ECR: Russia invokes traditional values to divide democracies and justify the war

Russia uses the image of a defender of traditional and Christian values to gain influence and deepen divisions in democratic societies, participants at a conference organized by the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the European Parliament warned. The debate focused on how the Kremlin adapts its messages for different audiences and invokes religion to legitimize the war against Ukraine.

In briefParticipants described Moscow’s appeal to traditional values as an instrument of influence. According to the organizers, the messages are adapted for different political audiences, with the aim of deepening divisions in democratic societies.

Support for the war in Ukraine was cited to challenge Russia’s image as a defender of Christianity. Alexandr Vondra and Sergei Chapnin criticized the use of religious justifications to legitimize violence.

Szatkowski called for exposing the Kremlin’s objectives and defending the meaning of the values it invokes. The debate was part of an ECR group conference and does not amount to a position adopted by the European Parliament.

The conference, hosted by Members of the European Parliament Mariusz Kamiński and Rihards Kols, brought together politicians, researchers, and former intelligence officials. For the organizers, the issue is challenging a rapprochement that Moscow is attempting to create between its own objectives and conservative convictions. Kamiński argued that the patriotism invoked by Vladimir Putin conceals an imperial project, visible in Ukraine, while religion and the Church are used in the regime’s interest.

Kols described a strategy in which the message changes according to the target audience: “It picks up and abandons whatever narrative sells fastest on the market it is targeting,” he said of Russia, according to an account published by ECR. In the same vein, Tomasz Szatkowski, the group’s secretary-general and the conference moderator, stated that Moscow targets both circles he described as pseudoconservative and liberal and left-wing segments. In his assessment, the common objective is to deepen divisions, even if the arguments used differ.

This adaptation also appears in the EEAS’s fourth report on information manipulation and foreign interference. For the period preceding Moldova’s 2025 elections, the European External Action Service describes messages portraying Maia Sandu as violating traditional values through themes related to the LGBT+ community. The circulation of such content in Western European languages suggests, according to the EEAS, that the target audience extends beyond the local electorate. The report also explains amplification through multiple accounts and platforms, intended to increase apparent visibility and credibility; this alone does not prove a change in political preferences.

The war in Ukraine was the main test cited by speakers for Moscow’s claim to defend Christianity. MEP Alexandr Vondra, a former Czech defense minister, contrasted the commandment not to kill with the support for the war effort expressed by senior representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church. “The deeper problem is that Christian morality is subordinated to state ideology,” he said. His criticism concerns the use of religious authority to justify state actions.

Sergei Chapnin, author of the report Faith under Pressure, developed the same contradiction through the meaning of martyrdom. In his interpretation, a martyr accepts death rather than killing, whereas the religious justification for the war attributed to Patriarch Kirill reverses this relationship. His argument concerned the transformation of religious sacrifice into a legitimation of violence. The two interventions thus linked the dispute over values to support for the war, beyond messages intended for Western audiences.

Influence through intermediaries is already targeted by European measures. On 15 December 2025, the Council of the EU sanctioned 12 individuals and two entities for Russian hybrid activities, including information manipulation and cyberattacks. Among the entities was the International Russophile Movement, which the Council accused of amplifying destabilizing messages worldwide on behalf of the Russian government. The adopted measures provide for the freezing of assets and a prohibition on making funds available to those targeted. The decision offers an example of a response to influence networks; it does not, in itself, establish the validity of all the claims made at the conference.

The response proposed by Szatkowski was for democracies to expose the objectives and consequences of Russia’s actions and defend the meaning of the values it is attempting to appropriate. Maciej Materka, former head of Polish military counterintelligence, nevertheless highlighted the difficulty of combating hostile messages in open societies that protect freedom of expression. The discussion thus formulated a political appeal and a security problem; the conference organized by ECR does not represent a position adopted by the European Parliament.

https://2eu.brussels/ro/news/ecr-rusia-invoca-valorile-traditionale-pentru-a-dezbina-democratiile-si-a-justifica-razboiul