The Essence of the Claim and Its Purpose
The narrative of “protecting canonical Orthodoxy” is presented by Russian propaganda as an allegedly forced response to “religious repression” in Ukraine. In reality, this claim has no independent religious content and serves a purely political and legal function: creating moral and ideological cover for armed aggression.
The use of religious rhetoric allows the Kremlin to shift the conflict from the domain of international law into the sphere of “sacred struggle,” where legal norms, state sovereignty, and the protection of civilians are declared secondary. This is a classic technique of sacralizing violence, well documented in academic research on political theology and authoritarian regimes.
Methods of Promotion and Psychological Mechanisms
The promotion of this narrative relies on a combination of fear, moral blackmail, and pseudo-canonical assertions. Terms such as “canonicity,” “true faith,” and “spiritual war” are used outside their theological context and function as tools of political mobilization.
The Russian Orthodox Church and affiliated media deliberately blur the boundary between religion and the state, fostering the perception that dissent from Russian state policy is equivalent to “betrayal of the faith.” This mechanism is examined in detail, among others, in reports by PONARS Eurasia and in studies of religion as an instrument of hybrid warfare.
Fact-Checking and Legal Analysis
The facts directly refute claims of religious persecution. According to data from the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience, more than 12,000 religious communities of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) continue to operate in the country, retaining the right to worship, property ownership, and legal registration.
Freedom of religion is enshrined in Article 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine, as well as in Ukraine’s international obligations, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 18) and the European Convention on Human Rights (Article 9).
Monitoring reports by the OSCE, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch contain no findings of systemic or institutional religious persecution in Ukraine.
At the same time, it is the Russian Federation that systematically violates:
- Article 2(4) of the UN Charter — the prohibition of the threat or use of force;
- The 1949 Geneva Conventions — protection of civilians and religious sites;
- The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court — war crimes and crimes against humanity;
- International humanitarian law — deliberate attacks on places of worship.
According to UNESCO, since 2022 hundreds of religious sites in Ukraine have been damaged or destroyed, predominantly as a result of actions by the Russian armed forces.
Examples of Media Manipulation
Russian state television and affiliated outlets systematically portray local property disputes or intra-community conflicts as “state repression.” In doing so, they ignore the key fact that decisions on changing religious jurisdiction are made by the religious communities themselves.
OSINT investigations by Bellingcat and the Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) have repeatedly documented the use of archival or irrelevant footage to construct a false narrative of “persecution.”
Logical and Psychological Traps
The core manipulation lies in a substitution of concepts: legal processes and national security measures are presented as a “war against faith.” This creates a false dilemma in which aggression is framed as a forced “defense of holy sites.”
This approach eliminates legal analysis and replaces it with moral blackmail, where any disagreement is interpreted as hostility toward religion.
Internal Contradictions
If systematic religious repression existed in Ukraine, it would inevitably be recorded by international human rights mechanisms. This has not occurred. At the same time, it is the Russian Federation that destroys churches, mosques, and synagogues in occupied territories, as documented by the United Nations and international NGOs.
Conclusion
The claim of “protecting canonical Orthodoxy” is neither a religious nor a legal argument. It is a tool for legitimizing aggression, diverting attention from war crimes, and undermining the international legal order. Its function is not the defense of faith, but the justification of violence.
Key Sources and Materials
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