Changing the Memorial Landscape in the Occupied Territories of Ukraine: How a New Ideology is Formed

In the territories of Ukraine under Russian occupation, a large-scale restructuring of the memorial space has been recorded in recent years. Some monuments are being erected, others are being reconstructed with altered content, and still others are disappearing completely. Ukrainian historian Yuriy Latysh notes in his analysis for “Novaya Gazeta Europe” that this is not spontaneous activity, but systematic work embedded in Russian state propaganda.

The pace at which the symbolic space of the occupied regions is changing indicates a pre-planned strategy. New monuments appear at sites of historical events, inscribed in a political narrative where the current war is interpreted as a continuation of previous “liberation” campaigns. This allows Russian structures to form an image of continuity, linking the past with the current actions of the army and authorities.

Ideological manipulations become the basis for forming the desired version of history. The cult of the Great Patriotic War occupies a central place, used as a justification for current decisions. When restoring monuments, new episodes and figures are added, linking the 1940s with the wars of the 2010s and 2020s.

One of the striking examples Latysh mentions is the memorial complex on Saur-Mogila in the Donetsk region. Initially created in 1967 in memory of the battles of 1943, it was destroyed in 2014. The new Russian version of the complex combined historical images with a pantheon of “DNR heroes.” Thus, a single line is created — from World War II to modern armed formations.

Similar processes are occurring in other places. In Krasny Luch, the updated historical memorial received new visual elements emphasizing “generational continuity” and reinforcing the ideological message. The same logic is manifested in the use of the symbolism of Kievan Rus, which Russian propaganda tries to appropriate, linking it exclusively with modern Russia.

Simultaneously, the occupation administrations are conducting opposite work — removing monuments associated with Ukrainian identity. Monuments to the victims of the Holodomor, repressions, and figures of Ukrainian culture are being dismantled. Even neutral objects, such as the monument to actor Yevgeny Matveyev in the Kherson region, acquire new political significance within the framework of reinterpreting the space. The semantic load of such changes is to instill the idea of the absence of an independent Ukrainian history and culture.

The Russian Military Historical Society (RMHS) plays a separate role. This structure coordinates the construction of new monuments, reconstructions, educational events, and mass actions. Local branches of RMHS are being created in the occupied territories, providing ideological work with the population and schoolchildren, consolidating the necessary historical narrative.

Yuriy Latysh concludes: changes in the memorial space of the occupied regions are a full-fledged ideological operation. It is aimed at legitimizing Russian power, rewriting local history, and integrating eastern Ukraine into Russia’s symbolic field. Such a policy shows that Moscow views the war not just as a military conflict, but as an attempt to reformat the region’s identity.

This transformation, in essence, also affects the perception of the conflict in the international arena, where the analysis of memorial practices becomes an indicator of the scale of Russian propaganda activities. Analysts, researchers, and the Ukrainian diaspora in Israel are closely monitoring the situation — including the audience of NAnews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency, where such materials help trace how space, history, and political reality change under the influence of occupation policy.