. A strong condemnation of dictators is missing.

Their message—"we need to negotiate," "diplomatic solutions," "weapons don't bring peace"—is accompanied by a collection of Russian talking points, disinformation, and propaganda myths that aim to at least partly "justify" the Russian invasion.

These peace rallies and movements always defend themselves against legitimate criticism in the same way: "Are you against peace?" "You are a warmonger," "We are not on the Russian side; we are on the side of peace."

Peace is undeniably good—who wouldn’t agree? But a certain kind of "hardcore pacifism" allows aggressors to succeed, subjugate, occupy, torture, and kill those who don't defend themselves, yet these questions don’t arise when you think "weapons are always bad" & "hug your enemy"

It’s not just about what they say, but also what they leave out. Russian imperialism, the Kremlin's genocidal propaganda, and the terror of the occupation regime—these are all incompatible with the "peace at all costs" narrative and remain unmentioned.

Then we have to ask ourselves: Why are there participants waving Russian flags or displaying the war symbol "Z"? Why are there speakers at peace rallies and "peace conferences" who have appeared on Russia Today or even on the show of the notorious Russian warmonger Solovyov?

This is only a superficial overview of the activities and narratives of the pro-Kremlin 'Peace Movement.' You are welcome to add further insights.

I believe there is much to discuss, and I should note that much of the information about the flaws and misguided direction of this movement comes from former members who have left it.

One question remains: How can we reclaim the word "peace"? For everyone who supports a sustainable, just peace, this must also mean freedom.