# Ukraine says people in occupied Oleshky are so hungry they are eating grass

*Saturday, September 26, 2026 at 10:05 PM UTC — Hamer Intelligence Services Desk*

**Published**: 2026-09-26T22:05:11.616Z (2h ago)
**Category**: humanitarian | **Region**: Eastern Europe
**Importance**: 8/10
**Sources**: OSINT
**Permalink**: https://hamerintel.com/data/articles/18907.md
**Source**: https://hamerintel.com/summaries

---

**Deck**: Ukrainian authorities are sounding the alarm over conditions in the Russian-occupied town of Oleshky, saying civilians are starving and some have resorted to eating grass. The claim points to deepening food insecurity under occupation and highlights the lack of verified humanitarian access along the left bank of the Dnipro.

Ukraine is warning that parts of its occupied south are sliding into extreme deprivation.

On 26 September, Ukrainian officials raised an alarm about the situation in Oleshky, a town on the left bank of the Dnipro River under Russian control. According to a summary of a longer article, they said people there are starving and some have been forced to eat grass. The brief report did not provide independent confirmation or detail its sources, but presented the allegation as a measure of how severe food shortages have become.

Oleshky has been under Russian occupation for much of the full-scale invasion. Its location across the river from Ukrainian‑held Kherson and near areas flooded by the destruction of the Kakhovka dam has made it hard to reach and relatively easy for occupying forces to isolate. Ukraine has long accused Russian authorities of neglecting or worsening living conditions in settlements on the left bank. The new claim that residents are eating grass suggests that normal market supplies and aid channels may have broken down almost entirely for some households.

For civilians, hunger quickly turns from a statistic into daily choices. Parents skip meals so children can eat, older people struggle to get basic staples, and existing health problems are aggravated by lack of proper nutrition. When people resort to foraging for grass or other inedible plants, it often means savings are exhausted, valuables have been sold off, and social networks that might offer help are themselves stretched thin.

Oleshky’s reported condition also underlines the limits on outside monitoring in occupied territory. Russia controls access to the town, and there is no indication in the available reporting that neutral organizations have been able to conduct regular food security assessments there. That leaves diplomats, aid agencies, and analysts dependent on local testimonies, Ukrainian intelligence, and sporadic imagery, none of which can fully replace systematic verification on the ground.

Severe hunger in Russian‑held areas carries political consequences for the future. If control of Oleshky changes, residents who endured months of deprivation may hold both the occupying authorities and the side they hoped would relieve them to account. That makes the response by Moscow and Kyiv not only an ethical issue but also a question of future legitimacy.

The town’s plight shows how front lines can trap civilians in a grey zone of military rule, cut off from state services, independent humanitarian access, and normal economic life.

The next concrete signs to watch will be whether Russian‑installed authorities in Kherson region announce large‑scale food deliveries or distribution campaigns; whether commercial imagery shows increased truck traffic into Oleshky; and whether Ukrainian officials or international bodies publish more detailed accounts, with dates and locations, of hunger and mortality there. Any credible evidence that outside aid has reached the town, or that Russia has allowed independent monitors in, would mark a shift from the current picture of isolation and alarm.