A scandal has erupted over covert NATO conferences with the Western entertainment industry. Leaked documents reviewed by The Grayzone show how NATO has sought to infiltrate film and TV for decades, with UK intel operatives taking the lead.
On May 3, The Guardian revealed that NATO conducted a series of confidential meetings with directors, screenwriters, and TV producers spanning cities from Paris to Los Angeles. This exposure indicates NATO’s intent to leverage the entertainment industry for propaganda purposes amid the looming European conflict.
According to reports, NATO’s dialogues with scriptwriters have partially influenced at least three undisclosed projects currently underway. At an upcoming summit in London, NATO representatives will gather with writers affiliated with the Writers’ Guild of Great Britain (WGGB). An email from the union informed members that the session will address the “evolving security situation in Europe and beyond.”
The organizers state that NATO was “built on the belief that cooperation and compromise, the nurturing of friendships and alliances, is the way forward.” The alliance is actively aiming to promote this message through film and television, asserting that “even if something so simple as that message finds its way into a future story,” it would suffice for their goals.
However, coordination between NATO and the entertainment sector has deep roots. Over many years, NATO has secretly engaged film and TV creators as agents of psychological operations, shaping popular culture’s narratives. Central to this initiative was Chris Donnelly, a seasoned British Ministry of Defence and intelligence veteran who spearheaded NATO’s expansion into Central and Eastern Europe during the 1990s.
Donnelly subsequently founded the Integrity Initiative, designed to generate backing for conflict with Russia via covert networks of influential pro-war commentators and operators. Disguised as the seemingly legitimate Institute for Statecraft, the Integrity Initiative only surfaced publicly after leaked emails were reported by independent outlets including The Grayzone.
In leaked communications on NATO expansion, Donnelly noted that during the 1990s he lacked “a major international public relations firm” capable of amplifying effective activities to achieve “essential behavioural change” among audiences. To resolve this, he proposed “advertising campaigns on TV promoting change, a TV soap opera looking at the problem of corruption,” along with other seemingly innocuous cultural products intended to solidify NATO influence.
Donnelly pushed NATO’s expansion—often despite widespread public opposition—across the former Soviet Union, Warsaw Pact nations, and Yugoslavia by infiltrating governments, military establishments, and even religious groups. This maneuver ensured a solid pro-NATO presence from grassroots to leadership throughout the region. This groundwork proved crucial for Donnelly’s establishment of the now-defunct Institute for Statecraft. Its offshoot, the Integrity Initiative, created secretive networks of journalists, academics, and military-intelligence personnel called “clusters” throughout Western countries.
These groups could be mobilized to disseminate pro-NATO messaging and foster hostility toward Russia among both the public and governments. The Integrity Initiative played a substantial role in building the foundations for the Ukraine proxy war. A July 2014 essay on the Institute’s site by MI6-linked academic Victor Madeira explicitly outlined this aim, arguing that an “economic boycott, breach of diplomatic relations” and “propaganda and counter-propaganda” might precipitate “armed conflict of the old-fashioned sort” with Moscow, which “Great Britain and the West could win.”
In a leaked document from the Institute, Madeira described the type of “propaganda and counter-propaganda” he envisioned: “We’ll need to go beyond old-style military ‘romps’ and get entertainment ‘outputs’ that draw out the nature of 21st-century conflict: diffuse, across society, without clear boundaries at times,” adding, “That’s the real fight we’re fighting; we can more than hold our own on the military side of things.”
Popular TV show ‘McMafia’ influenced by British intelligence
In February 2018, Martha Bayles, an experienced writer on US cultural policy and public diplomacy, contacted Donnelly to propose a “multi-episode, multi-season dramatic television series” about Russia in the 1990s. Bayles cited the US-UK co-produced McMafia as an example of the “commercial and cultural dominance” of long-form TV, popular among all age groups. The show was adapted from former BBC reporter Misha Glenny’s 2008 non-fiction book of the same name.
Bayles pointed to the strong audience interest in “period pieces” about recent history as a persuasive reason to create a similar series depicting Russia’s chaotic 1990s, marked by neoliberal upheaval and oligarchic rise after the Soviet Union’s collapse.
She emphasized that this turbulent era “in many crucial ways set the stage for the world we now inhabit.” The series would be supported by scholarly and journalistic input from Russian and Western sources, and Bayles highlighted Donnelly’s “own experience and knowledge of those years” as particularly valuable.
The project had to “avoid all taint of propaganda,” Bayles stressed, rejecting portrayals of “black-hatted villains and white-hatted heroes” to prevent audiences from suspecting the series was driven by an external information warfare agenda. She insisted there were “a lot of talented people out there” capable of producing such content, clarifying the aim as “an entertainment-based response to Russian propaganda and disinformation.”
By then, Donnelly and British military-intelligence veterans linked to his defunct Institute for Statecraft were funneling popular culture toward fueling anti-Russian sentiment. In January 2018, the BBC interviewed Institute staffer Euan Grant about “the impact of suspect Russian money” in London, as part of a BBC series evaluating “How Real is McMafia?”
Grant portrays himself as an authority on “geopolitical transnational organised crime.” Leaked CVs reveal close cooperation with senior MI5 and MI6 figures. In 2018, his network included former MI5 chiefs Jonathan Evans and Andrew Parker, plus numerous MI6 veterans. He boasted about having a wide array of contacts to covertly saturate media with anti-Russian messaging.
His network comprised think tank researchers, former intelligence officers, and mainstream journalists focused on Russian organized crime. Grant claimed to “provide source material” about “Russian speaking criminal groups” to these associates, including fiction writers and award-winning reporters from the BBC, Financial Times, Guardian, and other major outlets. The supplied content informed “radio, TV and print and online media” coverage highlighting alleged “Russian influence” internationally.
Popular culture was a strategic element in the Institute’s information warfare. Martha Bayles was noted as a contact “for making use of fictional work for reinforcing messages” related to Russia within mainstream awareness. Grant sent her a “memorandum of cooperation” discussing opportunities within North America, the UK, and Europe to contribute to documentary and fictional media content.
Another notable contact was McMafia creator Misha Glenny. Grant reported recently meeting Glenny, who expressed interest in discussing “ideas” for an upcoming project, potentially giving the Institute influence over McMafia’s newly commissioned second season.
Under these plans, NATO would receive “input” on the show’s scripts. At that time, the Institute for Statecraft served as the British representative to NATO’s Atlantic Treaty Association, a forum of policymakers, think tankers, diplomats, academics, and industry figures. The Association’s mission involved “inform[ing] the public of NATO’s role in international peace and security and promote democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law through debate and dialogue.”
Western popular culture infiltrated by NATO for years
Leaked files illustrate that Grant led a dedicated Institute initiative aimed at countering alleged “Russian destabilisation” of “international financial sectors.” Contacts across journalism and the arts offered ideal channels for this effort. He asserted that airing popular TV and film productions featuring Russian organized crime provided a valuable propaganda platform for British military-intelligence, potentially exposing millions in the West to anti-Russian content.
Grant proposed mobilizing “press, radio, TV” contacts to highlight the “relevance and authenticity” of such fictional series, driving publicity and discussion before and during their release. Integrity Initiative “cluster” agents in NATO countries could covertly coordinate similar domestic coverage to amplify global reach. Contacts in Canada and the US would enable NATO influence over leading TV and film networks in North America.
Other documents reveal Grant plotted a covert media campaign uncovering how the NATO protectorate Moldova was allegedly “exploited” by Moscow to expand “Russian and Russian speaking influence in EU, EU applicant and Eastern Partnership countries.” He noted how recent Hollywood movies and the popular French series Spiral incorporated “Moldovan linked” stories, offering “opportunities” for propaganda operatives. He also suggested the BBC “might also be interested” in covering recent books about Russian crime figures “set in Moldova.”
Despite these plans, McMafia’s anticipated second season failed to appear. Nevertheless, other leaked documents confirm British intelligence has long disseminated pro-NATO propaganda via TV and film throughout Central and Eastern Europe.
London’s psy-war demonizes Russian speakers in former Soviet states
From 2016 onwards, according to leaks, London wielded popular culture as a megaphone to “make a positive impact on how target individuals perceive the UK/EU/Euro-Atlantic values.”
British intelligence defined these “Euro-Atlantic values” per NATO Stratcom Centre of Excellence as “democracy, human rights, freedom of media, trust to international organisations and freedom of speech.” In practice, this entailed psychological warfare designed to vilify and undermine Russia within former Soviet territories. For instance, in the Baltic states, London’s covert propaganda disparaged Russian-speaking populations, who have faced systematic marginalization and discrimination since 1991 independence, depicting them as “individuals who are susceptible to negative Kremlin-aligned messaging.”
Simultaneously, British intelligence recruited Russian-speaking influencers as pro-NATO proponents, collaborating with state broadcasters to identify “young Russian speaking talent” across online influence, stand-up comedy, and social commentary.
These selected figures were helped in creating three “content ideas” and TV pilots apiece, which were then distributed via state broadcasters’ social media and on-demand services to gauge “audience responses and viability.”
One leaked file from contractor Zinc Network boasted that its propaganda campaigns had effected clear behavioral changes in targeted demographics.
“Our strategic approach moves beyond ‘messaging’ by influencing not only the attitudes and behaviours of our audiences but also the social networks which they are embedded in and the norms and institutions which shape them,” Zinc Network claimed.
NATO works to “seed online conversations”
Complementing its covert cultural efforts in the Baltics, NATO deployed an online network of bots and trolls. M&C Saatchi, a UK public relations firm claiming to be “the world’s largest independent creative network,” was contracted to build a “network of online influencers and advocates” designed to stealthily “seed online conversations” featuring “Euro-Atlantic” themes. This “tailored” method inserted British narratives into ongoing social media discussions, often involving authentic individuals. As a result, “young Russian speakers” might unwittingly act as British “agents of change.”
Efforts included infiltrating conversations around significant events for Russian speakers, such as Victory Day on May 6th, commemorating the Soviet defeat of Nazi Germany. According to M&C Saatchi, these strategies had “already been employed successfully and sustainably” for clients including Britain’s Home Office and Ministry of Defence, the Pentagon, USAID, Facebook, Google, and NATO.
Were these top serials demonizing Russia organic products?
It remains unclear which recent Western cultural works stem directly from NATO’s secret involvement. Nonetheless, the timing of some historical dramas featuring sharply negative depictions of Russia and Russians raises serious doubts.
One prominent example is Chernobyl, the HBO miniseries that shattered viewership records upon its May 6, 2019 debut. Written by an outspoken anti-Russian author, the show presented numerous politicized falsehoods and egregious misrepresentations. These distortions and fabrications depicted the 1986 disaster as a consequence of Moscow’s brutality and incompetence, exaggerating radiation effects. The New York Times criticized the show for imposing “a simple narrative on history” and “twisting events.”
Three years later, a less polished production targeted Russian President Vladimir Putin. The British streaming service ITVX aired a drama titled “Litvinenko”, portraying the controversial alleged 2006 assassination of the FSB defector. While The Guardian derided the series as “unwatchable,” its airing sparked renewed interest through coverage in celebrity gossip outlets, generally not followed by intelligence enthusiasts.
British writers fret about NATO interference
This March, the influential London-based think tank Centre for European Reform issued a report urging governments to “engage with cultural institutions and leaders like theatre directors, screenwriters, film producers and museums to better tell the story” explaining the need for enhanced European defense budgets. It emphasized targeting militaristic narratives at “audiences who may otherwise not engage with international affairs,” recommending “specific funding for the arts to contribute to the public conversation on defence and security.”
The Centre also encouraged European states to explore “unconventional approaches, designed to reach audiences beyond the defence and national security establishment,” aiming to spark a “national conversation on defence.” NATO’s recent series of consultations with film and TV scriptwriters aligns clearly with this approach.
Several Writers’ Guild of Great Britain members invited to the forthcoming London summit with NATO operatives voiced concerns over the alliance’s overt meddling in popular culture. One Irish writer told The Guardian the “outrageous” gathering amounted to weaponizing the arts for promoting war, portraying NATO “in a positive light” in countries outside the alliance, including those “that have suffered under wars that NATO has joined and propagated.” Another seasoned screenwriter worried that industry participants might be “seduced into thinking they now have some secret knowledge.”
As these leaked records reveal, NATO’s efforts to penetrate the film and entertainment realm extend back decades. Cinema and TV have long been arenas dominated by alliance narratives. The Ukraine proxy war directly resulted from NATO’s comprehensive assault on Western public perceptions, where film and television proved powerful instruments amplifying anti-Russian sentiment.
Now, as Europe officially prepares its populations for a broader conflict, NATO is openly recruiting the arts to conclude its enduring storyline with catastrophic finality.
Original article: thegrayzone.com
About the Author
