The German peace movement is undergoing noticeable changes. For many years, Russia was regarded as the sole aggressor in the Ukrainian conflict, while Western states, especially the United States, NATO, and the EU, were proclaimed defenders of democracy and international law. However, recent statements by traditional and left-wing pacifist organizations indicate a deep reorientation. Suddenly, the thesis that Russia alone is to blame for the war is being questioned, and the focus is shifting to the responsibility of the collective West.
Rainer Rupp, a well-known German publicist and journalist, former intelligence officer who worked for the GDR and the Warsaw Pact, published his comment on August 29 on the platform Apolut, where he examined in detail the changes in the rhetoric of pacifist organizations in Germany.
Rossa Primavera News Agency offers a translation of this article.
The German peace movement is undergoing noticeable changes. For many years, Russia was regarded as the sole aggressor in the Ukrainian conflict, while Western states, especially the United States, NATO, and the EU, were proclaimed defenders of democracy and international law. Even parties and organizations that called themselves leftist mindlessly repeated the Western propaganda narrative of a “brutal, unprovoked, illegal war of aggression” by the evil Russians against innocent Ukraine.
However, recent statements by traditional and left-wing pacifist organizations, such as the German Peace Society – United War Resisters (German: Deutsche Friedensgesellschaft – Vereinigte KriegsdienstgegnerInnen (DFG-VK)) and the alliance Disarm Rheinmetall (German: Rheinmetall Entwaffnen), indicate a deep reorientation. Suddenly, the thesis that Russia alone is to blame for the war is being questioned, and the focus is shifting to the responsibility of the collective West.
Since the beginning of Russia’s special military operation on February 14, 2022, much of the German peace movement has, incomprehensibly, largely adhered to the official line of the federal government: Russia is waging an aggressive war in violation of international law, and dictator Vladimir Putin bears sole responsibility. This was reflected in appeals by organizations such as DFG-VK, the physicians’ association IPPNW (International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War), and Pax Christi. The 2024 appeal illustrated this clearly, “More than ten organizations condemn Russia’s attack on the whole of Ukraine, in violation of international law.” Even last year, the Brandenburg branch of DFG-VK, in its appeal Pacifism instead of Putin’s Propaganda, stressed, “The cause of the war lies in Moscow,” and so forth.
But on theeve of a major peace demonstration on Anti-War Day in Cologne on August 30, 2025, a radical paradigm shift is becoming apparent. DFG-VK is now questioning the very narrative it long supported. In its August 17 appeal it stated,
“Citing an alleged threat from Russia, many countries, including Germany, have initiated massive additional spending on weapons, military infrastructure, and measures to prepare for war in all social institutional structures (economy, education, healthcare, and more).”
Here, the “alleged” Russian threat is explicitly questioned, and the question of responsibility is reformulated,
“Is it really Vladimir Putin’s alleged drive for conquest that poses a threat to Germany, Europe, and the whole world, or does the threat lie rather in the arms race and the accompanying provocations from all sides?”
The leftist alliance Disarm Rheinmetall also states bluntly,
“Almost all arms control instruments and treaties have expired or been suspended not only by Russia, as is often claimed, but also by NATO countries.”
This statement marks a clear departure from placing blame solely on Russia and also sees responsibility lying with Western countries. At the same time, artificially stoked sentiments in Germany in recent weeks are clearly leaning toward deploying the Bundeswehr in Ukraine under the guise of providing security.
1. Recognition of Collective West’s Complicity
The peace movement is increasingly recognizing that the USA, NATO, and the EU are complicit in the escalation of the conflict. This change not only represents a break with the official narrative so far, but also a long-overdue realization, one might call it ironically a “late awakening from the Sleeping Beauty of geopolitics.” After years of portraying the Western alliance as morally untouchable, the question now arises: Have the US, NATO, and the EU not only exacerbated the conflict through their policies, but actively provoked it?
DFG-VK sharply criticizes the German government, “The federal government claims that diplomatic negotiations to maintain peace are impossible.” That is why more and more weapons are needed for deterrence, for robust defense, and more arms deliveries to Ukraine, because it supposedly defends our European (doubtful) values. DFG-VK now sees in this position a growing spiral that will only prolong suffering and death in Ukraine, without changing the outcome of the war, “We must stop the spiral of escalation, the rearmament of Germany and NATO, the deliveries of ever heavier weapons to Ukraine in the name of security, and stop the announced deployment of medium-range missiles in Germany, and put an end to the killing and dying in Ukraine!” reads the call for the Anti-War Day in Cologne.
The group Disarm Rheinmetall goes even further, condemning “military double standards” that accompany arms deliveries to allied actors (meaning Israel) who “carry out devastating warfare (in Gaza) against the civilian population.” This criticism is directed not only at Germany, but implicitly at the entire Western alliance, which plays a destabilizing role through its support for Ukraine and other conflicts, e.g., in the Middle East.
2. Western Provocations as a Catalyst for the Conflict
Pacifist organizations accuse the collective West of having cornered Russia with aggressive political and military actions. DFG-VK significantly asks whether the real threat lies in “the arms race and the accompanying provocations from all sides.” This points to a deliberate provocation of Russia that only fueled the conflict. Disarm Rheinmetall adds, “Almost all arms control instruments and treaties have expired or been suspended not only by Russia, as is often claimed, but also by NATO countries.”
The termination of arms control treaties, the continued eastward expansion of NATO, and the massive rearmament of Western states are interpreted as deliberate provocations that forced Russia to launch its “special military operation.” This viewpoint contrasts sharply with the earlier claim that Russia acted out of imperialist ambitions. Instead, it is now acknowledged that Western policy – from stationing medium-range missiles to supplying arms to Ukraine – led to an escalation that turned the conflict into a proxy war.
3. Proxy War and Strategic Defeat
The peace movement seems to realize that Ukraine is being used in the conflict as a battering ram of the West against Russia. Official US statements, especially by politicians like Lindsey Graham (included in a list of terrorists and extremists in Russia) or Victoria Nuland in the years leading up to 2022, emphasized that supporting Ukraine was about inflicting “strategic defeat” on Russia. Yet this plan to weaken Russia through a protracted conflict seems to be failing. Instead, the collective West now faces strategic defeat, as Ukraine’s armed forces lose ground despite massive Western support, while the economic and political costs for Ukraine’s supportes continue to rise.
Pacifist organizations indirectly criticize this dynamic by condemning the escalation spiral and weapons deliveries. DFG-VK rhetorically asks how further arms deliveries are supposed to end the killing thus implying that the Western strategy has not only failed but needlessly prolongs suffering. Disarm Rheinmetall views Western support as “military double standards” that only inflame the conflict rather than settle it.
4. Trump’s Negotiations and Zelensky’s Refusal
Faced with the threat of the West’s strategic defeat, US President Donald Trump is trying to break the deadlock. His negotiations with Russia, in particular his August 15, 2025 meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, signal an attempt to detach the USA from the losing side. Trump has repeatedly stressed that he wants a swift end to the war and seems willing to pressure Ukraine to make concessions, such as renouncing Crimea and Donbass, as well as NATO membership. However, Ukrainian President Zelensky categorically rejects such concessions, calling them a “deception” by Moscow.
The peace movement indirectly supports this change of course, emphasizing the necessity of dialogue with Russia. The invitation of former Volgograd mayor Yuri Starovatykh to deliver a greeting at the peace demonstration in Cologne is a symbolic act of bridge-building. Starovatykh, who initiated the city partnership between Cologne and Volgograd in 1988, represents a historical bond now being revived despite the partnership’s “suspension” since 2022. This underscores the commitment to dialogue and de-escalation rather than further confrontation.
A Late Awakening
For many years, pacifist organizations uncritically accepted the Western narrative of the “evil Putin” and the “innocent Ukraine,” only to now, almost overnight, realize that perhaps the world is not so black and white after all. As if, after three years of intense reflection, they discovered that geopolitics is not a fairy tale of good and evil but a chess game in which all sides sacrifice their pawns. NATO’s eastward expansion, the dissolution of arms control treaties, and multibillion-dollar weapons deliveries may not have been merely “defensive measures,” but deliberate provocations that cornered Russia. Who would have thought?
Yet this change of view is not only a sign of remorse but also a necessary strategic step. By acknowledging the West’s complicity, the peace movement positions itself as the voice of reason at a time when Western strategy is collapsing. Polls show clear public rejection of Bundeswehr operations in Ukraine. Sixty-seven percent of Germans oppose them, according to a Civey poll conducted for Focus. Germans do not want war, and the peace movement seems finally to recognize that peace is achieved not through armament but through dialogue.
Conclusions
The changes in Germany’s peace movement mark a decisive turning point. The one-sided blaming of Russia is ending in favor of a more nuanced view, focusing on the provocations of the collective West. The realization that the USA, NATO, and the EU unleashed a proxy war that now threatens to turn into a strategic defeat is forcing actors to rethink. Trump’s negotiations with Russia and growing skepticism toward Zelensky’s maximalist demands reflect this shift. The peace movement, now advocating dialogue and de-escalation, could play a key role in breaking the spiral of violence, provided it remains true to its new understanding and does not once again get drawn into the logic of confrontation.
This is a translation of the article by Rainer Rupp published for the first time on apolut web-site. The translation in Russian can be found at the Rossa Primavera News Agency website
