Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Business

Russia shelled Naftogaz facilities in Poltava and Sumy regions — what the 20th attack means for energy security

The chairman of the board of Naftogaz, Sergiy Koretskyi, reported new strikes on the company's production assets. There are no injuries, but the accumulated damage is weighing on operational resilience and will require resources for restoration — we examine why this matters for the country and every consumer.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

February 9, 2026 · 2 min read

Russia shelled Naftogaz facilities in Poltava and Sumy regions — what the 20th attack means for energy security

What happened

According to Naftogaz's chairman of the board Serhii Koretsky, Russian forces over the past 24 hours shelled the company's production assets in Poltava region and carried out new massive attacks in Sumy region. According to the company, there are no casualties, but damage and destruction of equipment have been recorded.

"Over the past 24 hours the enemy again shelled our production assets in Poltava region and carried out new massive attacks in Sumy region, which are still ongoing. There are no casualties."

— Serhii Koretsky, chairman of the board of Naftogaz

The company notes that this is already the 20th attack on its facilities since the beginning of the year. Similar strikes were recorded earlier in February and January: on the night of February 8 — against facilities in Poltava region, and on January 27 — against a facility in western Ukraine, which caused a fire.

Why it matters

A one-off strike does not stop the system, but the repetition of attacks creates a cumulative effect: critical equipment is worn down, repair and logistics costs increase, and the network's reserve resilience decreases. For consumers, this could mean longer service restoration times and additional expenses in the state budget, which must finance repairs and strengthen protection of infrastructure.

Energy security experts warn: systemic strikes on production assets are not only physical damage but also an attempt to undermine fuel supply logistics and create additional pressure during periods of heightened demand.

Context of the attacks

Russian strikes on energy infrastructure have been repeated since the beginning of the full-scale invasion. Naftogaz is one of the key operators on which gas supply for enterprises and critical facilities depends. Therefore, its assets often become targets as part of a strategy to weaken Ukrainian infrastructure.

  • Night of February 8: attack on Naftogaz facilities in Poltava region — no casualties, but damage to equipment.
  • January 27: shelling of one of the facilities in western Ukraine, which led to a fire.

What next

The course of action is clear: emergency repairs, risk inventories, strengthening physical security of facilities, and diversifying supply routes. However, their implementation requires financial resources and rapid coordination with partners. Now it's up to the state and international donors: will there be enough resources not only to patch up the consequences but also to increase the system's resilience for good?

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026