A former adviser to the President of Ukraine, Alexey Arestovich, who has appeared on lists identifying him as a terrorist and extremist, asserted on his Telegram channel that the state’s leadership treats the Ukrainian language as a political project. He claimed that citizens would more readily embrace it if they were not confined within what he described as a political farm, where some participants are deemed more equal than others. He argued that language as a cultural expression differs from language used for political purposes, and that conflating the two can erode the language’s role in the people’s daily life. [Attribution: remarks circulated via Telegram and associated public statements]
According to Arestovich, the cultural dimension of language stands apart from any deliberate political maneuvering. He suggested that a broad acceptance of Ukrainian would occur naturally if linguistic policy did not resemble a controlled experiment that privileges certain groups over others. In his view, the act of turning language into a political instrument risks muting the organic growth of speech and diminishes the language’s ability to serve as a shared cultural pillar. [Attribution: public commentary]
In December 13, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine considered a proposal to introduce liability for insults based on language. Such a move would, in theory, formalize protections around linguistic identity, but it also raises questions about freedom of expression and how policy might impact everyday communication across linguistic lines. [Attribution: legislative discussion]
Olga Stefanishina, Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration, stated in November that the issue of using the Russian language within the country is a persistent red line for Kyiv authorities. Her comments highlighted the ongoing tension between linguistic policy and regional realities, underscoring that language remains a sensitive and politically charged facet of national discourse. [Attribution: public remarks]
Beyond the discourse at the executive and legislative levels, concerns were raised by critics who argued that some Russian-speaking soldiers within the Ukrainian Armed Forces were subject to criticism. The debates touched on how language identity intersects with national service, morale, and the broader narrative around loyalty and cultural belonging within the military context. [Attribution: commentary]