Author: Карабас Барабас

Almost 4 years ago, with the start of Putin’s full-scale aggression against Ukraine, a 13-year-old teenager Mark Golenkov arrived in Israel from Kyiv. A repatriate. A goalkeeper. A guy who had been training in the Ukrainian football environment and living a normal child’s life, where training was the main event of the day.

And then four years passed — and the surname Golenkov suddenly began to sound like the names of people who do the “impossible” in one moment. Not in a movie. Not in a retelling. In a real playoff match, where you have one chance — and that’s it.

How “Maccabi” from Haifa knocked out “Barcelona”

The meeting took place on February 4, 2026, at the “Gyirmót” stadium in the city of Győr, Hungary — “Maccabi” was the nominal host.

Regular time ended 2:2. But looking at the dynamics, it was a game where emotions and pressure built up in waves.

First, “Barcelona” led 1:0 — after an own goal by Gaist Arad. It seemed: everything was going according to the usual scenario, the Catalan school, control, pace.

But in the second half, “Maccabi” turned the match around. On the 70th minute, Liam Luska scored, and on the 81st — Liam Karagola. 2:1 — and there was already a feeling that the sensation was really close, just a few minutes away.

And yet “Barcelona” equalized at the very end: on 90+1 a penalty was converted by Guille Fernandez. 2:2 — and the match went to a penalty shootout.

A penalty shootout where one person became the story

Penalties are always about nerves, but in youth football, it’s also about pure psychology: who faltered, who endured, who suddenly turned out to be older than their age.

The series ended 3:1 in favor of “Maccabi”. And the key fact of this night sounds like this: goalkeeper Mark Golenkov saved three consecutive penalty kicks.

Three in a row. In a match against “Barcelona”. In the playoffs of a European tournament.

After such an episode, any team becomes a story, and any goalkeeper — a name that is remembered. Because goals — yes, are scored every week. But three consecutive saved penalties at a crucial moment — that’s a rarity that instantly becomes a legend in sports.

Who is Mark Golenkov

In this story, it’s important not only “what he did” but also “where he came from”.

Name in Hebrew: מרק גולנקוב
Date of birth: July 2, 2008.
Place of birth: Kyiv, Ukraine
Citizenship: Israel and Ukraine
Position: goalkeeper
Team: Maccabi Haifa U19

In Israel, his youth trajectory sounds like this:

• Hapoel Beer Sheva (2022–2023)
• Maccabi Haifa (since 2023)

A separate detail that explains a lot: since the age of 15, he has been living alone in the Maccabi Haifa sports boarding school. This means — discipline and regime not “at will”, but as the only way to survive in competition.

Another fact: he signed a three-year contract extension with the club and is designated as a player of Maccabi’s youth team and the Israeli youth national team. For a 17-year-old goalkeeper, this is not just a “checkmark”, but a signal: the club sees him as a project they are ready to invest in.

Why a goalkeeper becomes a symbol of such sensations

In matches against clubs of Barcelona’s level, you can have a great game, you can even score two, you can hold the score — but in the end, it often comes down to one moment. And this moment is almost always related to the one who stands last.

Penalties are a personal duel: the kicker against the goalkeeper. Without the help of partners. Without tactics. Without “covering the flank”. Your choice and his shot.

And that’s why Golenkov’s story quickly spread through the media: it’s simple, like a sports parable. “A guy from Haifa stopped the empire.” People love such formulations not because they are pompous, but because they are accurate in feeling.

The Ukrainian trace that now sounds different

Just yesterday, one could say: “yes, he’s from Kyiv, yes, he moved.” But today the Ukrainian part of the biography looks not like a background, but a foundation.

In this thread, there are two Ukrainian episodes — and both are important.

Childhood years at FC “Zirka” (Kyiv)

Mark Golenkov started playing football in Kyiv, at the children’s and youth school of the club “Zirka” (Kyiv). Already at an early age, he showed himself as a talented goalkeeper. In October 2015, seven-year-old Golenkov participated in the II International Mini-Football Tournament “Children’s Dreams” in Transcarpathia, where he represented the “Zirka” (Kyiv) team. According to the results of the competition, Mark was recognized as the “best goalkeeper” (7 years old) of the tournament, and his team won bronze medals.

In the following years, the young goalkeeper continued to play for “Zirka” in various children’s tournaments.

One of the most significant achievements was the Brașov Indoor Cup 2017 – a major international youth futsal tournament. The “Zirka” (Kyiv) team became the winner of this tournament, and Mark Golenkov again received an individual award as the best goalkeeper (9 years old) of the competition (this was reported in the organizers’ social media reports). These successes at an early stage of his career confirmed Golenkov’s reputation as one of the most promising young goalkeepers of his age.

Transition to the “Dynamo” academy (Kyiv)

Successful performances for “Zirka” attracted the attention of leading academies. In his teenage years, Mark Golenkov joined the training system of FC “Dynamo” (Kyiv).

By the fall of 2021, he was already playing for the “Dynamo” U-14 team in the Elite League of the Ukrainian Youth Football League (UYFL). In particular, on November 6, 2021, Golenkov started in the lineup in the match “Dynamo” (U14) – OK im. I. Piddubny (U14), playing to a clean sheet and helping the Kyiv team win 2:0. This result allowed the Dynamo U14 team to advance to the next stage of the Elite League from the first place in the group. Golenkov regularly appeared in the goal for his team, including in crucial matches — for example, against peers from the “Shakhtar” academy.

Playing for the “Dynamo” academy, Mark continued to progress. Although at the UYFL level individual awards for goalkeepers are rarely given, his reliable play was often noted by coaches. The official “Dynamo” website published match reports mentioning Golenkov in the lineup, confirming his role as the main goalkeeper of the U14 team.

A bit broader: why this story is not only about sports

For the Israeli audience, this victory resonates also because it’s a recognizable biography for hundreds of thousands of people.

Jews from Ukraine in recent years have gone through what is hard to describe in one phrase: anxious gatherings, moving, a new school, a new language, a new circle of friends, a new sense of home. And almost always — an attempt not to lose oneself along the way.

Sports in such stories often become not a “hobby”, but a lifeline. It gives structure, schedule, clear rules: here’s the coach, here’s the team, here’s your role. You may be confused in everyday life, but on the field, you understand again who you are.

Therefore, Golenkov’s story is not just about a “talented goalkeeper”. It’s an example of how a teenager from Ukraine, raised in Kyiv’s football culture, found a new path in Israel and did not dissolve in the move. On the contrary — he reached a level where his surname was heard beyond the country.

And here is another important detail, very “Israeli”: Haifa is a city where repatriation has always been part of the air. Here, they are used to the fact that a person can come from another world and in a couple of years become one of their own. Not by passport — by actions.

Why this match is important for “Maccabi” and the entire Israeli school

Yes, it’s the Youth League. But such games are a showcase of future lineups.

When an Israeli team knocks out “Barcelona” precisely in the format of “nerves, shots, goalkeeper”, it speaks of two things:

First: “Maccabi” has a generation that is not afraid of big names.
Second: Israel has a growing goalkeeper who can handle pressure — not in theory, but in the toughest playoff format.

And this is no longer a “beautiful episode”. It’s a statement. Such matches change how you are viewed. Scouts, coaches, opponents. Even your own — start expecting repetition.

What’s next: the main challenge begins after the sensation

The match with “Barcelona” made Golenkov a headline. But football life is tough: one evening can raise you to a level of expectations that you then have to meet for years.

For a goalkeeper, this is especially painful. A goalkeeper’s mistake is visible to everyone, it cannot be “hidden” under successful passes. And after three saved penalties, people will expect you to always be “that one”.

And yet, in this story, there is something that inspires calm: the chain of facts from the thread shows that Golenkov’s character has been building for a long time. Children’s tournaments. Ukrainian school. Matches at the level of “Dynamo” U14. Moving. Life in a boarding school. Competition in Israel. And now — an evening when you didn’t falter against “Barcelona”.

It doesn’t look like a coincidence. It looks like a result.

NAnews — Israel News | Nikk.Agency will follow how this story develops further. Because when a guy appears in Haifa who saves three consecutive penalties against “Barcelona”, — it’s not just about football. It’s about Israel, about repatriation, about the Ukrainian trace, and about how quickly a teenager can become a symbol of an entire night.

And it seems, this is just the beginning.

On July 16, 1990, the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR of the 12th convocation adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine — a crucial document that proclaimed the supremacy and independence of the Ukrainian republic within its territory.

The declaration did not immediately announce secession from the USSR but established the priority of Ukrainian laws, the right to its own armed forces, bank, currency, and a neutral, non-nuclear status. This was the first step toward Ukraine’s independence, which sparked broad public and international response.

This study is dedicated to the reaction to the declaration by the Jewish community of Ukraine, Jewish diasporas abroad (USA, Canada, and others), and the State of Israel.

We explore whether there were official or informal responses from Jewish organizations, consider the participation of Jewish deputies in drafting the document, evaluate the hopes and concerns of Ukraine’s Jewish population, and examine whether Jewish issues were addressed in the discussions and the text of the declaration.

Reaction of the Jewish Community in Ukraine

Inside Ukraine, the adoption of the sovereignty declaration was met with interest and support from emerging Jewish organizations and activists. The late 1980s and early 1990s were marked by a national and cultural revival of Jewish life in Ukraine amid the weakening of Soviet censorship. By the end of 1990, 13 Jewish newspapers and magazines were being published in eight cities, along with cultural societies and Yiddish and Hebrew language circles.

Jewish community leaders saw democratization and Ukraine’s sovereignty as an opportunity to strengthen Jewish culture and civil rights. For example, the Jewish Cultural Society in Kyiv and similar organizations in other cities were actively involved in civic life and partnered with Ukrainian democratic movements.

A pivotal development was the creation of the Rukh Council of Nationalities within the People’s Movement of Ukraine (a mass democratic movement for reforms and sovereignty). One of the founders and leaders of this initiative was Kyiv Jewish activist Alexander Burakovsky, who became the council’s chairman (or co-chair).

The council leadership also included dissident and human rights defender Iosif Zisels, who later recalled:

“I was very active in Rukh — I created the Council of Nationalities within it.”

The council served as a bridge between the Ukrainian national-democratic movement and national minorities, including Jews. From the beginning, Rukh declared its commitment to multiethnic unity and opposition to antisemitism. At Rukh’s founding congress (September 1989), a resolution was adopted urging citizens to oppose all forms of ethnic hatred and antisemitism:

“We must stand in defense of the honor of the Jewish people, their culture, education, and religion.”

During the summer of 1990, as the Ukrainian Supreme Soviet debated the sovereignty declaration, Jewish representatives were not absent from the process. While no specific “Jewish amendments” were introduced, principles of equality and minority protection, championed in part by Jewish activists, were reflected in the document.

Following the declaration’s adoption, many Jewish community leaders in Ukraine publicly welcomed the move. For instance, the editor of the Lviv Jewish newspaper Shofar, Alexander Lizen, said that for him, as a Jew, participating in Ukraine’s national revival was

“a golden opportunity… to help Rukh awaken the nation — not just for Jews, but also for Russians, Ukrainians, Poles, Hungarians, for everyone.”

He and several other activists — such as Borys Dobrivker in Odesa — consciously chose to stay in Ukraine rather than emigrate, because they believed in Ukraine’s democratic future and improvements in the status of Jews.

Jewish organizations began cooperating with Ukrainian ones

The Kyiv Jewish Cultural Society, for example, supported the initiatives of Rukh: in 1990, it called on Jews to join Rukh or at least take part in its activities. That same year, the organization contributed financially to the construction of a memorial in Kyiv to the victims of the 1932–33 Holodomor, thus showing solidarity with Ukrainian suffering.

In Lviv, the first joint Ukrainian-Israeli society “Ukraine–Israel” was established, initiating the installation of a monument to 136,000 Jews — victims of the Lviv ghetto.

These examples demonstrate that the reaction of the Jewish community of Ukraine to the declaration of sovereignty was mostly positive and proactive. Ukrainian Jews saw in the new political course a chance to revive their community and improve relations with the titular nation based on mutual respect.

As Alexander Burakovsky noted at the time, “Ukraine is now the only republic where Jews can live in peace,” emphasizing the positive changes.

Overall, the Jewish community of Ukraine greeted the declaration of sovereignty with enthusiasm and relief.

This was supported by public gestures from Ukrainian leaders. Just a year after the declaration, in the fall of 1991, the speaker of the parliament, Leonid Kravchuk, at a rally commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Babi Yar tragedy, apologized on behalf of Ukraine to the Jewish people for instances of Ukrainian collaboration with the Nazis.

Such steps, unimaginable during Soviet times, were crucial in building trust. Prominent former dissidents — Vyacheslav Chornovil, Yevhen Sverstyuk, Ivan Dziuba, among others — openly wrote and spoke about the need for normalization of Ukrainian-Jewish relations, urging all political forces to adopt the view: “Ukraine must have normal relations with Israel and the entire Jewish world.”

These statements were widely published in the Ukrainian press and perceived by the Jewish community as a guarantee of their safety in the new Ukraine.

Reaction of the Jewish Diaspora and the State of Israel

In the Jewish diaspora outside the USSR, events in Ukraine were closely followed, although a unified position was not immediately developed.

In 1990, the main focus of foreign Jewish organizations was still on the general situation in the USSR—emigration of Soviet Jews, the fight against antisemitism, and reestablishing ties with Jewish communities across the Soviet republics.

Nevertheless, Ukraine’s declaration of sovereignty was noticed and appreciated. The Ukrainian republican government declared its commitment to minority rights, which received positive feedback on the international stage.

Thus, the U.S. Congressional Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) reported in early 1992:

“Ukraine’s treatment of minorities is encouraging; unlike many former Soviet republics, Ukraine has largely avoided ethnic conflict. Interethnic peace has been maintained.”

The same report noted significant progress in Ukraine’s compliance with OSCE human rights obligations.

Notably, among the independent human rights observers in Ukraine in the early ’90s were members of the Jewish diaspora. The Union of Councils for Soviet Jews (UCSJ) established the Ukrainian-American Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law, which monitored the situation in the newly independent Ukraine. These organizations reported in their bulletins that Ukraine’s official policy toward Jews had significantly improved—state antisemitism had disappeared, Jewish life was being revived, and the government pledged to support minority cultural rights.

Western media published reports on the status of Jews in Ukraine during its path to independence

For example, the Los Angeles Times in spring 1991 ran a feature titled “Changing Lifestyles: Some Jews Forgo Israel’s Promise and Elect to Stay in Ukraine.”

The article noted that the democratic Rukh movement had gained the trust of part of the Jewish population, and that many Soviet Jews “chose to stay and lead the revival of Jewish culture in Ukraine—for the first time in decades”, rather than emigrate. The article included emigration statistics: in 1990 alone, 58,528 Jews emigrated from Ukraine to Israel (according to ADL), but tens of thousands remained.

It also emphasized that Rukh condemned antisemitism and some Jewish organizations in Ukraine urged Jews to join Rukh, hoping to secure their rights through active participation in independence. This kind of reporting fostered a cautiously optimistic perception of Ukrainian sovereignty among the Jewish diaspora, especially in the U.S.—concerned about nationalism, but recognizing Ukraine’s commitment to tolerance.

In Israel, there were no major official statements in 1990 regarding Ukraine’s declaration of sovereignty—at the time, Israel did not maintain diplomatic relations with individual Soviet republics. Still, Israeli circles monitored the developments closely.

Between 1990 and 1991, hundreds of thousands of Soviet Jews immigrated to Israel, a significant portion of them from Ukraine.

Israel had a vested interest in ensuring that the collapse of the USSR and the emergence of new states did not lead to instability for Jews. In this context, Ukraine appeared relatively stable. There were no major ethnic clashes, and overt antisemitism was marginal.

The Israeli press noted that, unlike some nationalist uprisings, Ukraine’s independence movement was moderate, civic in nature, and proclaimed protection of all communities. Israeli diplomats began informal contact with Ukrainian elites even before the USSR’s collapse.

According to accounts from that time, in 1991, Israeli embassy staff in Moscow regularly visited Kyiv and held informal discussions with Ukrainian MPs and journalists. They reported to Jerusalem that antisemitism was not being encouraged at the official level and that minorities seemed to feel safe.

Israel, however, took a cautious approach to recognizing the independence of Soviet republics—choosing to wait for the U.S. and international consensus first.

Once Ukraine held its referendum and declared full independence in December 1991, Israel was one of the first to establish diplomatic ties (on December 26, 1991).

Israeli leaders welcomed independent Ukraine, recognizing its importance as the homeland of a large aliyah population and a strategic partner in Eastern Europe. Israeli-Ukrainian relations quickly developed on the basis of mutual respect.

Notably, even before independence, Ukraine supported restoring Soviet-Israeli diplomatic ties and moved to deepen its own connection with Israel. (For example, the Ukraine-Israel Friendship Society was founded in Lviv in 1990.) All this shows that both the State of Israel and the global Jewish diaspora viewed Ukraine’s sovereignty declaration not with negativity—but with cautious hope.

Directly or indirectly, Jews abroad supported Ukraine’s aspiration for freedom, expecting the new republic to become a democratic and safe home for Jews.

Participation of Jewish Deputies in the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR

The Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR of the 12th convocation (elected in spring 1990) included many representatives of national minorities—Russians, Poles, Jews, Tatars, Armenians, and others. It is difficult to determine the exact number of Jewish deputies, as nationality was often not specified in official biographies.

Nevertheless, available sources confirm that Jews were indeed present in the Ukrainian SSR’s parliament and played an active role.

In Kyiv in 1990, there was an attempt to form an informal “Jewish Council of Ukraine”—an association of deputies and public figures of Jewish origin. According to archival data, it was intended to include about 20 People’s Deputies of Ukraine.

This suggests that at least about two dozen members of the Verkhovna Rada were of Jewish origin. A significant number of them were elected from major industrial cities and academic centers (Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odesa, Dnipropetrovsk, etc.)—areas with traditionally large Jewish populations.

Some of the Jewish deputies belonged to the democratic opposition, while others were part of the communist majority. However, they ultimately stood united on the issue of sovereignty. On July 16, 1990, 355 deputies voted in favor of the Declaration of Sovereignty, with only 4 against—clearly, the Jewish deputies were among those who supported it.

Regarding the drafting of the declaration, the main author on behalf of the opposition was the lawyer Serhiy Holovaty (ethnically Ukrainian), while the leadership’s version came from the working group of the Presidium of the Supreme Council.

There were no direct representatives of the Jewish community in this group. Nevertheless, ideas important to the Jewish population were reflected in the final text, largely thanks to the cooperative atmosphere fostered in part by Jewish activists within the Rukh movement.

During parliamentary debates, the opposition’s “People’s Council” (125 democratic deputies) insisted on including principles of human rights and ethnic equality in the declaration. These provisions were also supported by many communist deputies, who believed it was necessary to assure all ethnic groups in Ukraine of their protected rights. As participants later recalled, the session was held under public pressure—people were protesting outside the parliament demanding sovereignty. Under these circumstances, the deputies almost unanimously approved language affirming civil equality.

In the preamble of the Declaration, it was stated that all power in the republic belongs to the people of Ukraine, and in the section on citizenship, it was declared: “All citizens are equal before the law, regardless of origin, social and property status, racial and national identity, gender, education, political beliefs, religious convictions…”.

It was further emphasized that citizens of all ethnicities together form the people of Ukraine. These principles directly aligned with the interests of the Jewish community: equality regardless of nationality or faith meant that the new Ukraine rejected any form of discrimination against Jews. It is no surprise that Jewish deputies supported these principles.

Thus, Jews in the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR were not excluded from the process of adopting this historic document. On the contrary, they voted in favor of the declaration and thus contributed to the establishment of Ukrainian sovereignty. Their political affiliations varied—some were communist reformers, others were in the democratic opposition. But the general consensus was that a sovereign Ukraine should become a state of equal opportunity for all nationalities—a view supported and promoted by Jewish parliamentarians.

Hopes and Concerns of Ukrainian Jews Regarding Sovereignty

For Ukraine’s Jewish population, the declaration of sovereignty was a moment that sparked mixed emotions—hope for positive change, but also uncertainty and concern about the future.

On the one hand, the declaration promised a solid legal foundation for protecting the rights of Jews as a national minority. For the first time in decades, principles of equality and freedom of conscience were proclaimed at such a high level. Ukrainian Jews, having just emerged from the era of state-sponsored antisemitism (such as the “Doctors’ Plot” and anti-Zionist propaganda of the 1970s–80s), saw it as a breath of fresh air.

These hopes were based on the belief that “Ukraine would no longer pursue discriminatory policies.” And indeed, soon after independence, the Ukrainian government passed concrete legislation building on the 1990 declaration: in November 1991—the Declaration of the Rights of Nationalities of Ukraine, and in June 1992—the Law on National Minorities, which provided broad guarantees for language, cultural, and religious rights. These steps demonstrated the seriousness of intentions outlined in 1990.

Jewish leaders noted that state antisemitism was fading into the past and that the highest officials were showing respect for Jewish heritage and memory (for example, by participating in Babyn Yar commemorations and initiating dialogue with Israel). This inspired optimism, especially among younger Jewish activists who saw Ukraine as their future home.

As mentioned earlier, part of the Jewish intelligentsia chose not to emigrate but instead to help build a new life within Ukraine. Many shared the hope that independent Ukraine could become a democratic home for people of all ethnicities. Indeed, in the early 1990s there was a true revival of Jewish life: Jewish schools, libraries, and theaters were opening; films and books on Jewish themes were being produced; and ties with global Jewry were strengthening. These changes were seen as fulfillment of the hopes sparked in 1990.

On the other hand, a large part of the Jewish population also had concerns rooted in historical experience and the uncertainty of 1990. First, the collapsing Soviet market pointed to looming economic and social crises.

Many Jews feared that such instability could provoke nationalist backlash or lead to Jews being scapegoated. As noted by Kyiv activist Burakovsky, the mass emigration of Jews at that time was driven not only by new opportunities but also by “political uncertainty, economic hardship, and environmental problems (like Chernobyl)”. In other words, many were leaving “just in case,” unsure whether Ukraine would remain stable.

Second, there was lingering distrust toward ordinary citizens (the mob mentality).

According to some Jews who stayed, “we trust Rukh, but we’re unsure about the general public,” whose reactions could be unpredictable. This fear came from memories of early 20th-century pogroms and WWII atrocities perpetrated by mobs with official indifference.

While the new Ukrainian leadership expressed support for Jews, the question remained—what did the people think? To prevent possible incidents, the democratic government took steps: it blocked the Russian ultranationalist group Pamyat from operating in Ukrainian cities; police guarded synagogues in response to anonymous threats, and more.

Fortunately, no significant antisemitic violence occurred in Ukraine during 1990–1991. Nevertheless, the sense of unease among parts of the Jewish population lingered, as evidenced by high emigration rates.

By the end of 1991—after the independence referendum—many of the Jewish community’s fears began to fade.

Ukraine was proving itself to be a relatively peaceful and tolerant state. In international reports from 1992, Ukraine was cited as a “model of interethnic harmony,” especially considering its large Russian and minority populations.

The Jewish community saw that their worst fears—such as a return to state-sponsored antisemitism—had not materialized. By the mid-1990s, it was clear that antisemitism in independent Ukraine was declining, both institutionally and socially.

According to the Euro-Asian Jewish Congress, incidents of antisemitic discrimination by state agencies had ceased in the early 1990s; antisemitism became marginal, limited to fringe publications and individual extremists. This progress was rooted in the decisions of 1990–1991 that laid the foundation for equality. Thus, the hopes of Ukraine’s Jews linked to the declaration of sovereignty were largely fulfilled, while earlier fears gradually subsided.

Conclusion

The adoption of the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine on July 16, 1990, was a turning point not only for the Ukrainian people but also for all national communities of the republic, including Jews. The analysis leads to the following conclusions:

• The official and unofficial response of Jewish organizations in Ukraine was generally positive. Jewish activists actively engaged in the processes of perestroika and sovereignty, seeing in them an opportunity to secure their rights. As early as 1990, Jewish communities (in Kyiv, Lviv, Odesa, and others) cooperated with the Rukh movement, jointly opposing antisemitism and defending democratic ideals. No major Jewish organization in Ukraine opposed the declaration; on the contrary, many publicly supported it. They viewed the declaration as a guarantee of equality. Abroad, major Jewish institutions (such as the World Jewish Congress and the American Jewish Committee) did not issue special statements on Ukraine in 1990, as their focus was broader—the entire USSR. However, indirectly, the reaction was positive: international Jewish human rights groups noted the absence of pogroms or persecution during the rise of the Ukrainian national movement. In 1990, the State of Israel maintained official neutrality, awaiting Ukraine’s formal independence. Yet immediately after the December 1, 1991 referendum, Israel was among the first to recognize the new Ukraine. This signaled trust: Israelis saw Ukraine as a friendly state where Jews were not persecuted.

• Jewish deputies participated in drafting and adopting the declaration, though there were no clearly identified Jewish authors. Jewish presence in the 12th convocation of the Ukrainian Supreme Soviet was significant—dozens of MPs were of Jewish origin. They represented various political factions but unanimously supported sovereignty. It can be said that the Jewish community’s contribution to the declaration’s ideology was evident in the proclamation of Ukraine as a multiethnic democratic state. Jewish deputies, alongside other minority representatives, acted as a kind of parliamentary conscience, reminding the majority of the value of tolerance.

• Ukraine’s Jewish population in 1990 viewed the event with both hope and concern, though optimism predominated. Many Ukrainian Jews saw the declaration as a long-awaited step toward freedom, promising cultural and religious revival. Jewish leaders spoke of a new era of cooperation between Ukrainians and Jews. At the same time, there were fears: historical trauma, economic instability, and rising extremism raised concerns that things could go wrong. These fears were compounded by ongoing emigration—over 58,000 Jews left for Israel in 1990 alone. Still, some 400,000 Jews remained in Ukraine, and by the end of 1991 it became clear that their situation was improving—the state committed to protecting minorities, there were no ethnic clashes, and antisemitism was openly condemned by major forces. Statements by Jewish activists from that time reflect a dominant tone of cautious optimism. The prevailing sentiment was: “Yes, there are risks, but we cannot miss this chance to live with dignity in our homeland.” History proved that this optimism was largely justified—Jews in independent Ukraine gained opportunities for development that were unthinkable in the Soviet Union.

• The “Jewish issue” was present in the declaration and its discussions indirectly, through general references to equality and freedoms. The Jewish people or antisemitism were not specifically mentioned—which made sense, given the declaration’s universal nature. Still, the spirit of the document—nation-building without discrimination and with guarantees for all cultures—implied that Jewish interests were considered. The declaration paved the way for further legislation on minority rights and freedom of religion. In parliamentary debates, democratic leaders repeatedly emphasized that independent Ukraine must exemplify interethnic harmony—especially in contrast to conflicts elsewhere in the USSR. This consensus helped avoid the notion of “special status” for the titular nation. Ukraine was proclaimed the common homeland of all its citizens—something vitally important for the Jewish population.

In conclusion, it is clear that Ukraine’s Jewish community welcomed the proclamation of sovereignty with support and active participation, seeing it as a path to democratic change and enhanced security.

Jewish diasporas abroad and the State of Israel, though not issuing immediate official responses, generally viewed Ukraine’s emergence as a sovereign state positively—especially admiring its leaders’ commitment to tolerance.

The event of July 16, 1990, was a turning point in the Jewish history of Ukraine: it marked the beginning of a new chapter in Ukrainian-Jewish relations, grounded in partnership and mutual respect—as confirmed both by the documents of the time and the subsequent development of independent Ukraine.

The story of Moshe (Moshe-Tzvi) Segal is the trajectory from Poltava to Jerusalem. Youth in the Ukrainian Jewish environment, strict study routine, and the first Zionist circles turn into a public gesture of freedom at the Western Wall on Yom Kippur in 1930. He gave the final sound of the shofar — tekiah gedolah — and was arrested by the British police; that same evening, Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak Kook secured his release. This frame marks the beginning of the long journey of a man who not only protested but also built institutions of Jewish life.

Birth and Childhood in Poltava (1904–1924)

Moshe Segal was born in Poltava on February 23, 1904 (6 Shvat 5664) to the family of Avraham-Mordechai ha-Levi Segal and Henna-Leah Minkin. His home was traditionally Jewish, with deep religious and Zionist traditions.

From an early age, he was distinguished by his eagerness for books. Segal’s “second school” was not a gymnasium but the Poltava Jewish Community Library, where he spent hours reading philosophical treatises, chronicles, and journalism. There he first became acquainted with the works of medieval thinkers, while simultaneously getting involved in Poltava’s Jewish youth organizations: already in 1916 he joined “Tikvat Yisrael,” and from 1920 he actively participated in “Tzeirei Zion” and “Hechalutz.” These unions combined learning with practice and instilled in teenagers the aspiration for aliyah — relocation to Eretz Yisrael.

During World War I, the Mir Yeshiva was evacuated to the city for several years (1914–1921), and Moshe studied at the Mir Yeshiva in Poltava from about the age of ten to fifteen. This accustomed him to the discipline of the beit midrash and the “bundle” of three words: Torah, Eretz Yisrael, action.

By the early 1920s, Moshe Segal had ceased to be just a curious teenager. He became one of those who connected the “reading” youth with the “practitioners”: he participated in organizing hachsharot — agricultural internships to prepare for relocation to Eretz Yisrael. These camps helped teenagers and young people not only physically prepare for future life but also feel the unity of the cause. Moshe supervised the dispatch of young people to farms in southern Ukraine, ensuring that the community in Poltava was not only a center for studying books but also a launching pad for action.

These twenty years in Poltava shaped him as a “man of action.” It was there that book learning, public work, and the first leadership qualities merged, which he carried throughout his life — from the arrest at the Western Wall to participation in underground organizations and the establishment of Israel.

Reference: What is the “Mir Yeshiva” and what does it have to do with Poltava

The “Mir Yeshiva” is one of the most influential Lithuanian (Ashkenazi) Torah academies. Founded in the town of Mir (now Belarus) in 1815–1817 by the Tiktin family (Rabbis Shmuel, Avraham, and Chaim-Leib Tiktin), it became the flagship of the “Volozhin” school with an emphasis on deep Talmudic study and strict academic discipline. At the turn of the 19th–20th centuries, it was strengthened by Rabbi Eliyahu-Baruch Kamai and his son-in-law, the future Rosh Yeshiva Rabbi Eliezer Yehuda Finkel; the spiritual “engine” of the interwar period was the mashgiach Rabbi Yerucham Levovitz — under him, Mir was called “the yeshiva where future heads of yeshivas are raised.”

The key to our topic is the Poltava period. With the start of World War I, in 1914, the yeshiva was evacuated from Mir to Poltava, where it operated until 1921. It was during these years that Moshe Segal studied at “Mir” in Poltava: the beit midrash, the rhythm of study, partner responsibility, and the “bundle” of three words — Torah, Eretz Yisrael, and action — were formed in him not in an abstract “Lithuanian” environment but in the specific Ukrainian Poltava.

After the Poltava period, the Mir Yeshiva had a rather dramatic fate:

• 1921 — after the Civil War and Soviet power in Ukraine, it became impossible to maintain a religious educational institution. The yeshiva left Poltava and returned to the town of Mir (then Poland).
• 1939 — after the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and the division of Poland, part of Belarus went to the USSR. The yeshiva found itself under Soviet rule, making its existence impossible.
• 1940–1941 — the leaders and students of the yeshiva moved to Lithuania. From there, thanks to the help of Japanese consul Chiune Sugihara and Dutch diplomat Jan Zwartendijk, several hundred students received transit visas.
• 1941–1947 — refugees from the yeshiva ended up in Shanghai (China), which was then under Japanese occupation. There, the yeshiva continued to function, which is considered a unique case of preserving a traditional Talmudic school during the Holocaust years.

During World War II, “Mir” experienced a unique escape “via the eastern route”: Mir → Vilna/Keidan (Lithuania) → transit visas → Kobe (Japan, 1941) → Shanghai (1941–1947).

After the war, two main centers grew from this line: in Jerusalem (officially established in 1944–1945, Beit Yisrael district) and in Brooklyn (Mirrer Yeshiva, established in the 1950s under the leadership of Rabbi Avraham Kalmanowitz). The Jerusalem branch was successively headed by Rabbi Chaim Shmulevitz, Rabbi Nachum Partzovitz, Rabbi Binyamin Beinush Finkel, Rabbi Nosson Tzvi Finkel; today it is led by Rabbi Eliezer Yehuda Finkel along with other senior roshei yeshiva (including Rabbi Yitzchok Ezrachi).

Where and how many students now. The Jerusalem “Mir” is the largest yeshiva in the world: according to open data, it has about over nine thousand students (≈9–9.6 thousand). The American Mirrer Yeshiva in Brooklyn has several hundred students (school branch and post-school program), which is significantly smaller but historically key to preserving tradition in the USA.

The conclusion for our material is simple: “Mir” is the “Oxford” of the Torah world; Poltava was its temporary home in 1914–1921; Segal is one of those whom the “Poltava Mir” shaped. Therefore, in his biography, we highlight both the yeshiva itself and its connection with Poltava in such detail.

Poltava: Ukrainian and Jewish History to the Present Day

Middle Ages. The first mention of Poltava dates back to 1174. At that time, it was a fortified settlement on the Vorskla River, part of the Principality of Pereyaslav.

Tatar-Mongol Invasion. In the 13th century, Poltava, like other cities of Kievan Rus, suffered from Batu’s campaigns (1237–1240). The city was destroyed, the population partially exterminated or taken captive. For several centuries, the territory was under the influence of the Golden Horde.

Polish-Lithuanian Period. From the 14th century, Poltava was under the rule of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and then the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. During this period, the first Jewish families and traders appeared.

Cossack Era. In the 17th century, Poltava became the center of a Cossack regiment. During Bohdan Khmelnytsky’s uprising (1648–1657), the city played a significant role in the struggle for autonomy.

Battle of Poltava. In 1709, the decisive battle of the Great Northern War took place here: the alliance of Charles XII and Ivan Mazepa was defeated by Peter I. After this, Poltava was secured for the Moscow state.

Second Half of the 18th Century. By this time, a Jewish community already existed in Poltava, although Jews were formally restricted from living in central areas of Ukraine. Despite this, the first synagogues, charitable funds, and schools were formed here.

19th Century. In 1802, Poltava received the status of a provincial center. The city became the cultural capital of Left-Bank Ukraine: Ivan Kotlyarevsky worked here, Nikolai Gogol began his studies, and theaters opened. By this time, the Jewish community had reached significant influence: according to the 1897 census, 11,046 Jews (20.5% of the population) lived in Poltava. There were 10 synagogues, a Talmud Torah with 300 students, a women’s school, a library (8,000 books), and a Jewish hospital.

World War I and Interwar Period. From 1914–1921, the famous Mir Yeshiva evacuated from Belarus was located in Poltava — one of the largest centers for Torah study. During this time, future activist Moshe Segal studied here. In 1926, about 93,000 Jews lived in the province, and in the city itself — 18,476 (20.1% of the population). But by 1939, the share had decreased to 9.9%.

World War II. The Germans entered Poltava on September 18, 1941. Already on September 25, about 5,000 Jews were shot, and on November 23 — another 3,000. In total, during the occupation, more than 22,000 Jews died in the region.

Soviet Period. After the war, the community partially recovered, but under atheistic policies. In 1959, the authorities closed the last functioning synagogue, and Jewish life went underground. Meanwhile, the city developed as an industrial and educational center of the Ukrainian SSR.

Independent Ukraine. Since the late 1980s, the community began to revive. In the 1990s, a Chabad center, the “Or Avner” school, and the “Hesed Nefesh” program appeared in Poltava. According to the 2001 census, about 1,800 Jews (0.3% of the population) lived in the city.

Russian Aggression (2022–2025). Poltava was again under attack.

• April 2, 2022 — first rocket attacks on infrastructure.
• September 3, 2024 — rockets hit the Military Institute of Communications and a hospital: dozens killed, hundreds injured.
• February 2, 2025 — a rocket destroyed a residential five-story building, killing 14 people, including children.
• March 28, 2025 — mass attack by “shaheds” on industrial zones.
• July 3, 2025 — drones hit the military enlistment office and neighboring houses.

Today. Despite the threats, Poltava remains part of independent Ukraine — the administrative center of the Poltava region and an important industrial and cultural hub of Central Ukraine. According to various data, about 280–320 thousand people live in the city, and together with the surrounding villages in the urban community — up to 600–650 thousand. The Jewish community, though small, is active: the synagogue, Chabad center, “Or Avner” school, social projects, and memorial initiatives remind of the past and help shape the future.

Jews of Poltava: Notable Figures

The history of the Jewish community of Poltava is reflected in the biographies of its outstanding natives and residents. These names are known far beyond Ukraine, and their contributions have become part of world Jewish history.

• Yitzhok Yitzhak Krasilshchikov — a rabbi nicknamed “The Gaon of Poltava.” He was the author of a fundamental commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud and is considered one of the key figures in its study in the 20th century.
• Elias Tcherikover — born and raised in Poltava. Historian, one of the founders of the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research in Vilna. His works are dedicated to the history of Jewish life and pogroms in Eastern Europe.
• Yitzhak Ben-Zvi — a native of Poltava, the second president of the State of Israel. In Poltava, he received a Jewish education, participated in the Zionist movement, and in Israel became one of the central state figures.
• Alina Treiger — born in Poltava, became the first female rabbi ordained in Germany after World War II. Her activities became a symbol of a new stage in the development of Judaism in Europe.
• Jacob (Yasha) Gegna — a klezmer musician from Poltava, a famous violinist and teacher. His name is associated with the development of Jewish musical tradition in the early 20th century.
• Pavel Gertsyk — a Poltava colonel during the time of Ivan Mazepa. He came from a Jewish family that moved to Poltava. His family occupied a prominent place in the Cossack and Ukrainian elite of the 18th century.

The Move of Moshe Segal to Palestine and the Path to the Kotel

In 1924, Moshe repatriated to Palestine with his parents.

In Palestine, Segal worked as a stonemason, studied at “Merkaz ha-Rav”, and got involved in “Beitar”.

Summer-Fall 1929 — defense of Tel Aviv during the Arab riots; at the Kotel, he participated in demonstrations and organizational work. In the fall of 1930, he was detained for several days for participating in a protest against the visit to Palestine of the British Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies Dr. Drummond Shiels; a few days later, all detainees were released by order of the High Commissioner.

Episode at the Kotel (1930): How It Happened

After the riots of 1929, police restrictions of the mandate administration were in effect at the Western Wall: it was forbidden to bring “demonstrative religious items” and blow the shofar; the police enforced this already in 1930 (the law would come later).

Yom Kippur 5691 fell on the evening of October 1 → evening of October 2, 1930 (not “September 21” — this date is mistakenly mentioned in several materials).

Segal took a shofar in advance from Rabbi Yitzhak Avigdor Orenstein (the first official “rabbi of the Wall”) and hid it under his tallit. At the end of Ne’ilah, he gave a long final sound tekiah gedolah, as is customary to conclude the fast; the police detained him on the spot and took him to the Kishle station.

The Chief Rabbi of Eretz Yisrael Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak Kook called the administration and stated that he would not conclude the fast until Segal was released; closer to midnight, Moshe was free.

Segal did this as a religious-political gesture: to conclude Yom Kippur with the prescribed tekiah gedolah at the holy site and remind that this place is a sanctuary of the Jewish people.

He consciously concluded Yom Kippur with a tekiah gedolah at the Kotel, openly challenging British prohibitions and asserting the right of Jews to pray according to their custom. The gesture worked as mobilization: after his arrest and Rabbi Kook’s intervention, the shofar sounded there annually until 1948, turning into a ritual of nonviolent disobedience.

In the following years until 1948, at Segal’s initiative, young people annually smuggled a shofar to the Kotel and gave a tekiah gedolah — despite arrests and fines.

What Was This Law and Where Is the “Logic” of the Dates

The International Commission on the Western Wall (Chairman — Eliel Löfgren, members — Charles Barde, Johann van Kempen) completed its work in December 1930. The commission recognized the Muslim waqf‘s ownership of the wall and the plaza, and for Jews — the right of “free access for prayer” with reservations: a ban on the shofar and a list of what can/cannot be brought to the wall.

These findings were turned into law in the Palestine (Western or Wailing Wall) Order in Council, 1931, which came into force on June 8, 1931; for violation — fine of 50 pounds or imprisonment up to 6 months. Consequently, in 1930, Segal was detained under existing police instructions, and in 1931, the same regime was codified.

After the “Sound”: Not Only Protest but Also Construction

Segal remains a man of long distance.

In the 1930s and 1940s, he went through right-wing national movements (Etzel/Irgun from 1931, contacts with “Lehi” from 1943; in parallel — Brit ha-Biryonim 1931–1932, Brit ha-Hashmonaim from 1937) — this is evident from his organizational “trail.” After the declaration of the state, he moved into community routine: in the 1950s, he participated in the establishment of Kfar Chabad (the settlement was founded in 1949), worked in agriculture and the secretariat.

After June 1967 (Six-Day War), Segal returned to the Old City and contributed to the revival of the “Tzemach Tzedek” synagogue and regular minyan; in the 1970s, he participated in religious and public initiatives to strengthen presence at holy sites (including movements like “El Har ha-Shem”/“El Har ha-Bayit”).

Recognition and Memory

In 1974, he was awarded the title of “Yakir Yerushalayim” (Honored Citizen of Jerusalem). This is one of the highest municipal awards given to people who have made a significant contribution to the development of the city.

In his memory, a square near Mount Zion in Jerusalem is named after him. This fact emphasizes that his name and act — blowing the shofar at the Western Wall — are entrenched not only in historical memory but also in the urban toponymy of Israel’s capital.

He died on Yom Kippur, September 25, 1985 (10 Tishrei 5746), and is buried on the Mount of Olives.

Final Note

For our section “Jews from Ukraine“, this is almost a textbook example.

Poltava is not just a line in a questionnaire, but a school of character: the library and circles, study at the Mir Yeshiva specifically in Poltava, experience of self-organization and hachshara. Jerusalem is the continuation of the same line: where formal rules humiliate the meaning of prayer, he blows; where the noise subsides, he builds — a settlement, a synagogue, community institutions.

And yes, if someone looks up “September 21, 1930” in the wiki — we will point to October 1–2, 1930 as the real dates of Yom Kippur 5691 and that the ban was initially police, and on June 8, 1931 it became law. This removes all “logical” nitpicks.

Ukraine began 2026 with one of the most sensitive and anticipated decisions — the exchange of prisoners.
This is not a symbolic gesture, but about specific people who, after months and years of captivity, returned home.

On February 5, another exchange took place between Ukraine and Russia.
The information was officially confirmed by President Volodymyr Zelensky.

First exchange of 2026: key figures

As a result of the exchange, 157 Ukrainians were released.

This includes both military personnel and civilians.
Among those returned are fighters of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the National Guard, and the State Border Guard Service.

According to the president, these are soldiers, sergeants, and officers.
Most of them had been in captivity since 2022.

What Zelensky said

The president specifically emphasized that the exchange was made possible by the actions of Ukrainian units on the front and the work of negotiation groups.

He thanked everyone involved in the process of freeing the prisoners, as well as the military who effectively form the exchange fund.

According to him, without the results of the Ukrainian army, such exchanges would be impossible.
Every advance on the front directly affects the chance to bring people home.

Work continues without pauses

According to the president, Ukraine does not consider this exchange as a completed stage.

Work is being done on each name.
The goal remains the same — to bring everyone back.

This principle, as analysts note, is consistently emphasized by NANews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency, when it comes to the humanitarian dimension of the war and Kyiv’s long-term strategy.

Negotiation background: Abu Dhabi

The exchange on February 5 was a continuation of the negotiation process that previously took place in Abu Dhabi with the participation of representatives from Ukraine, Russia, and the USA.

As a result of these consultations, an agreement was reached on a possible exchange of 314 prisoners of war.
This was reported by the special envoy of the US president Steve Witkoff.

According to him, this is the first large-scale exchange in the last five months, resulting from lengthy and substantive negotiations.
The American side also expects further progress in the coming weeks.

The most difficult categories of prisoners

A separate topic remains the issue of exchanging fighters of the Azov unit.

Russia very rarely agrees to their release.
Throughout the full-scale war, there have been only a few isolated cases of the return of servicemen from this unit.

According to Ukrainian military personnel, there is practically no interest from the Russian side in such exchanges, making negotiations particularly difficult.

Context of previous exchanges

The previous exchange between Ukraine and Russia took place on October 2.
At that time, 185 Ukrainian military personnel and 20 civilians returned home.

Among those released were defenders of Mariupol, fighters of Azovstal, and guards of the Chernobyl NPP.

Most of them had also been in captivity since 2022.
The age of the released military personnel then ranged from 26 to 59 years, civilians from 25 to 60.

Another exchange took place on August 24, but it was less large-scale.

Why this exchange is important

The exchange on February 5 is not just a humanitarian event.
It shows that even amid complex military actions, negotiation channels remain operational.

For Ukraine, it is a signal to families who continue to wait.
For international partners, it is confirmation that dialogue, albeit limited, is possible.

And for those released, it is the first step towards returning to life outside of war.

In the Z-segment of the internet, a characteristic howl has been heard since the morning of February 5, 2026. Grinding, hysteria, curses.

“Betrayal,” “Musk sold out,” “the Ukrainians pushed through” — a standard set that is heard from afar and easily recognized by intonation. But sometimes, through the noise, a rare and unexpectedly sane thought breaks through: this is called technological lag.

And with this, arguing is pointless.

When the 21st Century Collides with a War of the Past

The beginning of the second quarter of the 21st century. The fourth year of full-scale war.

And the army, which for years called itself “the second in the world,” still has not acquired its own stable, protected communication system. Data exchange, unit management, fire coordination — all this has long relied on Telegram and Starlink satellite internet, including terminals used outside official procedures.

Yes, the Ukrainian side also actively uses satellite communication. But the fundamental difference is that for Ukraine, this is an element of the system, not its replacement.

And no one in Kyiv built a mythology around the “second army in the world.”

What Actually Happened

Starlink was disabled in Ukraine for all unauthorized terminals — at the official request of Ukraine.

This is not about “Russian terminals” per se and not about targeted blockades. A territorial control principle was introduced: any Starlink terminal operating in Ukraine without coordination with the Ukrainian side is subject to disconnection.

This decision was implemented through SpaceX’s technical capabilities and was a direct response to the recorded use of satellite communication in combat operations without the permission of the state where the war is taking place.

What Preceded This Decision

On January 25, radio technology specialist Sergey “Flash” Beskrestnov, advisor to Mykhailo Fedorov on technological directions, publicly stated the probable use of Starlink satellite internet by the Russian side on strike UAVs like “Shahed.”

This was not about isolated episodes but about the systematic use of satellite communication for targeting and controlling drones.

After this, Ukraine approached SpaceX with a request for help in stopping the unauthorized use of Starlink in the combat zone. Elon Musk publicly responded to the request.

Soon it became known that SpaceX began implementing countermeasures. On February 1, Musk noted that measures against unauthorized use of Starlink likely already had an effect.

Ukraine’s Decision and the “White List”

Minister of Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov announced the gradual implementation of a system where only authorized Starlink terminals can operate in Ukraine.

The key point is not “who uses it,” but where and under what conditions.

The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine adopted a resolution on the introduction of the so-called “white list”. This means the following:

— only verified and registered terminals operate in Ukraine
— all devices outside official registration are subject to disconnection
— the geographical principle is more important than the origin of the equipment

This is why the effect was massive.

Why This Was a Blow to the Russian Army

According to intelligence, Russian units used up to 20,000 Starlink terminals, investing more than 20 million dollars in this gray communication channel.

After disconnection, these terminals turned into useless equipment.

Dependence on satellite communication in some units reached a critical level. Switching to outdated radio means drastically reduced coordination speed.

In a significant part of the front, assault actions were effectively paralyzed due to the inability to manage fire and units operationally.

FPV Drones and Management Degradation

A separate blow hit the drone component.

The range of relay drones sharply decreased. Returning to analog channels made control vulnerable to electronic warfare.

What used to work for tens of kilometers now fails on approach.

Communication That Unmasks Headquarters

Returning to bulky Soviet-type communication systems has another effect — deadly dangerous.

If compact Starlink antennas transmitted a signal with a narrow beam into the sky, remaining inconspicuous, then old radio stations work like powerful beacons.

For radio-technical intelligence, this means quick de-anonymization of headquarters. Coordinates are calculated in minutes, followed by a strike.

The loss of Starlink is not just the absence of communication. It is the exposure of the entire management structure.

Is There a Way Out

In short — no.

Russia does not have its own full-fledged Starlink analogs in hardware. Projects exist at the level of concepts and presentations, but sanctions, chip shortages, and the lack of components make them unrealizable in the foreseeable future.

Even in an optimistic scenario, creating its own satellite network will take several years. In the conditions of the 2026 war, this is equivalent to the absence of a solution.

Returning to communication methods of the last century is a direct path to tactical and strategic fiasco.

Why This Is More Important Than One Episode

The story with Starlink is not about Elon Musk and not about emotions in Telegram. It is a demonstration of how in modern warfare, not numbers and rhetoric, but technology and control over infrastructure decide.

This is exactly what NANews — Israel News | Nikk.Agency wrote about earlier, analyzing how technological gaps become a key factor on the battlefield.

When communication disappears, management disappears. And without management, even a large army quickly becomes blind.

In the Ukrainian feed corn market, there is a steady upward price trend. Active demand from domestic and foreign buyers continues to outpace supply, creating a tense situation and pushing the market upward.

According to APK-Inform analysts (February 3, 2026), at the beginning of February, purchase prices were mainly fixed in the range of 8.6–10 thousand UAH per ton on CPT terms. The supply of grain is uneven and, as a rule, in small batches — most often at maximum or close to maximum prices.

Experts point to a combination of several factors. On one hand, there is high interest from consumers. On the other, there is insufficient active grain supply from producers. Additional pressure is exerted by the export market, where Ukrainian corn remains in demand and competitive.

Price growth has also been recorded in port infrastructure. In Ukrainian ports, the cost of feed corn has risen and was mainly in the range of $205–212 per ton on CPT-port terms. This reflects the increasing competition among traders for available volumes and the high pace of export shipments.

Export statistics confirm the scale of demand. According to Spike Brokers, in January 2026, corn exports from Ukraine amounted to 2.66 million tons, which remains one of the key indicators of the current season.

The largest importers of Ukrainian corn were Turkey (625.1 thousand tons) and Italy (606.7 thousand tons). Significant volumes were also purchased by Spain, Egypt, and Tunisia. Among EU countries, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Portugal showed activity.

Israel stands out in this statistic, having imported 76.7 thousand tons of Ukrainian corn in January. For the Israeli feed grain market, this is an important element of food stability, especially amid unstable global prices and rising costs in the livestock sector.

In this context, materials published on the platform NAnews — Israel News | Nikk.Agency allow considering the export of Ukrainian corn as part of a broader economic link between Ukraine and Israel, where agricultural supplies directly affect domestic markets and price balance.

Analysts agree: if the current level of demand and limited supply persists, the feed corn market will not receive impulses for a decline in the near future. On the contrary, active purchases, including the Israeli direction, will continue to support high price levels, forming a new benchmark for the market at the end of winter and the beginning of spring.

There is a feeling that the United States repeatedly appears as a country that abandons those to whom it gave promises yesterday. This is about perception — external, global. And today it works against the US no less than real decisions.

Author — Valeriy Pekar, lecturer at Kyiv-Mohyla Business School.
The original post was published on February 4, 2026 on Facebook.

The history of the Kurds is almost a textbook on disappointment. A people who are approached when the hardest and dirtiest work needs to be done. To contain ISIS — the Kurds are needed. To destabilize Assad’s regime — again the Kurds. Promises, political signals, hopes. And then — emptiness. Formally, there are always justifications: Turkey, balance of interests, a complex region. But from the outside, it looks simple: promised and then refused.

A similar logic worked in Iran. Young people who took to the streets, seized administrative buildings, risked their lives, did not do it in a vacuum. They were directly told about support, encouraged not to retreat. The outcome is known: the protest drowned in blood, thousands of broken lives. The price of this “withdrawal” for the US will echo more than once — both morally and politically.

Venezuela is a separate case, but with the same aftertaste. The opposition, which had a chance to restart the country, turned out to be a bargaining chip. The path chosen by Washington is unlikely to lead to stability. Rather — to a new wave of violence, and not only locally. In such scenarios, blood is often shed far beyond the region, including the lives of American soldiers.

The example of Ukraine is so obvious that it does not require a detailed retelling. It has already become part of collective memory — in Eastern Europe, in Israel, and across the ocean.

Against this background, it is especially indicative how the topic of trust in the US is increasingly discussed in the Israeli and regional context. Including on analytical platforms like NAnews — News about Israel and Ukraine | Nikk.Agency, where the conversation about allies has long ceased to be abstract and has turned into a practical security issue.

Even in Asia, the logic is the same. China is unlikely to go to direct war over Taiwan. Its strategy is slow strangulation, pressure, division, a classic game of Go. And here many are convinced: the US will again promise a lot, but at the decisive moment will fear escalation and blackmail. Retreat will be costly — both economically and geopolitically.

The scenario of Russia’s collapse also does not look comforting. The North and the Far East are zones of vital interests for the US. But if China actively enters there, Washington will most likely prefer to step back, shifting the burden of problems to Japan and Canada. This has happened before.

A special place in this chain is Israel. Within the country, pro-American sentiments are still strong. It seems that US support has always been there: the diaspora, values, common rhetoric. But it is worth opening the history of Israeli-American relations — and the illusion quickly dissipates. There are too many episodes that are remembered in Israel as cold calculation and refusal at a critical moment.

This is not about anti-Americanism. In US history, there have been different periods, different administrations, different approaches. Both under Democrats and Republicans. But the current stage increasingly shows: today Washington is not an ally in the classical sense. It is a partner in a deal where the terms can change at any moment.

And here the key question is not even about values, but about interests. Betrayal of allies or those who believed in promises often contradicts not only the declared principles of the US but also their own long-term benefits. However, short-term transactions repeatedly prevail.

The final conclusion is simple and unpleasant. If your interests constantly conflict with your values, perhaps the problem is not in the values. Perhaps it is worth carefully reconsidering the interests themselves — and asking yourself where they really lead.

11 years ago, on March 18, 2014, Russia annexed Ukrainian Crimea, which led to long-term political and humanitarian consequences.

This illegal annexation was carried out in violation of international law and without Ukraine’s consent. On the peninsula, among other ethnic groups, there was a Jewish community, including Karaites and Crimean Jews, small but significant peoples with a unique religious and cultural identity. These groups, like all other residents of Crimea, faced the threat of losing their cultural independence and rights under Russian occupation.

Israel, despite its traditional restraint in international matters, closely monitored the situation, expressing concern within the framework of the UN and supporting peaceful initiatives for restoring Ukraine’s control over Crimea.

Israel, remaining on the side of international norms, supports Ukraine’s territorial integrity, despite diplomatic restraint in its relations with Russia.

---

Anniversary of the Annexation of Crimea

On March 18, 2025, it will be 11 years since Russia conducted the annexation of Ukrainian Crimea by signing a treaty with the self-proclaimed “Republic of Crimea”, forming two new subjects of the Russian Federation on this territory — the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol, effectively including Crimea into the Russian Federation. This event became a blatant violation of international law and led to long-term political and humanitarian consequences.

The illegality of these actions is confirmed by numerous international resolutions, and the process of annexation was not recognized by most countries. Including Crimea in the Russian Federation is a violation of the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, in which Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom committed to respecting Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in exchange for its renunciation of nuclear weapons. Russia violated its obligations, thereby undermining the foundations of international security.

Russia’s attempts to present the annexation as a legal union were merely a cover for aggression aimed at strengthening Russia’s influence in the Black Sea region. Russia’s confrontation with the international community did not stop it, but rather provoked further military actions, including the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

---

The Law on Indigenous Peoples of Ukraine

In 2021, Ukraine passed a law recognizing several ethnic groups as “indigenous peoples of Ukraine,” including Karaites and Crimean Jews, as well as Crimean Tatars. This law became an important step in ensuring the rights of these peoples, confirming their right to preserve their cultural heritage, language, and identity.

An indicator of the effectiveness of the Ukrainian Law “On Indigenous Peoples of Ukraine” was the hysterical reaction of Russian President Putin. The adoption of this law marked the beginning of the destruction of the “Russian world” ideology and was also a real step toward the de-occupation of Crimea.

In addition, Crimea hosts a significant number of Crimean Tatars, who were also recognized as indigenous peoples of Ukraine in 2021. However, despite the recognition of their rights, under annexation, Crimean Tatars, like Karaites and Crimean Jews, faced the threat of losing their cultural identity and religious traditions. Unlike Tatars, Karaites and Crimean Jews are Jewish communities with unique cultural and religious traditions, different from mainstream Judaism.

For Karaites and Crimean Jews, as small but unique Jewish communities, the annexation of Crimea posed a serious threat to their existence in the form they historically developed. In response to these challenges, Ukraine passed a law guaranteeing their rights, but the political instability on the peninsula raises doubts about the possibilities for real restoration and protection of these rights.

Karaites are a Jewish community that has preserved its religion and traditions, distinct from mainstream Judaism. Their connection to Crimea and Israel is particularly important, as they play a key role in supporting the Jewish cultural and historical identity on the peninsula.

Crimean Jews, on the other hand, represent a group that practices traditional Judaism but also has unique cultural traits that are part of Jewish heritage. This community has experienced not only Soviet repressions but continues to face challenges under Russian occupation, putting their unique identity at risk.

---

Jews in Crimea in 2014

In 2014, there were approximately 4,500 Jews living in Crimea, including 600 Karaites and 200 Crimean Jews, which accounted for less than one percent of the total population of the peninsula. It may seem small compared to the thousands-strong Jewish community of the late 19th century, and certainly very small compared to the 2.5 million population of modern Crimea. However, the influence of the Jewish community on the life of modern Crimea and their contributions to science, art, medicine, business, technology, and political life of the peninsula is difficult to overestimate.

Despite their small numbers, Jews, including Karaites and Crimean Jews, played a key role in the development of Crimea’s cultural and public life. Their contributions to the region’s economy, culture, and politics were significant, and many of these people held important positions in various spheres.

---

How the Annexation of Crimea Happened: History and Present

The history of the annexation began with Russia’s attack on Ukraine in February 2014, when Russian troops without identifying marks began seizing key facilities on the peninsula. Protests in Ukraine, known as Euromaidan, became a catalyst for the Kremlin, which saw this as a threat to its influence on the post-Soviet space. In response to the fall of power in Ukraine and Ukraine’s desire to move closer to the European Union, Russia intensified its actions.

On March 16, 2014, a disputed referendum was held, which did not meet international standards, and its results were recognized as illegitimate by most countries. This referendum was merely a cover for Russian aggression aimed at seizing the territory. Russia’s real goal was to secure its positions in the Black Sea and restore its influence in the region, leading to long-term consequences for Ukraine and international security.

Today, Crimea remains under Russia’s control, and the situation continues to be at the center of international discussions. Russia continues to support its actions in Crimea, asserting that the region has become “an integral part of Russia.” Ukraine, despite losing control, maintains that Crimea is its sovereign territory.

---

Reactions from the World and Israel

The reaction of the international community to the annexation of Crimea was overwhelmingly condemning. The United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution emphasizing that the annexation of Crimea is a violation of international law and that the peninsula remains part of Ukraine. In response to these actions by Russia, international economic sanctions were imposed, which continue to this day.

Israel’s reaction to the annexation of Crimea was restrained. Israel did not participate in the UN vote on this issue in March 2014, taking a neutral position.

Despite its political restraint, Israel condemned Russia’s actions in the UN and participated in international condemnation of the annexation. Israel does not recognize the annexation of Crimea, nor the self-proclaimed entities in Luhansk and Donetsk. Israel supports resolutions aimed at ending Russia’s occupation in the UN and other international forums.

Israel continues to refrain from making public statements about the conflict and does not supply offensive weapons to either side. Defense deals with Ukraine, while ongoing, are small and not of a decisive nature, including the supply of navigation equipment and communications tools.

Additionally, Israel participated in the third parliamentary summit of the “Crimea Platform”, held on October 24, 2024, in Riga. At the summit, Yuli Edelstein, representing Israel, stated: “Our two countries continue to lose the best sons and daughters of our peoples, but in the end, a bright future awaits us, and we are moving toward it. Only by joining forces can we cope with international terrorism.”

---

Karaites and Crimean Jews as Jews and Their Connection to Israel

Karaites and Crimean Jews are two Jewish communities that, in essence, are also Jews but with a unique religious and cultural identity. Karaites follow Karaism (a particular interpretation of Judaism), while Crimean Jews practice traditional Judaism, but both groups share common roots with the Jewish people.

The Karaites and Crimean Jews communities, although small, hold significant cultural and historical importance for Crimea. Unlike most Jewish communities, these groups have preserved their unique identity and traditions. Karaites and Crimean Jews have survived deportations and persecutions, but in recent decades have begun to restore their culture and return to Crimea. Israel provides assistance to these communities in preserving their language and cultural traditions, supporting their religious and cultural institutions.

---

How Israel Reacts to This?

Israel continues to maintain cultural ties with the Karaites and Crimean Jews, despite its political neutrality regarding the issue of Crimea. However, due to the diplomatic situation, Israel prefers not to intervene in the political conflict over Crimea while continuing to support these communities in preserving their traditions and religious practices.

Nevertheless, Russia’s influence on the international stage, especially in the context of Syria and other Middle Eastern conflicts, also compels Israel to maintain caution in its foreign policy. Despite its position on Crimea, Israel maintains ties with Russia, which allows it to minimize risks to the security of its country and Jewish communities in Russia.

---

Conclusions from NAnews – Israel News

The annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014 continues to be one of the most controversial and painful issues in international relations. For Ukraine, as well as for Karaites and Crimean Jews, this tragedy has far-reaching consequences. These indigenous peoples of Crimea were forced to face the loss of their cultural identity and rights, as well as the threat to their security and stability. In this context, Israel’s role is important, as it continues to support its communities and help preserve their cultural heritage, despite diplomatic restraint.

Russia, despite its attempts to present the annexation as a legitimate union, remains an aggressor, violating international law and Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

These events have led to significant consequences for regional security, and the question of Crimea’s status continues to remain unresolved on the international stage.

On January 28, 2026, in Zhytomyr, a traveling exhibition “Journey with the ‘Ukrainian-Jewish Encounter’: From Antiquity to 1939” opened at the regional literary museum. The exhibition immediately sets a broad historical scale — from early contacts to the dramatic threshold of World War II — and offers a look at the past without simplifications and myths.

More details at suspilne.media.

The exhibition consists of 20 informational panels and already has a long international biography. As the head of the Ukrainian representation of the Canadian non-governmental organization Ukrainian-Jewish Encounter Vladyslav Hrynevych explained, the project was first presented in 2015 in five major cities of Canada. After adaptation and translation into Ukrainian, the exhibition began actively traveling around Ukraine.

Over the years, the exhibition has visited 15 cities in the country — in regional centers, museums, libraries, cultural and educational spaces. Each time it gathers a different audience, but invariably evokes the same interest: an attempt to understand not only the tragedies but also the complex intertwining of the destinies of the two peoples.

According to Vladyslav Hrynevych, the key goal of the project is to deepen mutual understanding between Ukrainians and Jews and to show how close their historical and cultural dialogue was.

He emphasizes: it is not only about tragic pages. The exhibition tells about mixed marriages, the linguistic mutual influence of the Ukrainian language and Yiddish, religious contacts, and how these processes formed new identities. The phenomenon of the “Ukrainian Jew,” he says, was almost unrecognized until recently, but today it is becoming an increasingly noticeable and discussed part of common history.

The organizers place a special emphasis on the educational mission. The head of the department of culture and tourism of the regional military administration, Tetyana Rudenka, notes that the exhibition is especially important for schoolchildren and students.

According to her, the museum and cultural institutions plan to hold lectures here for children and youth so that the conversation about the Holocaust and the history of Jews in Ukraine is not limited to one date on the calendar. Video lectures are also planned to be posted on the official resources of the department of culture.

For many visitors, the exhibition resonates particularly sharply in the context of today’s war. One of them, Vadym Pyvovarov, noted that parallels with modernity suggest themselves.

He believes that Russia’s actions against the Ukrainian people in terms of scale and logic of violence evoke painful associations with what Nazi Germany did to the Jews in the 20th century. These comparisons, he says, make the historical exhibition not archival but frighteningly relevant.

It is in this context that the theme of the common Ukrainian-Jewish history acquires a special meaning — as a reminder of what dehumanization leads to and why memory remains a matter of security, not just culture. It is no coincidence that in the middle of the exhibition route, the organizers emphasize the contemporary resonance of the project, linking it with the values regularly written about by NANews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency, discussing the connections between Ukraine, Israel, and the shared responsibility before history.

The exhibition at the Zhytomyr Regional Literary Museum will run until February 15, 2026.

Touching footage remembered by all of Ukraine:

Exactly three years ago, the Defense Forces liberated Kherson. On November 11, 2022, Ukrainian troops entered the city, where they were greeted by locals with blue and yellow flags — the very ones that had been hidden from the occupiers. These fearless people immediately showed Putin’s army that it had come to the wrong place on tanks: “Kherson is Ukraine.” Many of them remain in the city today and do everything to ensure that, despite daily shelling by Russia, Kherson continues to live. Glory to all who fight! We remember those who gave their lives in battles for Ukraine.

Symbol of liberation: how the ATB truck appeared in the city

On the same day, November 11, 2022, when the Armed Forces of Ukraine entered liberated Kherson, residents saw an unexpected symbol of life returning on the streets — a truck with the logo of the Ukrainian retailer “ATB.”
The vehicle moved through the central streets, and people with flags waved at it and cried. This moment was captured on video, which spread across the country.

Everyone who saw the truck was joyful and confident that this was indeed the end of the occupation, even though Defense Forces units were only entering the outskirts of the city. Therefore, after some time, locals with blue and yellow flags were already waiting for Ukrainian defenders in the city center.

According to 24 Channel, behind the wheel was Eyal Israeli — an immigrant from Israel who has been living in Ukraine since the early 2000s.
When Russian troops left the city, he returned the truck stolen by the occupiers and drove through the streets with a Ukrainian flag.

Eyal and his friends drive around the city in the ATB truck, stopping at every billboard to remove the posters left by the Russians. “Kherson forever with Russia” — a fiction that disappears piece by piece from the streets to the cries of “Glory to Ukraine” and “Putin is a h***o!” On the billboards remain only the firmly glued pieces — the torn remnants of the “Russian world.”

We have already written about Eyal Israeli in the article – “Superhero ‘like from ‘Fauda” in the war against Russia: Israeli veteran on the banks of the Dnipro“

---

Eyal Israeli — the man who returned the symbol

According to colleagues and locals, Eyal had long worked in logistics and was a partner of the ATB network in the region.
During the occupation, he refused to leave the city, helped residents, and on the day of liberation — simply took and returned the truck.

Some Ukrainian publications write that in Israel he served in special units and from the first days of the invasion helped Ukrainian military with intelligence and volunteering.
But for the residents of Kherson, he became not a scout, but a person who first opened the streets for life and flags.

“Eyal heard a lot about how Ukrainians are called ‘neo-Nazis’ and now he already knows that he saw Nazis in Ukraine while he was in occupation. While the Russians were in the city, he did everything to make their life unbearable. And when collaborators stole ATB trucks, Eyal decided he would return them. And now he drives around the city in one of them. And on it is the first Ukrainian flag that appeared in Kherson. The first banner of freedom on the truck of the company that Eyal will always be grateful to, because in Kherson he was hired by ATB long ago without knowing the language — they taught him and did everything so that he could work.”

“On the streets, Eyal is now met by joyful and surprised people. Those who have not yet seen the military in the city were definitely sure that Kherson was free if ATB had already entered here. The truck drove into Freedom Square. There are no military here yet, but there are already people waiting for them. All in flags. Seeing the truck, the crowd began to chant ‘ATB! ATB!’, and when men in balaclavas got out of it, people thought they were military and chanted ‘AFU!’. But it was not them yet. Or rather, they were not yet in the center.”

---

Why this story is important

• Liberation is not only about the army and weapons, but also the courage of citizens who believe and act.
• The truck of the store chain became a symbol of the return to normalcy — food, work, life.
• An Israeli who decided to stay in a Ukrainian city during the occupation showed how the destinies of people from different countries unite in the struggle for freedom.
• For Ukrainians and the Jewish diaspora, this story is an example that true loyalty to a country is measured not by a passport, but by actions.

---

Strength in people

Kherson residents continue to live under daily shelling, but blue and yellow flags still hang on the houses.
The ATB truck that day became a sign that life is returning, and the people are unbroken.

This story remains in the memory of millions: not only as a video with flags but as proof that liberation always begins with one decisive person.

What you need to know about the liberation of Kherson?

• Kherson was the only regional center of Ukraine that the Russians occupied after the start of the full-scale invasion.
• After a long operation by Ukrainian troops, the Russian defense collapsed, causing the enemy to begin a panicked retreat to the left bank of the Dnipro, where they entrenched. Now Kherson is separated from the occupiers by the river and islands where battles are taking place. The city is under daily artillery fire, MLRS, KABs, and especially drones.
• Recently, Angelina Jolie visited Kherson. This happened despite the fact that Kherson is currently one of the most dangerous cities in Ukraine.

NANews — News of Israel and Ukraine.