Yuliya Krylova-Grek1; 1 National University of of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Ukraine
Discussion
The study introduces the concept of “crimes against national identity”, examined from both legal and linguistic perspectives, and focuses on the connection between incitement to crimes and their commission. The ongoing war against Ukraine demonstrates the flaws in international and national legal frameworks: discursive attacks on identity remain almost impossible to prosecute, and cultural genocide is still not adequately recognized in international law. Despite the existence of definitions of crimes, in practice it remained difficult to prove intent and to distinguish between political rhetoric and incitement, as evidenced by conflicting resolutions of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The research considers the effectiveness of contemporary legal mechanisms for protecting national identity from discriminatory and assimilationist rhetoric in the public sphere. The reseach materials - the provisions of the main international legal instruments in the field of human rights and humanitarian law (the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and discursive practices in the Russian public sphere. The research identifies that one of the key challenges in the legal argumentation regarding the existence or absence of incitement to crimes is linguistic in nature: there is no clear set of linguistic indicators to determine when verbal aggression (direct or subtle) turns into rhetoric that violates human rights. Results. In the research it is provided a definition of the concept of “crimes against national identity” and identified linguistic markers of incitement to such crimes. developed criteria for their identification. The study also revealed the following gaps in international law: the lack of criminalization of incitement to crimes against humanity; the disregard of cultural genocide as a distinct category of crime. Methodologically, the research combined discourse analysis of Russian public narratives denying Ukrainian identity with a legal examination of international and national frameworks. The discourse analysis included both content analysis (AI-assisted) and textual analysis using linguistic and psycholinguistic methods to trace language patterns that justify aggression and normalize violence. The legal analysis assessed the applicability and limitations of existing instruments in addressing crimes targeting national identity. In the context of the ongoing war in Ukraine, this study contributes to understanding how linguistic forms of aggression operate as integral components of hybrid warfare. The findings offer practical tools for human rights defenders and lawyers to address identity-based violations and to recognize cultural and discursive forms of destruction as elements of broader patterns of crimes against humanity.
