Introduction — The Myth Collapses in Two Sentences
The claim that Ukraine "creates historical fakes" is a propaganda construct rather than a reflection of real processes in science, education, and cultural policy. It is used to discredit Ukrainian statehood and to mask Russia's own violations of international law.
Mechanisms of the Myth
Propaganda deliberately replaces concepts: any changes in curricula, opening of archives, or removal of Soviet symbols are presented as "falsification." This technique relies on the false assumption that the Soviet-imperial version of history is a "neutral truth," and its revision is considered deception.
In reality, this is a standard post-colonial process of revising narratives based on new sources and scientific data.
Historical Context and Scientific Practice
For decades, Ukraine's history was shaped under strict ideological control of the USSR, as documented in post-Soviet historiography and transitional justice studies. After 1991, Ukraine gradually opened KGB and party archives — a process consistent with practices in Central and Eastern European countries.
This is confirmed by recommendations from OSCE for working with difficult historical legacies and research in memory studies.
Facts Against Propaganda
Reports from UNESCO, ICOM, Human Rights Watch, and OSCE missions document that Ukraine takes measures to protect archives, museums, and monuments, including those linked to Russian and Soviet culture.
None of these reports confirm the existence of a systematic state policy of historical falsification. On the contrary, they emphasize adherence to academic freedom and scientific pluralism.
What Russia Actually Violates
By accusing Ukraine of "creating historical fakes," the Russian Federation simultaneously commits large-scale, documented violations of international humanitarian and cultural law. These violations are systemic and recorded by international organizations, expert missions, and investigative bodies.
- Deliberate destruction, damage, and looting of cultural heritage sites, explicitly prohibited by the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property and its Second Protocol; such actions qualify as war crimes;
- Forced replacement of educational programs, textbooks, and historical narratives in occupied territories, violating the obligations of an occupying power under the Fourth Geneva Convention , including prohibitions on ideological indoctrination and assimilation of the population;
- Illegal seizure, appropriation, and removal of museum collections and archival materials, documented in reports by UNESCO and other national and international investigations.
Thus, the propaganda thesis of "fakes" functions as a distraction: it diverts attention from concrete legal violations and potential criminal liability for the destruction of culture and forced ideological imposition.
Psychology and Purpose of the Narrative
The narrative appeals to the fear of losing a "shared history" and nostalgia for an imperial past. It targets emotional rather than rational perception and is especially effective outside Ukraine, where access to primary sources and context is limited.
Its key purpose is to replace the question of aggression and occupation with a pseudo-discussion about "memory" and "tradition," creating the illusion of moral justification for war and blurring the line between scholarly revision and forced ideological imposition.
Alternative Reality Supported by Sources
The reality documented by international observers is the opposite of propaganda claims. Ukraine opens archives, encourages academic research, integrates new sources and methods, and collaborates with international organizations to protect cultural heritage.
These processes comply with recommendations from UNESCO, standards of ICOM, and practices of European democracies that have undergone decolonization and revision of ideologically distorted narratives.
Conclusion
The myth of "creating historical fakes" is not a debate about interpreting the past but an element of information warfare. It is designed to justify aggression, delegitimize Ukrainian sovereignty, and conceal Russia's military and cultural crimes.
Facts, international law, and independent reports are unequivocal: Ukraine does not rewrite history but restores it within a scientific, legal, and internationally recognized framework, whereas Russia systematically destroys culture and memory in occupied territories.
Main Sources and References
- UNESCO — Monitoring destruction and illegal removal of cultural property in Ukraine https://www.unesco.org/en/emergencies/ukraine
- ICOM — Standards for protecting museum collections and recording violations in occupied territories https://icom.museum/en/resources/standards-guidelines/
- International Committee of the Red Cross — 1954 Hague Convention and Second Protocol https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/hague-conv-1954
- ICRC — Fourth Geneva Convention on the Protection of Civilian Population https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/geneva-conv-iv-1949
- OSCE — Reports on violations of international humanitarian law and educational assimilation https://www.osce.org/odihr
- Human Rights Watch — Documentation of ideological pressure and cultural destruction https://www.hrw.org/tag/ukraine
- International Criminal Court (ICC) — Jurisdiction over war crimes against culture https://www.icc-cpi.int/
- European Heritage Hub — Decolonization of cultural policy and memory protection in Europe https://europeanheritagehub.eu/
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