By Lara Kajs
Dispatches from the Field — The Genocide Report
Washington, DC,— 15 December 2002
Ukraine’s historical experience of engineered famine informs its interpretation of Russia’s current war, where attacks on infrastructure and civilian survival systems raise renewed concerns over starvation and deprivation as methods of warfare.
On the 90th anniversary of the Holodomor, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky invoked historical memory to frame Russia’s ongoing war, drawing parallels between Soviet-era policies of mass starvation and contemporary attacks on civilian infrastructure. His assertion that Ukraine is once again being targeted through deprivation—this time by darkness and cold—reflects a broader concern that methods of warfare are being employed to systematically undermine civilian survival.
Starvation as a Weapon
The Holodomor, widely recognized as a man-made famine, resulted in the deaths of millions of Ukrainians between 1932 and 1933. Soviet policies under Joseph Stalin, including forced collectivization and grain requisitioning, dismantled Ukraine’s agricultural system and stripped rural populations of their means of survival.
Collectivization eliminated private farming, consolidating agricultural production under state control. The imposition of unattainable production quotas, combined with the seizure of grain and livestock, left communities without food reserves. Soviet authorities further restricted movement, preventing access to external food sources and effectively sealing off famine-stricken regions.
These measures were not incidental outcomes of policy failure but constituted a coordinated system that weaponized food deprivation. The Holodomor remains a critical reference point in understanding how state policy can be used to inflict mass harm through the denial of basic necessities.
Suppression of Identity and Historical Memory
The Soviet response to the famine extended beyond its immediate impact. Authorities suppressed discussion of the Holodomor, reframing it as a natural disaster and erasing its causes from public discourse. This suppression of historical memory was part of a broader effort to control Ukrainian identity, language, and political expression.
The legacy of this repression continues to shape contemporary narratives. Disputes over the classification of the Holodomor as genocide reflect enduring tensions over historical accountability and national identity. In the current conflict, these unresolved issues contribute to how Ukraine interprets and responds to Russian actions.
Fighting for Survival
Since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine has faced widespread destruction and a humanitarian crisis. Millions have been displaced internally and across borders, while critical infrastructure has sustained extensive damage.
Attacks on energy systems have intensified, particularly since October, targeting power generation and transmission facilities. These strikes have resulted in widespread electricity outages, disrupted heating systems, and limited access to essential services during winter conditions. The cumulative effect has been to place civilian populations at increased risk, particularly the elderly, children, and those already displaced.
The scale of infrastructure damage, combined with ongoing hostilities, has significantly constrained humanitarian response efforts. The targeting of systems essential to civilian survival raises concerns about the use of deprivation as a method of warfare.
From engineered famine to weaponized infrastructure, the continuity lies in targeting the means of civilian survival.”
Deprivation and the Conduct of War
While the Holodomor and the current conflict differ in context and method, the comparison underscores a recurring pattern: the targeting of civilian survival systems. In the 1930s, starvation was achieved through agricultural control and food seizure. In the present conflict, the destruction of energy infrastructure produces conditions that threaten access to heat, water, and food.
These actions exist within a broader pattern of attacks affecting civilian areas, raising questions regarding compliance with international humanitarian law. The cumulative impact of such strategies extends beyond immediate harm, contributing to long-term instability and humanitarian need.
Fight for Peace and Democratic Resilience
Amid ongoing conflict, Ukrainian civil society continues to emphasize the relationship between resistance and the preservation of democratic institutions. Oleksandra Matviychuk, head of the Center for Civil Liberties, articulated this position in her Nobel Peace Prize address, highlighting that sustainable peace cannot be achieved through capitulation in the face of aggression.
This perspective reflects a broader understanding that the protection of human rights and sovereignty is interconnected. In this context, Ukraine’s resistance is framed not only as a military necessity but as a defense of democratic principles and international norms.
Atrocity Prevention Lens
The current conflict in Ukraine reflects multiple indicators of atrocity risk, including widespread attacks on civilian infrastructure, mass displacement, and patterns of conduct that may deliberately undermine civilian survival. The targeting of energy systems during winter conditions raises particular concern, as it may constitute a form of collective punishment or deprivation strategy. Prevention efforts must focus on reinforcing accountability mechanisms, increasing documentation of violations, and sustaining coordinated international responses, including sanctions and diplomatic pressure. The historical precedent of the Holodomor further underscores the importance of early recognition and response to patterns of deprivation that place civilian populations at existential risk.
Legal Framework
International Humanitarian Law
International humanitarian law prohibits attacks against civilian objects and requires distinction between military targets and civilian infrastructure. The targeting of energy systems essential for civilian survival may violate these principles, particularly where such attacks are disproportionate or indiscriminate.
Starvation as a Method of Warfare
The use of starvation or deprivation of objects indispensable to civilian survival is prohibited under international law, including Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions. This prohibition extends to actions that indirectly produce starvation conditions, such as the destruction of infrastructure necessary for food, water, or heat.
War Crimes
Deliberate or indiscriminate attacks on civilian infrastructure, as well as actions resulting in severe humanitarian consequences, may constitute war crimes. These include the targeting of energy facilities where such attacks foreseeably harm civilian populations.
Genocide Considerations
While genocide requires specific intent to destroy a protected group, historical and contemporary comparisons highlight the importance of examining patterns of conduct, intent, and impact. The Holodomor remains central to discussions of genocide, while current events necessitate careful legal analysis based on established criteria.
Suggested Citation
Kajs, Lara. “‘We Cannot Be Broken.’” Dispatches from the Field. The Genocide Report, Washington, DC, 15 December 2022.
Photo Credit
Memorial the Holodomor 1932-1933 (death by hunger) in Kyiv, Ukraine by Andrew J. Swan. Licensed under CC by NC – ND 2.0
About TGR
The Genocide Report (TGR) publishes analysis and educational resources on conflict, international law, and atrocity prevention. Its work seeks to bridge academic research, field realities, and public understanding of mass violence and civilian protection.
About the Author
Lara Kajs is the founder and executive director of The Genocide Report, a Washington, DC-based educational nonprofit focused on atrocity prevention and international law. She is the author of several field-based books on conflict, displacement, humanitarian crises, and international humanitarian law, drawing on extensive research and field experience in Yemen, Syria, and Afghanistan. Her writing and public speaking focus on atrocity crimes, forced displacement, the protection of civilians, and the legal frameworks governing armed conflict.