Between national security and spiritual liberation: Ukrainian state policies towards the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes the relationship between the Ukrainian state and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), which is historically and ecclesiastically affiliated with the Moscow Patriarchate, since the beginning of Russian aggression in 2014. The paper specifically discusses legal measures taken by the state against the UOC, focusing on the 2024 law banning the UOC for its affiliation with Russia. The paper demonstrates that, while restrictions applied against the UOC are usually discussed and evaluated within the framework of religious freedom and national security, in fact these restrictions have more to do with the “spiritual decolonization” or “spiritual liberation” of Ukraine, including the de-Russification of Ukrainian religious space. The paper argues that, while the Ukrainian state enjoys broad discretion to protect national security, the ban on UOC communities that are not involved in illegal activities can hardly be reconciled with international standards of freedom of religion or belief, which consequently weakens rather than strengthens Ukraine’s security. The ban is also potentially problematic for Ukraine’s religious pluralism, as it will unduly strengthen state interference in religious life and unavoidably result in state favouritism for the UOC’s rival church, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".