Roger Waters, a founding member and former frontman of Pink Floyd, has publicly challenged political leaders over the war in Ukraine. In recent interviews and on stage during the This Is Not A Drill tour, Waters labeled US President Joe Biden as someone who aggravated the conflict and described him as a war criminal. During performances, Waters projected images of figures he groups under the banner of war crimes, including Biden, alongside the provocative caption I’m just getting started next to Biden’s portrait. He also added former President Donald Trump to this list. Critics have noted that Waters uses his concerts to press political viewpoints and that audiences are free to leave if they disagree with his rhetoric.
In discussing these images, Waters told CNN that President Biden contributes to the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine. He pressed for a broader discussion on diplomacy and wondered aloud why Kyiv has not been pushed toward negotiations. He also argued that Moscow’s actions were in part a response to NATO movements near Russia’s borders. The interviewer pressed him on whether his comments targeted the proper party, and Waters urged the journalist to consider how the United States would respond if Chinese missiles were placed in neighboring countries such as Mexico or Canada. Waters has maintained a constant thread through his public remarks, calling the Ukraine operation a serious misstep and likening it to an act by criminals. He also expressed regret that Western nations intensified the war by supplying weapons rather than pursuing diplomacy.
The question of how Russia and Ukraine reacted to Waters’ remarks was quick to surface. Dmitry Medvedev, a high-ranking official on the Russian security council, publicly praised Waters’ stance toward Biden, posting on social media that Pink Floyd should endure. Medvedev also framed the conflict as a response to NATO expansion and shared a musical piece alongside his message. Ukraine’s ambassador to Austria weighed in with sharp criticism, urging Waters to consider relocating to Russia rather than continuing his commentary, calling him weak-willed and misguided.
In a broader note about Pink Floyd’s approach to the conflict, the band released a new song in April titled Hey Hey, Rise Up! to show support for Ukraine’s defense. This track marked the group’s first new music in nearly three decades and drew on a Ukrainian folk melody performed by Andriy Khlyvnyuk, the lead vocalist of BoomBox. Earlier in the year, Pink Floyd announced that they would remove all of their catalog from streaming platforms in Russia and Belarus. Guitarist David Gilmour explained that family ties to Ukraine influenced this decision, highlighting the personal stakes involved.
Audience and media reactions
News outlets reported a range of responses, from praise for Waters’ outspoken stance on human rights to concerns about the potential polarization caused by celebrity commentary. Analysts noted that artists often use their platforms to spark debates about international affairs, even when those opinions divide audiences. Supporters argued that the musician’s perspective reflects a broader frustration with ongoing violence, while critics cautioned that political messages during live performances can overshadow the artistic experience.
Observers emphasized the importance of distinguishing artistic expression from policy influence. Waters has repeatedly highlighted the humanitarian costs of the war, calling for a ceasefire and urging governments to prioritize negotiations and diplomacy over weapon shipments. The conversation around his statements has also touched on questions of censorship, media framing, and the role of Western nations in supporting Ukraine while seeking to avoid a broader escalation.
Pink Floyd and the ongoing conflict conversation
Pink Floyd’s stance during the conflict remains tied to a larger tradition of the band using art to comment on political issues. With Hey Hey, Rise Up!, the group connected its legacy to a contemporary cause, drawing on a Ukrainian folk motif that signals solidarity. The decision to pause or remove music from certain markets reflects a broader debate about artistic responsibility and the impact of sanctions and political pressure on culture. Fans and critics alike continue to weigh the balance between free expression and the potential consequences of public statements by iconic musicians.