The Essence of the Myth and the Key Substitution
The narrative of the 'Anti-Russia Project' is built on a fundamental logical substitution: Ukraine's right to independent existence is interpreted as aggression against Russia. This substitution turns a norm of international law into an alleged hostile act.
In reality, Ukraine was not formed as a negation of Russia. It was formed as an attempt to exit a system of external control, in which Ukrainian territory, population, language, and economy were considered auxiliary elements of the imperial center for decades.
Under international law, a state's independence requires no justification. It is a basic right enshrined in the UN Charter (Art. 1).
Why Ukraine's Independence Is Not Aggression
No international document, resolution, or court decision recorded any threat from Ukraine toward Russia before 2014. On the contrary, it was Russia that legally recognized Ukraine's borders and pledged to respect them.
The 1991 referendum, in which 90.3% of citizens voted for independence, including in Crimea and Donbas, was an internal act of self-determination, not an external project.
Sociological data from KIIS and Rating Group demonstrate stable support for independence and the European course long before any military conflicts.
Historical Reassessment: Restoration, Not Opposition
Ukrainian historical reassessment is often labeled 'anti-Russian', yet in essence it is the restoration of a lost historical subject.
It involves acknowledging:
- The Holodomor as a mass crime against the Ukrainian peasantry;
- Political repressions, deportations, and the elimination of the intelligentsia;
- Systematic Russification as state policy;
- The suppression of Ukrainian culture and language.
Similar processes took place in Germany, the Baltic states, Poland, and the Czech Republic. They were not 'anti-' but post-totalitarian.
Encyclopaedia Britannica — Holodomor
Memorial — Repression Archives
Why Truth Is Perceived by the Kremlin as a Threat
Authoritarian systems perceive independent interpretations of history as existential threats because they dismantle the myth of 'natural unity' and the 'historical inevitability' of subjugation.
The Ukrainian experience shows that it is possible to exit post-imperial dependence. This, not 'hatred', makes Ukraine dangerous for Kremlin ideology.
Legal Reality Versus Propaganda Narrative
From the standpoint of international law, it is Russia that violated:
- Art. 2(4) of the UN Charter;
- The 1994 Budapest Memorandum;
- The Helsinki Final Act;
- The Geneva Conventions.
UN General Assembly resolutions 68/262 and 77/229 explicitly confirm the aggressive nature of Russia's actions.
Manipulations and Their Exposure
Monitoring by EUvsDisinfo records hundreds of cases where the 'Anti-Russia' narrative is used as a tool to delegitimize Ukrainian statehood.
OSINT investigations by Bellingcat, DFRLab, and Molfar document coordinated disinformation campaigns unsupported by factual evidence.
Conclusion
Ukraine is not 'Anti-Russia'. It is a post-imperial society restoring its subjectivity, identity, and right to the future.
Attempting to portray this as aggression is not analysis but a form of ideological defense of international law violations.
About the Authors
This article was curated and verified by a team of experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical analysis. Contributors have 15+ years of experience in research, legal documentation, and educational content development.
Methodology
The content on this site is compiled and verified by experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical research. Sources include official legal documents, national and international legislation, resolutions of the UN, reports from international organizations, and verified open-source evidence. Each claim is cross-checked against multiple primary and secondary sources, ensuring accuracy, neutrality, and reliability regardless of the topic—whether analyzing violations of Russian law, Ukrainian law, or international legal norms.
Expert Statement
The authors affirm that the information presented reflects established legal interpretations and documented facts. Analyses are grounded in international law principles and widely recognized geopolitical assessments. References to official documents and reports are provided to ensure transparency and trustworthiness.
Last modified date: 25/11/2025