- March 10, 2026
- 11:32 pm
- World News
On March 9, 2026, someone named Viktor Medvedchuk launched an attack against Israel and attempted to present the Middle Eastern situation through an old pro-Russian matrix. The head of the “Other Ukraine” movement stated that Israel’s policy towards Iran and neighboring countries allegedly “has become similar to Kyiv’s actions,” and the Jewish state itself, according to him, is following the same pattern as Ukraine.
Such words are important not only in themselves. It is equally important who exactly is saying them. Because in this case, we are not talking about a neutral observer or an external analyst, but about a person who has long become a symbol of pro-Russian politics in Ukraine and one of the most toxic political figures in the post-Soviet space.
First, a direct quote from TASS on March 9, 2026:
“Israel is overtaking Ukraine in the lead,” the politician wrote in his article posted on the movement’s website. According to him, Israel is acting according to the same scheme as Kyiv. “Destabilizes the situation in the region; does not try to resolve the conflict diplomatically, blaming the opposite side for everything; does not make any compromises or concessions; declares the war total and existential; dances on the bones of the war’s victims.”
“Israel today is Ukraine yesterday,” Medvedchuk emphasizes. “First, Volodymyr Zelensky wanted to make Ukraine into Israel, now Israel has become the Middle Eastern Ukraine, dragging neighbors into someone else’s war.”
Who is Medvedchuk and why do his words about Israel sound particularly dirty
He is not just a former politician, but a long-time conductor of the pro-Russian line
Viktor Medvedchuk is the former leader of the banned in Ukraine party “Opposition Platform — For Life,” a long-time representative of the pro-Russian camp, and a person whose name in Ukrainian politics has long been associated not with an independent position, but with the interests of Moscow. His reputation was formed long before the full-scale war, and it was extremely clear: Medvedchuk for years promoted a line convenient for the Kremlin, covering it with talks of peace, negotiations, and “realism.”
It is also worth mentioning his personal connection with the Kremlin’s master. Medvedchuk is not accidentally called Putin’s godfather. This formulation has taken hold because Putin is the godfather of Medvedchuk’s daughter. So we are talking not just about political closeness, but about a personal connection that has long been part of his public image. And when such a person begins to reason about Israel, Ukraine, diplomacy, and war, it must be understood: he speaks not from the outside, but from within that system of views that for years justified Russian pressure and Russian aggression.
That is why his current attack does not look like a private opinion, but as a continuation of a familiar line. First, Ukraine for years was portrayed in this logic as a source of conflict. Now the same lexicon is being tried to be transferred to Israel.
How he was arrested and why he was later exchanged
Medvedchuk’s story after the start of the big war only reinforced this image. In Ukraine, he was charged with treason and was under house arrest. After the start of the full-scale Russian invasion, he fled. Later he was detained by the SBU.
This episode became one of the most indicative in the first months of the war. A person who for many years spoke on behalf of the “other Ukraine,” at a critical moment turned out to be neither a statesman, nor a peacemaker, nor a mediator. He turned out to be a fugitive associated with the pro-Russian camp, whom the Ukrainian authorities eventually caught.
Later Medvedchuk was exchanged. Ukraine handed him over as part of a large prisoner exchange, and for many, this seemed symbolic: a figure embedded for decades in the system of Russian influence ultimately went where its real political center of gravity was. This exchange only reinforced the perception of Medvedchuk as a foreign player for the Ukrainian state, not as an “oppositionist,” as he liked to portray himself.
What exactly he said about Israel and why he needs it
The old anti-Ukrainian set was simply transferred to the Middle East
In his article, Medvedchuk stated that Israel allegedly “is overtaking Ukraine in the lead.” Then he listed the usual set of accusations: destabilization of the region, refusal of diplomacy, blaming the opposite side, unwillingness to compromise, declaring the war total and existential, and, as he put it, “dancing on the bones of the war’s victims.”
Then he formulated the main thesis even more directly: “Israel today is Ukraine yesterday.” This phrase concentrates the entire meaning of his text. Not to explain the conflict, not to understand the reasons, not to divide the circumstances, but to mechanically impose on Israel the same propaganda construct that the Russian side has used against Ukraine for years.
This is a very characteristic technique. It works not through facts, but through a crude analogy. It doesn’t matter that we are talking about different regions, different threats, different historical circumstances. It doesn’t matter that each conflict has its own nature. It is enough to throw in a phrase that emotionally links two topics, and then you can lead the audience along the desired route.
It is at this point that NAnovosti — Israel News | Nikk.Agency draws attention to the most important detail: such texts do not analyze reality, but replace it. First, a politically convenient scheme is created, then formulations are adjusted to it, and then this scheme is presented as an obvious conclusion.
Why this rhetoric is dangerous for Israel
Medvedchuk is trying to make Israel a new platform for old lies
The main problem here is that Medvedchuk talks about Israel not as a separate country with its own security logic and regional context. He uses Israel as a new stage for old propaganda. The meaning of this operation is simple: to blur the differences between a defensive war, regional confrontation, external threats, and state policies, and then reduce everything to one convenient formula — “they act the same.”
For the “Russian-speaking audience” in Israel, this is a particularly sensitive story. Because such words are aimed precisely at those who are accustomed to perceiving international conflicts through simplified television clichés of Russian propaganda. Medvedchuk essentially offers a ready-made label: if Ukraine in this picture was the “guilty party,” then now by the same model, one can try to brand Israel.
But this does not make his statement strong. On the contrary. It emphasizes the intellectual and political weakness of his position. When a person has no honest analysis, he begins to drag the same set of accusations from one conflict to another. When there is no argument, a scheme appears. When there are no facts, a loud analogy is used.
And therefore the main conclusion here is extremely straightforward. Viktor Medvedchuk is not an authoritative critic of Israel, but an odious pro-Russian politician, Putin’s godfather, a figure in a treason case, a fugitive, detained after fleeing and then exchanged to Russia. His current text about Israel should be read precisely through this biography.
Then everything falls into place.
This is not an attempt to understand the Middle East.
This is the old Kremlin manner of getting into someone else’s war again and imposing its deceitful vocabulary.
