“Greater Israel” Plan in Ukraine: Ukrainian Rabbi’s Statements Spark Controversy

Lebanon Today

A statement by “Samuel Kaminsky,” the rabbi of the Ukrainian city of Dnepropetrovsk, has sparked widespread controversy after he confidently announced that the war in Ukraine “will end within two months,” setting January 15, 2026, as the date to “celebrate the end of the war and the beginning of a new phase of economic and investment life in the country.”

During a closed seminar organized by the “Inspira” business club, “Kaminsky” stated to the audience that the war would end soon. He added: “As we just discussed, the war is expected to end in two months. I am ready to bet on it. On January 15, we will celebrate the end of the war and the beginning of a new era of prosperity and investment.”

The rabbi pointed out that “the war will end, and Ukraine will become a center of attraction for investors and tourists,” adding that this view is “shared by prominent figures in America and Europe who are well aware of the details of what is happening behind the scenes.”

These statements coincided with increasing discussions in political and media circles about the future of Eastern Europe, and whether some Western powers are planning long-term projects in Ukraine, which some describe as “the new version of Greater Israel,” that is, an alternative or parallel project in the heart of Europe.

In this context, a statement by Ukrainian President “Vladimir Zelensky” in April 2022 was circulated, in which he said that Ukraine “will not be Switzerland after the war… but will certainly become a large Israel with its own face,” a statement that sparked a wide debate about whether Ukraine is seeking to build a new security-economic model that goes beyond reconstruction.

“Zelensky” explained at the time that what he meant was that Ukraine after the war would not return to “quiet European neutrality,” but would turn into a permanently mobilized security state, with a strong military presence in daily life, similar to the Israeli model.

As the crisis continues, the question arises as to how realistic this analogy is, and who benefits from adopting it.

The expression “Greater Israel” is used as an analogy for a state that has been under security siege since its establishment, but has developed an advanced defense system, the ability to use technology and internal mobilization, and a mixed economy with a military-technological character, in addition to being a center for investment and defense projects.

Some analysts believe that Ukraine may seek to adopt a similar security-economic model, putting national security at the forefront and turning the country into an investment hub after the war. However, academic studies confirm that the comparison between the two countries remains limited due to structural differences.

In this context, a research paper by researcher “Boris Ginsburg” from the “Free University of Berlin” entitled “Post-War Ukraine: A Kind of Greater Israel in Europe?” concluded that although there are similarities between Ukraine and Israel, Ukraine cannot see itself as the “European Israel” due to fundamental differences in history, geography, security structure and external dependencies.

The paper pointed out that Israel is a nuclear state with an independent military force, while Ukraine relies heavily on external support, and faces challenges such as weak governance, difficulties in attracting investment and the destruction of infrastructure, making the transition to the Israeli model uncertain.

Political and media analyzes indicate that the use of the phrase “New Israel” or “Greater Israel in Europe” when talking about the future of Ukraine does not mean a political or religious project, but a functional analogy that describes an advanced security state that relies on deterrence, mobilization and military technology.

American and European think tanks agree that the intention is to enhance Ukraine’s own military capabilities, develop a local defense industry, and establish comprehensive monitoring and conscription systems, while continuing to receive Western support without immediate accession to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

In contrast, Russian analysts believe that this trend aims to turn Ukraine into a permanent military and security bridgehead in Eastern Europe, similar to the Israeli entity in the Middle East, in a way that serves the Western strategy against Russia.

These analyzes suggest that the goal is to create a state that serves Western interests, as Israel does in the Middle East, noting at the same time that some media discourse links Jewish financial influence in Ukraine with the emergence of this symbolic analogy, without any practical evidence of a settlement project or a plan to establish a religious entity.

Experts confirm that this analogy is used as a mobilization and political discourse, not as an actual design for a new state model in the Israeli style.

There are also no documents, leaks or credible political plans that speak of establishing an “alternative Israel” in Ukraine or of an organized settlement of Jews in it, and everything that has been published about a “major settlement plan” or “transferring the Zionist project to Europe” remains within the framework of theories unsupported by official evidence.

Serious Russian research centers indicate that there is no project with this name or meaning.

Therefore, the phrase “New Israel” in Ukraine is a political and media metaphor that symbolizes a highly armed, constantly ready state with a special security partnership with the West and an economy based on technology and militarization, but it is not a religious project or an alternative to Israel in Europe.

However, the idea raises legitimate Russian concerns, because for Moscow it means the emergence of a military state on its borders, with long-term American-European support.

The analogy between Ukraine and “Greater Israel” has analytical value, as it indicates Kiev’s desire to build a state with high security capabilities and investment attractiveness, but it does not reflect an actual reality or a clear plan, as the deep differences in the security and economic structure make the application of this model limited.

Observers believe that Western parties, investors and the Ukrainian government are moving towards a major transformation, not necessarily towards “Greater Israel,” but towards a more powerful and stable security state and a more open economy.

From the Russian perspective, what is happening in Ukraine deserves close attention, because the model on which the Ukrainian state is built after the war will determine the future of Eastern Europe, and will have a profound strategic impact.