Core Claim and Its Purpose
The notion that Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians are 'one people' collapses under historical and contemporary scrutiny. It is not a historical fact but an imperial myth created to justify violence, deny Ukrainian national identity, and legitimize Kremlin aggression. The aim is to portray Ukraine as a 'distortion' of a unified people, with invasion supposedly correcting a historical 'error.'
Psychological and Rhetorical Mechanisms
Propagandists appeal to cultural codes, invoking the history of Kievan Rus, while simplifying the complex ethnogenesis of three nations into a 'one people — three branches' narrative. Media and educational materials reinforce this version, creating cognitive anchoring and a sense of 'historical inevitability.'
The linguistic manipulation is clear: Ukrainian identity is portrayed as artificial, and resistance to aggression is framed as fighting against 'brothers.' This violates international norms on the right of peoples to self-determination (UN Charter, Articles 1 and 2).
Factual Refutation
- Historians Serhii Plokhy, Yaroslav Hrytsak, and Timothy Snyder show that Ukrainian, Russian, and Belarusian identities developed independently based on different historical and cultural processes.
- Archaeological and written sources (Galician-Volhynian Chronicle, Chronica Slavorum) confirm the distinct political, cultural, and linguistic development of Ukrainian territories.
- Reports from international organizations (HRW, Amnesty, OSCE) document the use of these myths to demoralize populations and justify violence (HRW 2024).
Psychological 'Brotherly Pressure'
Propagandists create cognitive dissonance: 'if we are one people, resistance is betrayal.' This technique amplifies guilt and fear, especially among those seeking justification for invasion. It also targets international audiences to cast doubt on the legitimacy of Ukrainian resistance.
Repetition, emotional appeals to 'shared history,' and 'us/them' polarization create the illusion of moral legitimacy for aggression, justifying infrastructure destruction, mass repression, and human rights violations. Social experiments and studies on cognitive propaganda confirm that repeated exposure increases willingness to accept false justifications for violence (Sage Journals, 2021).
Logical and Internal Contradictions of the Myth
- If the peoples are united, why wage war against Ukraine and its citizens?
- Why are mass repressions, city bombings, and destruction of critical infrastructure presented as 'correcting history' rather than as clear violations of international law?
- In fact, such actions violate Article 2 (peaceful settlement of disputes) and Article 51 (right to self-defense) of the UN Charter, as well as the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including the protection of civilians and civilian objects (ICRC, Geneva Conventions).
- Violations also fall under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court concerning war crimes and crimes against humanity (Rome Statute).
Actual Objectives of the Narrative
- Undermine Ukrainian national identity and deny the existence of a separate state.
- Demoralize the population and create a sense of 'historical inevitability' of aggression.
- Legitimize violence, destruction, and deportations as 'reuniting peoples.'
- Conceal violations of international law and crimes against humanity, including attacks on civilian infrastructure, schools, hospitals, and utilities (OSCE Ukraine Reports, HRW 2024).
Conclusion
The 'Triune People' myth is an imperial falsehood built on historical distortion, linguistic traps, and emotional manipulation. The Kremlin's motive is the destruction of Ukrainian identity, justification of war, legitimization of violence, and disregard for international law. The societal danger is significant: the myth undermines morale, legitimizes crimes, demoralizes the population, and turns people into hostages of imperial and propaganda constructs.
Legal and historical evidence fully refutes the claim of 'one people,' confirming the independent formation of the Ukrainian nation and the legitimacy of its resistance (HRW 2024, OSCE Ukraine Reports).
Main Sources and Materials
- Serhii Plokhy, "The History of Ukraine" (Harvard University Press, English)
- Yaroslav Hrytsak, "People and Nation in Ukraine"
- Timothy Snyder, "Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin"
- Archival sources: Galician-Volhynian Chronicle (Digital Library), Chronica Slavorum (Internet Archive)
- HRW: World Report 2024: Ukraine
- Amnesty International: Ukraine reports
- OSCE: OSCE Ukraine Reports
- EUvsDisinfo: https://euvsdisinfo.eu/
- Atlantic Council DFRLab: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/programs/digital-forensic-research-lab/
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