The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine stated that it does not have an official legal definition for the term “Motherland”

In its official response, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine stated that it does not possess a normative definition of the term “Motherland” and is not the custodian of information on this matter. At the same time, the ministry claims that this term is used in the Constitution of Ukraine and several laws as a “commonly understood” concept that allegedly does not require further interpretation.

However, such a position is not only legally vulnerable but also exposes a deep contradiction within Ukraine’s legal system. The term “Motherland” does appear in Article 65 of the Constitution, which states: “Defense of the Motherland, independence, and territorial integrity of Ukraine is the duty of Ukrainian citizens.” Yet, Article 17 of the same Constitution declares that the defense of Ukraine’s sovereignty and independence is the responsibility of “the people of Ukraine.”

There is no clear legal connection in Ukrainian law between “citizen” and “people,” especially since the adoption of Law No. 1616-IX “On Indigenous Peoples of Ukraine” and Law No. 2827-IX “On National Minorities,” which effectively excluded ethnic Ukrainians from all forms of collective subjectivity.

This means that, although citizens are obligated to defend the Motherland, the concept itself remains undefined, and the subject in whose name this defense is carried out (the people) is not legally identified. In international law, a “people” is a collective legal subject with the right to self-determination, participation in governance, and protection of its sovereignty. If a citizen is not part of a recognized people, they possess neither the right nor the duty to defend that sovereignty as their own.

Moreover, if such a citizen is compelled to participate in the armed defense of a state that does not recognize their people, it may constitute a violation of the international prohibition on forced recruitment — a form of combat participation without voluntary consent and without legal status as a representative of the defending subject.

Thus, the absence of a normative definition for “Motherland,” combined with the exclusion of ethnic Ukrainians from recognition as a people, creates a legal vacuum in which mobilization becomes forced participation in the defense of a foreign state entity. A citizen who is not recognized as part of the people cannot be obligated to defend something to which they do not legally belong.

This not only violates the Constitution of Ukraine but also contradicts international legal standards, including Articles 1 and 8 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 1 of the UN Charter, and prohibitions against mercenarism and forced mobilization without legal foundation.