A response to the German Baptist journal “Die Gemeinde”
L a d u s h k i n – Astonishing about the 10 May 2026 issue of “Die Gemeinde” is the matter-of-fact manner in which it adopts a core narrative of the North Atlantic world: Russia is the aggressor, Ukraine, the victim. Good versus evil. It’s as though Ukraine’s history had only begun in 2022.
However, it was not Russia that expanded its military westwards in breach of the agreements of 1990–91. These agreements on the military neutrality of Central Europe formed the foundation upon which Russia permitted the reunification of Germany. Much later, the West balked at implementing Minsk II – see the statements from Angela Merkel. That agreement from February 2015 would most likely have averted the current war.
According to the British political scientist Richard Sakwa, all Russian leaders from Gorbachev to Putin hoped to integrate Russia into the political West. At the start of his term as president, Vladimir Putin twice requested admission into NATO as an equal partner.
In the 1990s, however, the US had decided otherwise: European security was to be achieved against Russia, not in partnership with it. Yet wise people maintain that security can only be achieved collectively; it cannot be secured unilaterally against the wishes of another party. Numerous political thinkers, from George Kennan and Henry Kissinger to Zbigniew Brzezinski, predicted both before and after 2000 that Ukraine’s admission to NATO would lead to a war with Russia. These conflicting approaches are at the heart of today’s conflict.
Great powers do not enjoy being crowded by another power – see the USA’s Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which is still in force today. What if the Warsaw Pact had marched into Mexico, reshaped the country geopolitically to suit its own interests and set up 40 bio laboratories across the land? Yes, there were 40 labs, if one is to believe Victoria Nuland and Tulsi Gabbard.
But why stop at the cause and outset of a war? Who wanted to continue this war after April 2022? It is widely known that, in early April 2022, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson visited Volodymyr Zelensky and talked him out of the Istanbul agreement. Today, Western Europe is following the motto: We will escalate and persevere - perhaps until the Democratic Party regains power in the USA? In any case, negotiations are not on the horizon. Assuredly, both sides want peace, but it is always conditional. Which set of conditions places the hurdles highest?
A clear conscience, after all, is a highly dangerous thing. It was used to justify dropping atomic bombs on Japan and inundating Vietnam with toxic chemicals.
Admittedly, Russia’s attack in February 2022 was a breach of international law. But has the US waged a single conflict since the Korean War that has complied with international law? Is it not therefore highly biased to single out this particular Russian attack? It is claimed that Russia could have halted the West’s eastward advance without war. I want to believe that too. But how? Who could enlighten me on this point? Should Russia have made greater efforts to win over hearts and minds in western Ukraine? Could it have organised a counter-Maidan? Sanctions have little effect on large states and state alliances. In the search for answers, one might start with the book “Provoked”. This effort by Scott Horton has 675 pages.
Humanitarian issues
In this war, I have unfortunately needed to learn once again that humanitarian aid is often not politically neutral. It certainly is not that in the Kiev-controlled part of Ukraine. In his article in this issue of “Die Gemeinde”, the Briton Joshua Searle asserts that humanitarian aid in Kiev’s Ukraine forms part of “the resistance arsenal” (my phrase).
Partisan humanitarian aid strikes me as akin to the glazier who smashes shop windows at night expecting that new orders will flutter into his office in the morning. One smashes things and patches them back together again. The Christian is both destroyer and saviour. This contradiction only resolves itself if aid is non-partisan in the sense of flowing to both sides.
Fearing protests from the Kiev camp, Russia’s Baptists feel compelled to keep their humanitarian aid “under a bushel”. There is no public information on this important service of charity. Franklin Graham’s organisation, “Samaritan’s Purse”, deserves recognition for attempting to aid the needy on both sides.
The “Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church” mentioned by Pastor Helge Frey in this issue has a dubious past. (It follows an Orthodox liturgy but falls under the jurisdiction of the Vatican.) Following its support for fascist, anti-Soviet forces during World War II., this church largely retreated to Canada. There, through literature, organisations and memorials, it was able to keep alive the dream of a monocultural and independent Ukraine. As early as 1 December 1989, the Vatican reinstated this church. Very soon thereafter, returnees from Canada were knocking at the door.
That same year too, there had been initial efforts to gather Ukrainian Baptist congregations into a new union independent of Moscow. A few years later, Baptists and Greek Catholics found common ground. It was probably their consistently anti-Russian stance that brought these two churches together within the realm of ideology and politics.
Russian Protestants never say it out loud; they are far too discreet and cautious for that: Here in Russia, Ukrainian Protestants are suspected of radical nationalism. Even before 2010, Ukrainian Baptists assured my wife and me that they would fight against Russia “to the very end”. That shook us to the core and left a lasting impression. Is the current Ukrainian hatred of Russia a cause or a result of the current war? I believe it is both. Of greater significance though is a statement made by the Ukrainian Pentecostal Peter Dudnik in Slavyansk on 1 April 2015: “When you see the pain people are experiencing, the identity of the guilty party is no longer that important. The only question that then matters is: How can I put an end to this suffering?”
One thinks of Eduard Grabovenko from Perm in the Urals. He is Ukrainian and the presiding bishop of the large Pentecostal “Russian Church of Christians of the Evangelical Faith”. He is suffering through the current crisis and remains silent – at least in public. That is the practice of virtually all of Russia’s remaining Protestants.
The Baptists of Russia were shocked by Yuri Sipko’s not entirely voluntary flight to Germany in September 2023. Yet publicly, they did not voice any criticism. Commenting would not have been fitting amongst the faithful. Sipko was President of the Russian Union of Baptists from 2002 to 2010; his long-standing pro-Ukrainian statements later got him into trouble. On 28 May 2026, “RIA Novosti” reported that Yuri Sipko has been added to the state list of “terrorists and extremists”. This refugee still has family members in Russia carrying out pastoral duties.
How did it come about that a global religious community such as the Baptists could confine itself to a narrow, North Atlantic narrative? This issue of “Gemeinde” also bears witness to that. That is only possible with blinders in place. In January 2026, 3.000 people from 130 countries gathered in Davos/Switzerland, for the “World Economic Forum”. Five months later, 24.500 people from 142 countries attended the “International Economic Forum” in St. Petersburg. In the same month, June 2026, a major ASEAN conference took place in Kazan. To the south, virtually all borders are open for Russians.
Klaus von Dohnanyi
In this article, I do not discuss the pros and cons of pacifism. On 9 June 2026, Klaus von Dohnanyi (a nephew of Dietrich Bonhoeffer) and retired Brigadier-General Erich Vad held an absorbing conversation with the Swiss newspaper *Weltwoche* (see YouTube). The conclusion reached by these two non-pacifists is that a militarily-ready neutrality (“wehrhafte Neutralität”) following the Swiss model would be the most effective means for securing peace in Germany and Western Europe. But is that realistic? As Konrad Adenauer supposedly said: “Better half of Germany whole than the whole of Germany half.” That stance is still in effect in the political West.
William Yoder, Ph.D.
Ladushkin, Kaliningrad region, 22 June 2026
webpage: “wyoder.de”
A journalistic release for which only the author is responsible. It is informational in character and does not express the official position of any church organisation. This release may be reprinted free-of-charge if the source is cited. Release #26-03, 1.333 words.
