Will the U.S. stop the persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church?
No sooner had political analyst Kost Bondarenko claimed that the President’s Office was rethinking its approach to the UOC, than a Cherkasy official publicly called for the city to be cleansed of UOC believers. What is going on?
At the end of March, renowned historian and political expert Kostiantyn Bondarenko said in an interview with blogger Oleksandr Shelest: “I think the government is now trying to figure out what to do with the UOC, especially since there are clear signals coming from the United States.”
Hopes that the U.S. would influence Ukraine’s religious policy – essentially, that it would defend the UOC from persecution – emerged immediately after Donald Trump’s victory in the November 5, 2024, presidential election. During the campaign, members of his team spoke openly and unequivocally about the persecution of the UOC. Most vocal among them was now–Vice President J.D. Vance. For example, in April 2024, while still a senator from Ohio, he posted a lengthy message on social media platform X, describing the persecution of the UOC. Vance stated that the Verkhovna Rada was preparing to pass a law banning the country’s largest religious denomination and shamed the Biden administration for failing to act in defense of Christians in Ukraine.
“It is our shame that we didn't see this coming. It is our shame for our inaction. It is our shame for refusing to use the billions of dollars we send to Ukraine as leverage to ensure and guarantee religious freedom,” Vance said at the time.
Now, after more than two months in office as Vice President of the United States, what has Vance done to end this persecution? He has met with President Zelenskyy several times, and has issued many statements about Ukraine. But have we heard a single call to end the persecution? Has the press office ever reported that he raised the issue with Ukraine’s President?
In November 2023, Tulsi Gabbard sharply criticized Zelenskyy on X, accusing him of outlawing and banning the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and of building an autocracy with American taxpayer money. In February 2025, Gabbard was appointed Director of National Intelligence – one of the most powerful positions in the U.S. intelligence community. Yes, after her appointment she did mention that Ukrainian authorities were shutting down churches. But is that enough to truly defend the UOC?
Another example: During the campaign, Elon Musk also spoke out about religious freedom in Ukraine. In October 2023, commenting on Tucker Carlson’s interview with UOC attorney Robert Amsterdam, who described the persecution of the Church, Musk posted a pointed question on X: “Are priests being jailed?”
After the U.S. election, Musk became one of the most influential figures in Donald Trump’s inner circle. Although his official focus is on domestic affairs, Musk has still found time to make bold statements about power shifts in the UK and to criticize European countries and the EU in general. But have we heard him loudly demand that the Ukrainian authorities stop destroying the country’s largest religious denomination? Has he done anything concrete on this front?
Attorney Robert Amsterdam has compiled an extensive legal dossier on each official involved in persecuting the Church. Even before the U.S. election, he warned of sanctions and legal action against any member of the Rada who voted for the UOC ban, and against any official violating freedom of religion.
And yet, Trump’s team has been in power for over two months. Where are the criminal cases? Where are the sanctions? Where are even public appeals to the Ukrainian authorities to stop persecuting the Church?
Much has been said – and threatened – regarding a supposed deal involving Ukraine’s natural resources. But somehow, virtually nothing has been done to end the persecution of the UOC, and almost nothing has been said about it at the highest political level.
We will try to address these questions later, but for now, we must disagree with the idea that the President’s Office is still undecided about whether to continue persecuting the UOC. In reality, the persecution has not stopped – neither before nor after Trump took office. Church seizures continue, hate-filled rhetoric against believers persists, and anti-church legislation remains in place with no sign of repeal. Recent events leave no doubt that Ukrainian authorities feel no fear of being accused by U.S. officials of violating religious freedom.
In March 2025, the Ministry of Culture formed a commission to examine the relics of the saints of the Kyiv Caves Lavra in terms of historical and scientific value. Similar actions by the Bolsheviks in the 1920s were known as the “campaign to unseal relics.” Many were removed to museums at best, and discarded at worst. The Ministry’s commission has already begun its work.
On April 1, 2025, UOC Metropolitan Theodosiy of Cherkasy and Kaniv stated that the authorities were preparing the violent seizure of several UOC churches in Cherkasy. Public sector workers are reportedly being threatened with dismissal unless they participate in attacks against the Church. Cherkasy City Council official Mykola Dobrovolsky made no attempt to hide his views, openly calling for action against the UOC. Here are some of his quotes:
- “Tomorrow we plan to take the last bastion in Cherkasy! Fighting against the rashist scum and Moscow vermin. We’ll celebrate Easter in a Cherkasy free of Moscow priests.”
- “Only with your help will Cherkasy become the first city in Ukraine without Moscow priests.”
- “Unfortunately, we have both open and hidden separatists, collaborators, and enemies. The obvious ones are the Moscow church and its FSB-affiliated priests.”
He even listed specific UOC church addresses and the times of the planned actions – a direct announcement of pogroms.
But where is the stern rebuke from Washington demanding that this not be done?
On March 30, 2025, evangelical pastor Mark Burns visited Ukraine. He was introduced as the “personal spiritual advisor” to U.S. President Donald Trump. During his visit, Pastor Burns met with representatives of nearly all major religious organizations in Ukraine – except for the largest one, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC). He expressed no interest in meeting with its representatives. Following his visit, Burns went so far as to declare that Ukraine, despite the ongoing war, is a “beacon of religious freedom.” This is the impression he took back to the United States and will likely share with American politicians – possibly even with Donald Trump himself.
And finally, on March 24, 2025, President Trump welcomed Archbishop Elpidophoros, head of the American Archdiocese of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, to the White House. The archbishop presented Trump with a cross and said: “You remind me of the great Roman Emperor Constantine the Great.” Judging by his expression, Trump was pleased. And yet, not long ago, Elpidophoros publicly supported Joe Biden and participated in anti-Trump BLM marches. Is all that now forgotten? That is another question we will attempt to address.
In the article “The Archons of the Phanar: OCU’s Last Hope?”, we previously analyzed how the Greek diaspora in the U.S. would go to great lengths to bring Trump over to their side. And now we’re seeing how quickly Greek leaders are shifting their political allegiances – from staunch supporters of the Democrats and Joe Biden, they are now just as enthusiastically aligning themselves with Donald Trump, showering him with praise and pledging loyalty. Can we now conclude that their efforts are succeeding? Has the OCU’s last hope already paid off?
The answer to most of these questions can be summed up by the well-known phrase: “Nothing personal – just business.”
The U.S. administration is well aware of the unlawful actions taken by Ukrainian authorities against the UOC. There is little doubt that American agencies have collected substantial compromising evidence on every official involved in persecuting the Church. And there is no doubt that fully justified sanctions or legal proceedings could be launched against them. But defending the UOC from government abuse is a trump card – one the Trump administration will play only if it serves a broader purpose: be it economic, political, or strategic.
Those are the priorities – not the protection of religious freedom.
American politicians and officials who spoke out during the campaign about the persecution of the UOC weren’t necessarily motivated by a desire to end it. Their primary goal was to score political points with voters. Now that they are in power, they have not rushed to defend the UOC or to pressure President Zelenskyy into leaving the Church alone. Instead, they are reserving the issue of Ukraine’s violations of religious rights and freedoms for a more advantageous moment.
There is currently no consensus within the U.S. administration as to whether Zelenskyy will comply with everything Trump demands. If he does, then the U.S. will continue working with the current Ukrainian leadership. In that case, there will be no need to change the government – and thus no need to bring up the issue of persecution. Ukrainian officials will get away with it all: the seizure of churches, the banning of the Church, the violation of believers’ rights. Business interests and 'realpolitik' will override the horrors of religious persecution.
But if Washington decides that removing Zelenskyy from power is in its interest, then all the “cards” will come into play: embezzlement of American aid, corruption – and yes, the illegal persecution of the UOC. Only then might we hear grand speeches demanding an end to religious oppression. Only then will we see sanctions, lawsuits, and investigations.
The words of the Prophet David – “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no salvation” (Psalm 146:3) – mean not only that a ruler or official may be unwilling to save or protect someone. They also mean that rulers and politicians rarely act out of a desire to please God or follow His commandments. Rather, they are guided by other priorities. They are not, in essence, in the business of “salvation.” Exceptions exist, of course – but throughout human history, they are few and far between.
The main goals of those in power are not religious but worldly – to the effect what the Apostle John meant when he wrote: “For all that is in the world – the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life – is not of the Father, but is of the world” (1 John 2:16).
Power, glory, money, and influence – these are the true motivations behind whether the “religious card” will be played in Ukraine. And they are also the reasons external powers may choose to defend the Church – or not.
Believers in Ukraine (and elsewhere) must come to understand that no one in power will defend them simply out of a desire to protect them or uphold justice. If defense comes at all, it will be for practical reasons. Therefore, our Church life must strive to be as independent as possible from “princes and sons of men.” Otherwise, we are doomed to chase every kind word from abroad – and be disappointed when those words turn out to be just words.
