“A Faith Under Siege” challenges the narrative, which some conservatives have propagated, that Ukrainians are targeting Christians. In the documentary, a group of evangelical Christians from the U.S. travel to the frontlines of the war in Ukraine. They reveal the ways in which evangelical Christians in Ukraine have been targeted by Russians and demonstrate how the Russian Orthodox Church is a state agent. The documentary challenges the Kremlin’s portrayal of Ukraine as the aggressor and exposes Russia’s abduction, indoctrination, and militarization of children. To the evangelical Americans, Russia’s mistreatment of Ukrainian children is part of its attack on pro-family and evangelical values–and, more broadly, religious freedom everywhere.
I found parts of this documentary moving. It is an example of the way shared beliefs can compel people to put themselves at risk and advocate for a vulnerable group. The evangelical Americans who traveled to the frontlines were drawn to support evangelical Ukrainians, though they may share little else with them than religion. The resulting documentary challenges a belief that members of their American communities at home may hold: that Russians, not Ukrainians, have been victimized. In this respect, the production of “A Faith Under Siege” allowed a small group of Americans–and by extension, audiences at home–to gain a deeper understanding of the Ukrainian experience of war today.
Still, I have questions about the legitimacy of the documentary’s claims. Is it true, for instance, that the Russian Orthodox Church is targeting Ukrainian Evangelicals disproportionately? Or, rather, does the Russian Orthodox Church target churches in Ukraine to lower morale and divide civilians, and not necessarily to obliterate evangelicalism? And, how true is it, if at all, that Ukraine targets Christians? Where did this claim come from? Finally, will evangelical advocates help civilians of other faiths?
Regardless, the other readings from this week affirm that faith-based action is insufficient to help Ukraine protect its citizens. Instead, Zelensky pushes for a broader vision of unity, one that integrates other European countries, along with the U.S., into Ukraine’s fight against Russia. In Europe and overseas, the effects of Russia’s invasion have been impossible to ignore. While the war has pushed Ukrainians to seek asylum in nearby countries, far-right politics has gained ground. Ukrainian refugees arrive in Germany in droves at the same time as conservative voices push to close borders.
Countering this attitude of separation, Zelensky pushes for unity. European countries may put their own national security at risk if they ignore this plea. Deb reports in her Substack that Russia has recently ramped up its use of drones in warfare, making civilian life more dangerous. In response, Ukraine started a program to shoot down Russian drones. This is a small solution to a pressing threat: drones are changing warfare–and global politics–at an alarming speed.
While drones have unleashed new possibilities for Russian attacks, they have also been essential to Ukraine’s defense. In the “drone race” underway, whichever country–Russia or Ukraine–advances and scales drone technology more quickly will gain a massive advantage. Russia has the resources to do this. Ukraine does not. For Ukraine to outpace Russia in its use of drones, it needs support from abroad. And for Ukraine’s allies, ignoring this need could have disastrous consequences. As The Philadelphia Inquirer reports, “Trump’s coddling of Putin only speeds Russia’s advancement in the new global drone wars, which could boomerang against Washington all too soon.” Which is to say: if Trump does not invest in Ukraine’s military technology, it will empower a dictatorial bloc including China, Iran, and North Korea, who are already learning from–and aiding–Russia’s use of drones.
