Geostrategy of Cultural Sovereignty: Oleh Mandziuk on the National Security Code

Protecting cultural heritage, preserving national identity, and effectively safeguarding copyright must be regarded as components of Ukraine’s national security. This is emphasized by Doctor of Law Oleh Mandziuk in his article devoted to the work of Ivan Marchuk, the issue of creating a museum for the artist, and legal mechanisms for protecting his legacy.

In the expert’s view, in the context of all-out war, the cultural sphere remains one of the fronts in the confrontation with Russia. This concerns not only the physical destruction of cultural and scientific objects but also the preservation of historical memory and the identity of Ukrainian society.

Ivan Marchuk as a Symbol of Cultural Identity

Oleh Mandziuk pays particular attention to Marchuk’s life path, considering it as an example of devotion to national culture:

“True patriotism is measured by actions: when in 90-s the Ivan Marchuk lived for nearly 10 years in the United States and had the opportunity to become a U.S. citizen, he sharply refused it… He preserved his own creativity and also safeguarded himself for us and for our descendants.”

According to the expert, this example raises a broader question about the role of personal choice in preserving national heritage. Marchuk’s art, in this context, appears not only as an artistic achievement but also as part of cultural memory that the state must preserve for future generations.

Mandziuk also draws attention to the artist’s characteristic technique—plentizanism—which is regarded as a special way of interpreting reality and national experience:

“Prophecy and the depth of Master’s creativity are not mere magic. They constitute a unique way of thinking and foreseeing the future. Plen... MaESTro’s plenti? are like hidden threads of being, and Marchuk’s plentanzism is the code of the nation.”

Thus the author links Marchuk’s artistic legacy to a broader question of Ukraine’s cultural resilience. In his view, the artist’s works allow interpreting historical events, social upheavals, and challenges faced by the country.

Ivan Marchuk Museum: a question that remains open

Another problem raised in the article is the creation of Ivan Marchuk’s museum. According to Mandziuk, the idea of such a space has been discussed for about twenty years, but it has not yet been realized:

“I note that we have been hearing about the Ivan Marchuk Museum for about twenty years. Since the presidency of Viktor Yushchenko, this idea has been almost realized… My personal feeling is that I would not want another country to establish this Museum faster than the government of the native state.”

The expert believes that implementing such a project should become one of the practical steps of state cultural policy. This concerns not only creating an exhibition space but also systematic security, research, and promotion of the artist’s work.

This issue acquires special significance given the artist’s age and the need to ensure proper preservation of his legacy. Therefore the museum discussion goes beyond a cultural project and touches on the state’s responsibility for preserving national heritage.

Copyright and legal protection of cultural heritage

An important part of the article is the legal aspect of the Ivan Marchuk situation. Oleh Mandziuk notes the dispute over the license agreement 2020 of year and the need for proper protection of the artist’s copyrights:

“Lawyers and attorneys representing Ivan Marchuk’s interests also claim that the License Agreement 2020 of year is onerous and void… and the protection of Ukraine’s cultural state must be ensured at the national security level.”

The author notes that the protection of cultural heritage should not be limited to a private-law dispute. He believes that the effectiveness of copyright protection mechanisms directly affects the state’s ability to defend national cultural values.

The article also mentions the conclusion of the Lviv Scientific Research Institute of Judicial Expertise from 7 August 2026 of year, which, according to the author, concerns the authenticity of signatures. These circumstances require assessment within appropriate legal procedures, and conclusions about possible violations should be based on case materials and decisions of competent bodies.

Mandziuk links this situation to greater state responsibility for compliance with intellectual property law. In particular, he emphasizes the importance of proper response by law enforcement agencies and the judiciary.

Cultural security in wartime

Another fragment of the article is devoted to Lana Barnar and her work in documentary film. Oleh Mandziuk expresses doubts about the director’s professional background and raises questions about possible ties to Russia:

“I particularly emphasize the figure of Lana Barnar… who presents herself as a documentary filmmaker. There is a high likelihood that she has relations with the aggressor state… The aim is to hinder the popularization of Ukraine’s cultural heritage… These actions infringe upon the policy of national memory.”

The expert calls for a proper legal assessment of the circumstances he deems suspicious, in particular by the Security Service of Ukraine. At the same time, the claim about possible ties to the aggressor state requires independent confirmation and cannot be considered established facts without appropriate evidence.

In this context, the author raises a broader question of protecting the cultural sphere from possible external influence. In his logic, state policy must cover not only physical preservation of monuments and artworks but also copyright protection, accurate representation of Ukrainian history, and support for national memory.

Cultural sovereignty as a component of state policy

In his article, Oleh Mandziuk consistently argues that cultural sovereignty is an integral part of state sovereignty. He views protection of national art, preservation of historical memory, and ensuring copyright as tasks requiring systematic involvement of state institutions.

The issues raised by the expert concern not only Ivan Marchuk’s heritage. They also bring into focus the discussion of the effectiveness of Ukrainian cultural policy, mechanisms of legal protection for artists, and the state’s ability to counter threats in the cultural sphere.

In the conditions of full-scale war these issues gain special weight. Preserving cultural identity requires not only public support but also concrete decisions—from intellectual property protection to implementing projects for preserving national heritage.

We reported: Legendary Ukrainian animator Yevhen Sifokín has passed away: a creator who shaped a generation of artists