- November 29, 2025
- 3:25 pm
- Israel, Ukraine
“On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly voted for Resolution No. 181 to end the British mandate in Palestine and to create two independent states on its territory — Jewish and Arab. Despite the resistance of Arab countries, the resolution was adopted by thirty-three votes to thirteen. This laid the foundation for the further proclamation and international recognition of Israel.
Let’s speak frankly: the Jewish state would hardly have appeared on the world map if not for the terrible tragedy that the Jews experienced during World War II“, the author writes.
There are texts that not only capture the moment but explain why the world begins to live by different rules. Column by Mykhailo Dubinyansky (Ukr.) (“Ukrainian Truth” November 29, 2025) is one of them. It describes how the era of sympathy for those long considered victims ends and what this means simultaneously for Israel and Ukraine.
The Historical Foundation That Ceases to Be Armor
The author’s starting point is November 29, 1947.
The day when the world voted for the creation of Israel and thereby recognized: after the Holocaust, humanity bears a special moral responsibility to the Jewish people.
Much was built on this feeling.
Israel was not just another state.
It was a symbol of survival after catastrophe, a living reminder of Auschwitz and Majdanek, of millions killed, and of the right to one’s own home.
For decades, this symbolism worked as a resource.
Empathy was built into the international attitude towards Israel by default.
But any emotional capital has a term.
The 2023–2025 War and the Nullification of Symbolic Capital
Dubinyansky emphasizes: the new war in the Middle East, which stretches from 2023 to 2025, became a moment of almost complete nullification of this historical resource.
In the eyes of a significant part of the “progressive Western audience,” Israelis who “bomb Gaza” ceased to be descendants of people who went through extermination camps.
They began to be seen primarily as the strong side of the conflict, as an army, as a state using force.
On the streets of Western cities, harsh anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist slogans are gaining popularity.
People take to marches not with slogans of sympathy but with accusations.
What was recently perceived as “a people who survived the Holocaust” is now more often seen as “a military power that responds with strikes.”
From this, the author derives a frightening but honest observation:
the era of sympathy for the people who survived the Holocaust is coming to an end.
And Israel is increasingly left alone with its power — and with its responsibility for using that power.
From Victim to Player: How Optics Change
The world reacts differently to wounds and to strength.
As long as Israel was perceived through the prism of trauma, it received an emotional “discount” — it was trusted more, forgiven more, treated more gently.
Now, when the power of the army and the harshness of decisions come to the forefront in mass perception, the logic changes.
The strong are not patronized.
The strong are discussed, criticized, evaluated.
And this is no longer an attitude towards a “victim of history,” but an attitude towards a full-fledged player.
And here Dubinyansky makes a transition that is important for Ukraine to hear: the same optics begin to work in relation to the Ukrainian war.
Ukraine and the Long Path to Foreign Sympathy: Why the Symbolic Strategy Didn’t Work
Current comparisons of Ukraine with Israel did not appear out of nowhere. Since 2014, many Ukrainian activists have seen Israel as a model of a country that does not ask for protection — it is capable of defending itself. It seemed that Ukraine should follow a similar path: to become a state that relies on its own strength, not on the emotions of others.
But before this idea, there was another approach. Ukraine tried to speak to the world in the language of pain — just as Israel once did.
In the mid-2000s, President Viktor Yushchenko first loudly drew the world’s attention to the tragedy of the Holodomor. His message was addressed not only to Ukrainians. He tried to explain to the outside world: Ukrainians in the 20th century experienced a crime comparable to the Holocaust. Therefore, Ukraine is a country worthy of special treatment, like Israel.
However, this attempt did not become an international emotional trigger.
The Holodomor was silenced for decades, was almost unknown to the world, and did not turn into a universal symbol of tragedy. Most foreign politicians recognized it as genocide because they were friendly towards Ukraine in the 21st century — not because they were genuinely touched by historical pain.
After 2014, Ukraine again tried to gain sympathy. The annexation of Crimea, the war in Donbas — all this was presented as a tragedy, as a crime, as a violation of international law. But the reaction was limited.
The West condemned Russia but did not perceive the loss of Ukrainian territories as a drama of a scale comparable to genocide or catastrophe.
Much of this was because life in the non-occupied part of the country remained relatively stable. To an external observer, it did not look like “a horror that cannot be ignored.”
And only on February 24, 2022, did Ukraine finally overcome the barrier of global emotional distance.
The scale of the invasion, destruction, footage from Kyiv, Bucha, Kharkiv, Mariupol, Kherson — all this broke through the wall.
For the first time in many decades, the West truly lived through someone else’s tragedy as its own.
Empathy converted into solidarity:
financial support, weapons, humanitarian aid, programs for refugees. Europe and the USA opened their doors to Ukrainians as they had not opened to anyone since the Balkan wars.
But any emotion has a limit.
By the fourth year of the big war, it became clear: the reserve of sympathy is running out.
America, captivated by a new political wave, demonstrates cold pragmatism. Trump blackmails Kyiv, Washington freezes aid. EU countries find it increasingly difficult to find resources to support Ukraine.
A rollback is sweeping across Europe: reduction of aid programs, tightening conditions for refugees, open criticism of Ukrainians, demands to “return young men to the front.” The ratings of politicians playing on anti-Ukrainian rhetoric are growing. A new speaker in the Czech Republic removes the Ukrainian flag from the parliament, a new president of Poland says he is signing aid “for the last time.”
This confirms the author’s main thesis:
the era of sympathy is ending — and Ukraine is once again facing the fact that emotions are not eternal, even if the tragedy is maximal.
Ukraine Lived Through the “Israeli Cycle” in Three Years
If Israel’s path from sympathy to pragmatism took decades, Ukraine went through this route almost in fast motion.
In 2022, it became a symbol of absolute injustice and courageous resistance for the world.
Millions of people opened their homes to refugees, governments made unprecedented decisions, media created the image of a country standing between civilization and barbarism.
But with each passing year, attention diminishes.
Not because Ukraine became less right,
but because the world, in principle, cannot empathize at maximum capacity for long.
In the end, we come to the point that Dubinyansky calls the end of the era of sympathy:
the war continues, and the emotional reaction weakens.
What Exactly Dubinyansky Asserts: Seven Key Meanings of His Text
To understand the scale of the shift, it is important to clearly formulate the author’s central ideas — they set the tone for the entire column.
The historical symbolism of Israel no longer works.
Once, the mere fact of the Holocaust was enough for the world to automatically side with Israel. Now this has ceased to be a universal argument.
Israel is perceived as a strong military power, not as a vulnerable side.
A country with a powerful army, technologies, and experience — in the eyes of many, it ceases to be a “people-victim” and becomes a state that bears full responsibility for what it does.
Ukraine tried to become “Israel for Europe.”
A small country that holds on under blows, defends itself, and simultaneously symbolizes the fight for freedom. This image worked especially strongly in 2022–2023.
Ukraine’s emotional resource is also depleting.
The West lives in conditions of crises: economy, elections, migration, its own conflicts. Human attention is limited, and sympathy decreases not out of malice, but due to overstrain.
International support is not endless.
Even the most morally understandable war eventually becomes background. News of bombings ceases to shock, exhaustion covers both elites and societies.
Ukraine can repeat Israel’s path.
Transition from the model of “asking for sympathy and help” to the model of “relying on one’s own strength and becoming an indispensable partner.” This is not a defeat, but the maturation of the state.
The era of sympathy is replaced by the era of pragmatism.
The world increasingly thinks not in categories of pain, but in categories of interest. And Ukraine will have to build long-term security not on the expectation of a moral reaction, but on projecting its own strength.
Why This Analysis Is Important Right Now
There is no romance in these conclusions, but there is sobriety.
He does not say: “The West betrayed.”
He says: “The West is tired.”
And then — the question to Ukraine:
what to do in a world where sympathy no longer lasts for years?
The answer, which is read between the lines, is quite direct:
— become a country without which the security of Europe cannot be imagined;
— become a player, not an object of care;
— build alliances based not on pity, but on mutual benefit;
— take an example from Israel not only in the military sphere but also in the ability to live without the illusion that someone is obliged to save you.
In this new world, officially no one “owes” anyone anything.
That is why those who make their strength part of others’ interests survive.
Why This Is Important: Short but Accurate Analysis by NAnovosti
The author’s statements sound harsh, but each of them contains a share of necessary honesty.
He is right — but only partially.
Yes, empathy is limited, but the “tired West” is still ready to help. Only the help becomes colder, less emotional, more rational.
The biggest risk is the shift of focus.
The USA, Europe, Asia — crises are accumulating everywhere. The more noise, the harder it is to keep attention on Ukraine.
Israel is an example of dual nature.
It is criticized for harshness, but it is this harshness that saved it. It survived not on emotions, but on its own strength. This is the lesson.
Ukraine must prepare for a world where emotions cease to be currency.
This moment is coming quickly. And those who manage to adapt will find it easier.
The era of sympathy ends — the era of respect begins.
The West may empathize less, but it may begin to rely more on Ukraine as a strategic partner, not an object of care.
Ukraine has already proven that it can surprise the world with resilience.
The next step is to prove that it can hold the world’s attention not only with suffering but with results.
“In 45 months of war, Ukraine has not become a second Israel. However, like the Israelis, we already know what it’s like when you are denied the empathy that seemed guaranteed by history itself.
As a result, we have to rely not so much on foreign empathy as on our own weapons. Only for Kyiv, without foreign compassion, it will be incomparably harder than for Jerusalem“, the author concludes.
This is what is important to repeat loudly and honestly today — and we will continue to do so because for us, as NAnovosti — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency, this is not just analytics, but a position based on the reality we see every day.