The Myth and Its Political Function
The narrative that Russia represents a 'special civilization' while Ukraine is an 'artificial project' created by external forces is not a historical conclusion but an ideological construct. Its purpose is to deprive Ukraine of agency and portray its statehood as incidental and therefore contestable.
This myth is systematically used to justify war, annexation, and denial of the Ukrainian people's right to self-determination. In the logic of propaganda, if Ukraine is 'artificial,' its borders, sovereignty, and international guarantees supposedly do not matter.
Historical Reality: What the Sources Say
Historical scholarship does not support the claim of Ukraine's 'artificiality.' The name "Україна" is recorded in the Hypatian Codex in 1187 as a designation of a specific territory and community, long before the rise of the Moscow principality. It referred not to a 'borderland of Moscow'—which did not exist as a political center at the time—but to a region with its own elite, laws, and traditions.
Kievan Rus', as a political and cultural entity, developed primarily on the territory of modern Ukraine. After the Mongol invasion, its lands evolved in various state contexts: the Kingdom of Galicia–Volhynia, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. These processes ensured institutional and legal continuity distinct from the trajectory of the Moscow principality, which emerged in the 13th–14th centuries within a different political and cultural environment.
Modern academic summaries (Britannica, Cambridge History of Ukraine) emphasize that the Muscovite state is not a direct continuation of Kievan Rus' but represents one of the East Slavic trajectories that emerged later and developed autonomously.
Why the "Civilizational" Argument Fails
The concept of a 'unique civilization' has no legal content. International law does not recognize civilizational exceptionalism as a basis for control over territories or peoples. Attempting to present Russia as a 'distinct civilization' serves solely an ideological purpose — to place it outside common legal norms and accountability.
European history knows many states with unique cultural traditions, yet none are granted the right to redraw neighbors' borders on that basis. Civilizational rhetoric is political myth-making, not a valid argument.
Legal Reality and Violations of International Law
From the perspective of international law, Ukraine has been a fully recognized sovereign state since 1991. This status is confirmed by:
- recognition by all UN members;
- Ukraine's membership in the UN and other international organizations;
- bilateral treaties, including Russia's recognition of its borders.
Attempts to deny Ukrainian statehood conceal real violations:
- Article 2(4) of the UN Charter — prohibition of threats and use of force;
- Principle of territorial integrity — affirmed by the International Court of Justice;
- Principle of non-intervention in internal affairs;
- Erga omnes obligations — prohibiting annexation of territory by force.
Historical or 'civilizational' arguments carry no legal weight and cannot justify aggression.
What This Myth Conceals
By denying Ukrainian history and statehood, propaganda seeks to obscure a simple fact: the war is not waged for 'historical justice' but in direct violation of international law. The myth of an 'artificial Ukraine' replaces questions of responsibility with questions of identity, shifting focus from legal consequences to pseudo-historical debates.
Thus, the narrative serves a protective function — it does not explain reality but masks the illegality of actions.
Conclusion
Ukraine is not an 'artificial project,' and Russia holds no special civilizational mandate. Historical sources confirm the long and autonomous development of Ukrainian lands, and international law unequivocally recognizes Ukraine's sovereignty.
The myth of 'civilizational exceptionalism' is a deliberate tool to justify aggression and deny accountability. Its debunking is a matter of facts, law, and protection of the international order.
Main Sources and Materials
- Encyclopædia Britannica — History of Ukraine (historical overview of the territory and state)
- Encyclopædia Britannica — Kievan Rus (formation of Kievan Rus as an early East Slavic state)
- Wikipedia: History of Ukraine — documenting the name 'Україна' from the 12th century and stages of statehood
- Wikipedia: Ukraine and the UN — Ukraine as a UN founding member (1945) and later recognized as an independent state (1991)
- UN Charter — establishes sovereignty and territorial integrity principles; violations constitute aggression against Ukraine
- International Court of Justice — Case on the territorial integrity of Ukraine (official proceedings regarding territorial violations)
- OSCE Documents — Security and Territorial Integrity of States (international obligations affirming border inviolability)
- UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/68/262 — confirming non-recognition of Crimea's annexation and support for Ukraine's sovereignty
- Cambridge History of Ukraine — academic study of historical development of Ukrainian lands
- S. Plokhy, The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine — scholarly and popular account of Ukrainian history and statehood
- Y. Hrytsak, History of Ukraine: A Modern Interpretation — analysis of Ukrainian identity formation and political institutions
- Wikipedia: Autonomous Republic of Crimea — historical status of the region as part of Ukraine before annexation
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