News from Ukraine is focused on its startling presidential election, in which the leading candidate is a comedian whose political role before now has been to play a fictional president in a TV series. Less visible alongside that drama is the country’s process of consolidating the new independence of its Orthodox church after centuries of control by Moscow. Ukraine’s religious independence from Russia is a high-stakes step, one that the Russian government actively opposes, toward a fully independent Ukraine following 300-plus years of Russian domination. In the struggle over control of the church, news accounts and a new U.N. Human Rights Report suggests that Ukraine is mainly—but perhaps not perfectly—preventing acts of intimidation that could increase the risk of violence.

Orthodox worshippers during a midnight Easter ceremony outside the St. Nicholas Cathedral in Donetsk, Ukraine, April 20, 2014. (Mauricio Lima/The New York Times)
Orthodox worshippers during a midnight Easter ceremony outside the St. Nicholas Cathedral in Donetsk, Ukraine, April 20, 2014. (Mauricio Lima/The New York Times)

Ukrainians and their government must prevent physical confrontations between the newly independent church and the long-dominant rival faction beholden to Russia. “The Ukrainian government and the newly created Orthodox Church of Ukraine should work assiduously to prevent any violence, including by their supporters,” USIP Executive Vice President Bill Taylor and Research Coordinator Leslie Minney wrote recently in the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs. “While the independence of Ukraine’s church from Moscow is fraught with political implications for both Ukraine and Russia, the new church can reduce the risks of violence only by keeping itself visibly independent of the Ukrainian government and politics.”

Taylor, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, and Minney stressed that Ukraine’s formal church independence, granted in January by the Orthodoxy’s preeminent prelate, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, is “no ordinary foreign policy defeat” for Russian President Vladimir Putin. “For Putin, Ukrainian religious independence undercuts the domestic political narrative with which he justifies his rule, and it weakens the Russian Orthodox Church—Russia’s most venerable institution and one of Putin’s most potent political allies.”

Bartholomew’s declaration that Ukraine’s church is now independent of Moscow has opened “a new competition, likely to last years, for the loyalty of Ukraine’s 18,000 parishes,” two-thirds of which have been under Russian authority, Taylor and Minney wrote. So far, Ukrainian news reports say, some 300 of the Moscow-aligned parishes have switched their allegiance to the independent Ukrainian church. This month, the latest U.N. Human Rights Report on Ukraine says U.N. monitors have investigated accounts saying that “in a few cases” such transfers had not been voluntary, but instead prompted by authorities.

The report offered no conclusions about those cases, but expressed “concern” at “incidents that could be perceived as acts of intimidation against members of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate,” the faction of the church loyal to Russia’s church. The United Nations report, like an account last month by Amnesty International, underscores that Ukraine’s most severe human rights violations, including those against religious freedom, continue to occur in the Russian-occupied Crimean Peninsula.

Ukraine’s news headlines, and its long struggles to consolidate democracy and stem corruption, will this year be dominated by elections. President Petro Poroshenko, who is running for re-election, has made himself a key public sponsor of the church independence movement. This also can pose risks. “As Ukraine’s new church is built, both it and the government must visibly demonstrate the separation of church and state required by Ukraine’s constitution,” Taylor and Minney wrote. “Any appearance of a Russian-style conflation of the two will make the new church an easier target for Moscow’s political attacks.”

Related Publications

Ukraine’s New U.S. Lifeline: Why It’s Vital and What’s Next

Ukraine’s New U.S. Lifeline: Why It’s Vital and What’s Next

Thursday, April 25, 2024

This week’s U.S. approval of nearly $61 billion in funds for Ukraine’s defense is a lifeline in the Ukrainians’ struggle against Russia’s unprovoked invasion and the assault on peace and rule of law in Europe and beyond. Ukrainian troops have been rationing ammunition, their lack of defensive missiles has exposed Ukrainian cities to Russian aerial attacks — and many military analysts predicted a probable collapse on part of Ukraine’s eastern defensive lines. While this U.S. action boosts Ukrainians’ capacities and morale, ending this war will need further funds, forces and security measures for those fighting and suffering for their survival — and for the redemption of international peace through rule of law.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

Asfandyar Mir on Why ISIS-K Attacked Moscow

Asfandyar Mir on Why ISIS-K Attacked Moscow

Monday, April 1, 2024

ISIS-K’s recent attack on the Russian capital was, in part, intended to assert the organization’s growing capacity to inflict terror beyond its home base of Afghanistan. “By reaching Moscow, ISIS-K is trying to signal it has the geographic reach to hit anywhere in the world,” says USIP’s Asfandyar Mir.

Type: Podcast

Moscow Concert Hall Attack Will Have Far-Reaching Impact

Moscow Concert Hall Attack Will Have Far-Reaching Impact

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

On Friday, terrorists attacked the Crocus City Hall outside Moscow leaving 140 people dead and 80 others critically wounded. Soon after, the Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attack. The terrorist group, which is headquartered in Iraq and Syria, has several branches, including in South and Central Asia. Press reports suggest the U.S. government believes the Afghanistan-based affiliate of the Islamic State, ISIS-Khorasan (ISIS-K), was behind the attack. The Biden administration has publicly noted that it had warned the Russian government of the terrorism threat in early March in line with the procedure of “Duty to Warn.”

Type: Question and Answer

Global Policy

Angela Stent on the Terror Attack in Moscow

Angela Stent on the Terror Attack in Moscow

Monday, March 25, 2024

While ISIS has claimed responsibility for the devastating terror attack in Moscow, Putin has baselessly tried to shift the blame to Ukraine, says USIP’s Angela Stent: “[Putin] wants to use this to increase repression at home … and also to pursue a more aggressive path in Ukraine.”

Type: Podcast

View All Publications