Education Under Russian Occupation

In March 2025, I visited Mykolaiv and communities near Kherson that had been affected by the Russian occupation. I interviewed dozens of teachers, school principals, and education administrators who had lived under occupation in different regions of Ukraine. Their stories reveal why education has become one of the key battlegrounds of this war.

Since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, schools and universities have become one of the primary targets of Russian occupation authorities in the territories under their control.

Over the past two years, together with researchers Gabriela Lotta and Mykhailo Honchar, I have studied how teachers and education professionals were affected by the Russian occupation. The research was conducted with the assistance of Resilient Ukraine and resulted in a scholarly article recently published in an Oxford University Press journal.

Education as a Battlefield under Russian Occupation

Educational institutions play a fundamental role in the functioning of any community. They not only transmit knowledge but also help preserve collective memory, culture, and national identity. Recognizing their importance, Russian authorities sought to take control of schools and universities during the very first months of the occupation.

Their objective was not merely to restore an appearance of administrative normality. Control over education would help consolidate the new political order, legitimize the occupation, and promote the Russification of the local population. Convincing adult Ukrainians that they belong to the Russian nation is a difficult task. Convincing children and adolescents–whose political and national identities are still being formed and who are therefore particularly vulnerable–may appear far more feasible from the occupiers' perspective.

The consequences of this policy quickly became visible. In schools controlled by Russia, Ukrainian children were required to regularly sing the Russian national anthem, participate in ceremonies featuring Russian flags, watch speeches by Vladimir Putin, and attend lectures delivered by military personnel. In many cases, military-patriotic activities for children and adolescents were also introduced. The Centre of civil education "Almenda" has done important work documenting these transformations.

At the same time, the Ukrainian language was drastically reduced or removed from much of the school curriculum, as were subjects related to Ukrainian history and culture. In their place, students were taught narratives aligned with the Kremlin's official propaganda.

Cultural Genocide and Russian Occupation Policies

It is in this context that the concept of cultural genocide becomes relevant. Amid the atrocities of the Second World War, Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term genocide, defined it as a coordinated plan of actions aimed at the destruction of a group as such. Although the term later became primarily associated with physical extermination, Lemkin emphasized that the destruction of a group could also occur through cultural means. Among these were control over education, the suppression of language, and the replacement of institutions responsible for reproducing collective identity.

The forcible transfer of children from one group to another–a practice that can also be observed in the current war through the deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia–occupied a central place in Lemkin's reflections on the destruction of national communities.

According to Lemkin, genocide involves two complementary stages: the destruction of the national patterns of the oppressed group and the imposition of the national patterns of the oppressor group. This formulation appears particularly relevant when examining the policies implemented by Russia in the occupied territories of Ukraine.

The Kremlin's official rhetoric reinforces this interpretation. Vladimir Putin and other representatives of the regime have repeatedly claimed that Ukraine is an artificial state and that Russians and Ukrainians constitute "one people" (odin narod), separated by what they describe as historical mistakes. These ideas did not remain confined to political speeches. They were incorporated into the educational practices promoted by the occupation authorities.

While Ukrainian schools, particularly in areas near the front line, rapidly shifted to remote learning in order to protect students and teachers, Russian authorities frequently insisted on the resumption of in-person classes even in areas close to active combat zones. Their objective was to strengthen control over local communities and ensure the implementation of the new educational system, while disregarding the significant risks imposed on children and adolescents.

Beyond the occupied territories, hundreds of schools, universities, and cultural institutions were also damaged or destroyed by Russian attacks. Russia's war against Ukrainian education, therefore, was not limited to the administrative takeover of schools; it also included the physical destruction of spaces dedicated to learning and culture.

Coercion, Co-optation, and Russification

Our research found that, in order to consolidate control over the educational system, the occupation authorities relied simultaneously on co-optation and coercion.

Many of the educators we interviewed described promises of higher salaries, financial bonuses, and career advancement opportunities for those willing to work under the Russian administration. Others reported threats, detention, and various forms of intimidation directed at those who refused to cooperate.

One school principal recounted being detained by armed, masked soldiers and taken to an improvised detention facility (the pidval, basement prison). According to her testimony, the occupiers told her that she could face years in prison for teaching foreign content on "Russian territory." Another educator described episodes of torture and coercion aimed at forcing him to record public statements in support of Russia. Searches of private homes conducted by armed soldiers also featured prominently in the interviews.

These circumstances created profound moral dilemmas. One school principal recalled being told by the occupiers that if local teachers refused to work, educators from Russia would be brought in to replace them. At the same time, participating in the implementation of an educational system designed to Russify the local population could be qualified as collaboration with the occupation authorities.

Despite these pressures, most educators living under occupation refused to work in institutions controlled by the Russian authorities. Some were able to continue receiving part of their salaries from Ukraine for several months. Russian and Ukrainian sources indicate that teachers from the Russian Federation were subsequently deployed to the occupied territories. The replacement of local professionals with personnel linked to the Russian state constitutes yet another element of a broader policy of cultural and social transformation in the occupied territories.

The pressure also extended to families. Occupation authorities offered cash payments to encourage parents to enroll their children in Russified schools. In some cases, parents reported being threatened with the loss of custody of their children if they refused to send them to school.

Resistance, Collaboration, and Remote Adaptation

Against this backdrop, we identified at least four strategies adopted by education professionals: leaving the occupied territories; collaborating with the occupiers, whether under pressure or due to personal gains and ideological affinity; resisting the new order; or pursuing what we term "remote adaptation."

Resistance took many forms. Educators organized classes in private homes, concealed school records, preserved Ukrainian educational materials, distributed humanitarian aid, participated in protests against the occupation, and shared information with Ukrainian authorities.

At the same time, resistance involved extraordinary risks. Even during the first months of occupation, many interviewees described living in a climate of fear and perceived surveillance, never knowing who might report their pro-Ukrainian views to the occupation authorities. The public use of the Ukrainian language, the display of national symbols, or any explicit expression of Ukrainian identity–including messages, photographs, or other content stored on personal mobile phones–could arouse suspicion and lead to punishment, particularly during inspections at checkpoints controlled by the occupiers.

As the Russian security apparatus became more deeply entrenched in the occupied territories, many of these forms of resistance became increasingly difficult.

In this context, "remote adaptation" emerged as one of the most important strategies for the survival of Ukrainian educational institutions. Teachers and administrators relocated to territories under Ukrainian control and continued operating schools and universities online.

This allowed students who had moved to other parts of Ukraine, sought refuge abroad, or remained in the occupied territories despite the significant risks to maintain ties with their educational institutions and local communities.

During our research, we visited Kherson State University, which has been operating in Ivano-Frankivsk with the support of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University since its displacement in 2022, as well as Mariupol State University, which is now based in Kyiv. Despite their forced displacement, both institutions continue to carry out their academic missions and preserve their university communities.

The Battle for Ukraine's Future

When we view the war solely through the lens of military maps, diplomatic negotiations, or statistics of destruction, we risk overlooking one of its most important dimensions: the struggle for the future.

The indoctrination of Ukrainian children is not an isolated phenomenon. Rather, it forms part of a long tradition of Russian policies aimed at erasing Ukrainians as a distinct national community. These policies have taken different forms over the centuries, ranging from the suppression of the Ukrainian language and culture in the Russian Empire to the persecution of intellectual elites during the so-called "Executed Renaissance" and the mass famine inflicted by Stalin's regime during the Holodomor.

The battle over education in the occupied territories is, to a large extent, a battle over memory, identity, and the continuity of the Ukrainian nation. Our research shows that schools and universities can be transformed into instruments of domination and assimilation. But it also shows that they can become spaces of resistance.

Despite threats, detention, torture, forced displacement, and the pressures of daily life under occupation, thousands of educators have found ways to preserve their communities and pass knowledge on to future generations. For this reason, education occupies a central place in this war: it is simultaneously a target of Russian aggression, an instrument of Ukrainian resistance, and one of the principal arenas in which the ongoing cultural genocide against Ukrainians is being carried out.

Vicente Ferraro, р

This article summarizes the main findings and arguments of a scholarly article published in the Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory (Oxford University Press). Ferraro has also written on the causes of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and, together with Felipe Freller, on the moral issues involved in the current peace negotiations.