War Theocracy: the instrumentalization of faith in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict

The role of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) in the contemporary scenario transcends the domain of the sacred to become one of the most sophisticated pillars of Vladimir Putin’s geopolitics. To understand the depth of this phenomenon, it is necessary to dissect the symbiosis between the Patriarchate of Moscow and the Kremlin, which has transformed faith into a tool of territorial expansion and global cultural influence.

Unlike the Catholic Church, which has a structure centralized in the Vatican, Orthodoxy is a communion of independent churches. Historically, this structure favored the concept of “symphony,” a Byzantine doctrine that preaches harmony and mutual cooperation between the State (the Emperor) and the Church (the Patriarch).

Under the leadership of Patriarch Kirill, the ROC has revived this tradition, but with a modern and authoritarian guise. The Church has ceased to be merely a spiritual guide to become the guardian of Russian national identity, providing the State with the moral legitimacy that secular nationalism alone could not sustain after the collapse of communism.

Russkiy Mir: the doctrine of the “Russian World”

The concept of Russkiy Mir (Russian world) is the intellectual basis that sustains Moscow’s expansionism. This doctrine claims that there exists a transnational Russian civilization that unites Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine (the “Holy Rus”) through a common language, a shared history and, crucially, submission to the Patriarchate of Moscow. It is the belief that Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians are, in fact, a single people.

While Russkiy Mir is a civilizational and political concept, Holy Rus is a mystical category. It refers to the period of Kievan Rus (9th to 13th centuries), when Prince Vladimir converted to Christianity in 988 AD. Patriarch Kirill often states that Ukraine, Russia and Belarus were born from the same baptismal font in Kyiv. Therefore, Ukraine’s attempt to separate from Russian influence is seen as a “sin” against the divine unity of Holy Rus. Holy Rus is not just a place on the map, but the idea that these peoples have a special mission given by God: to preserve Orthodoxy against heresies. If Ukraine becomes Western and secular, in Moscow’s view it is betraying Holy Rus.

Within this paradigm, political borders are secondary to “spiritual borders.” If a territory is part of the Russian Orthodox heritage, Moscow claims the right and the duty to exert influence over it. It is the theological justification for denying Ukrainian sovereignty, treating the neighboring country not as an independent nation, but as a rebellious spiritual province.

The geopolitical instrumentalization

The fusion between the Kremlin’s security strategy and the religious narrative has created a war theocracy, which generates this symbiosis not only as moral support, but as a redefinition of the conflict so that it becomes immune to rational and political criticism. When the Kremlin transforms security issues such as NATO expansion or Ukrainian sovereignty into matters of faith, it removes these issues from the realm of diplomatic debate.

The invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was presented by Patriarch Kirill not as a political aggression, but as a “metaphysical war.” According to this narrative, Russia is not fighting only against the army of Kyiv, but against a satanic and liberal world order led by the West. The conflict is portrayed as a defense against the imposition of Western values such as LGBTQ+ rights, secularism, and feminism. Kirill even stated that Russian soldiers killed on the battlefield would have their sins washed away, a rhetoric that recalls the medieval Crusades and sanctifies state violence by turning the fear of death into the hope of salvation. And if the war is metaphysical and ordered to preserve Holy Rus, questioning the military strategy comes to be seen not only as treason against the State, but as apostasy (betrayal of God).

If Moscow’s Orthodox faith is the only legitimate one within Holy Rus, all other religious expressions are considered threats to Russian security.

The Russian government has intensified repression of faith communities in the occupied areas. Specialists explain that Ukraine, since 1991, has built an environment of strong religious pluralism and cooperation among different beliefs, something that contrasts with the Russian model. In the occupied regions, this clash results in arbitrary arrests, torture, murders of priests and pastors, and the closing of churches. Protestants, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Muslims, and Orthodox Christians not subordinated to Moscow are among the most persecuted. Hundreds of temples have been destroyed or confiscated, services have been banned, and believers are intimidated and interrogated. The current Russian regime has become more brutal than that of the late Soviet era, and the religious nationalism linked to the Russian Orthodox Church sustains part of this repression. A direct offensive against religious freedom.

The danger of religious imperialism

The world diplomatic order is built on International Law and the principle of national sovereignty. The concept of Russkiy Mir runs over these principles by prioritizing “spiritual jurisdiction.” When the will of a leader is confused with the “will of God,” human laws and international treaties, such as the Budapest Memorandum, become irrelevant. This destroys the mutual trust necessary for diplomacy, because why would other countries sign agreements with a power that feels divinely authorized to break any norm in the name of a divine mission?

Diplomacy is based on the idea that both parties can give up something to gain peace. However, if the territory in dispute is defined as the sacred cradle of Holy Rus, any territorial concession is interpreted as a profanation. One does not negotiate a miracle or a divine inheritance. Thus, the political cost of a peace agreement becomes unsustainable for the leader, blocking any exit other than access to that territory.

The great danger that religious imperialism imposes on international politics is the replacement of rationality with the intransigence of the sacred. When a conflict leaves the field of national interests and enters the field of “salvation of the soul,” traditional diplomacy becomes obsolete.

The era of global disinformation amplifies this: the “gospel of hatred” is exported instantly, creating a transnational support base that sees the war as a necessary crusade, making any attempt at peace mediated by the international community an act of betrayal of tradition.

João Pedro do Nascimento

Bachelor’s degree in International Relations, with a postgraduate qualification in Public Policies. Serves as Editor-in-Chief of a website specializing in international analysis and has experience in translation, business mediation, and international cooperation. Fluent in English and Spanish, with a track record of collaboration with companies and organizations in multilingual and multicultural contexts.

Bibliography

COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS. Religion and Foreign Policy Webinar: The Russian Orthodox Church in Global Affairs. Council on Foreign Relations. Disponível em: <https://www.cfr.org/event/religion-and-foreign-policy-webinar-russian-orthodox-church-global-affairs>.

CSIS. Russia’s Religious Persecution and Misinformation in Ukraine. Center for Strategic & International Studies. Disponível em: <https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-religious-persecution-and-misinformation-ukraine>.

JILGE, Wilfried. Russkiy Mir: “Russian World” | DGAP. dgap.org. Disponível em: <https://dgap.org/en/events/russkiy-mir-russian-world>.

REID, Graeme. Russia, Homophobia and the Battle for “Traditional Values”. Human Rights Watch. Disponível em: <https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/05/17/russia-homophobia-and-battle-traditional-values>.

YOUNG, Cathy. Blaming the Ukraine Invasion on … the Gays? Cato Institute. Disponível em: <https://www.cato.org/commentary/blaming-ukraine-invasion-gays>.