Kursk and Belgorod Were Never Part of Ukrainian Statehood — UINP Response
Received: 16.09.2024
The response from the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory was provided in reply to the official request dated September 16, 2024.
The purpose of the inquiry was to determine whether the territories of the present-day Kursk and Belgorod regions were ever part of Ukrainian state formations in the past.
The request was prompted by statements circulating in the public sphere claiming that these regions hold a supposedly “Ukrainian” status and, as a result, attempting to legitimize the presence of Ukrainian military personnel on those territories.
In its response, the Institute clearly states that neither the Kursk Region nor the Belgorod Region, as separate administrative-territorial units, have ever been part of any Ukrainian state entity.
However, it emphasizes that the southern areas of both regions — which are currently part of the Russian Federation — do belong to a historical and geographic region known as Slobidska Ukraine (Slobozhanshchyna).
This means that Ukrainian ethnic presence in those areas indeed existed, but it concerns historical and cultural influence during the settlement of the southern frontier of the Russian Empire by Ukrainians in the 17th–18th centuries, not political or legal incorporation into Ukraine.
According to the Institute’s reference, Slobidska Ukraine encompassed eastern territories adjacent to modern-day Ukraine, including parts of the Kharkiv, Sumy, Luhansk, and Donetsk regions, as well as southern areas of the Voronezh, Kursk, and Belgorod regions of the Russian Federation.
The formation of this region was based on historical colonization of the Wild Fields by Ukrainian settlers, but this does not imply the existence of independent Ukrainian state formations in those areas.
Additionally, it is important to note that Article 133 of the Constitution of Ukraine contains an exhaustive list of administrative-territorial units that are part of the Ukrainian state. The Kursk and Belgorod regions are not included in this list.
Therefore, any political interpretations or claims that go beyond this constitutional framework cannot be considered legally justified.
Thus, the response provided by the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory does not confirm the existence of any territorial claims by Ukraine concerning the Belgorod or Kursk regions.
The document is informative in nature, based on historical and geographical analysis, and highlights only the fact of past Ukrainian ethnic presence in certain parts of these regions.
The question of the current state status of these territories under Ukrainian law is not in doubt — they are not and have never been part of the Ukrainian state.
