Rizky Amelia
South Korea has formally demanded an apology and a full explanation from Ukraine following Kyiv's public disclosure that two captured North Korean soldiers had been transferred to Seoul. The diplomatic rift centers on what South Korean officials describe as a broken confidentiality agreement, an accusation Ukrainian authorities reject. The dispute has exposed rare friction between two governments that have broadly aligned against Russia's war effort.
According to Seong Ghi-hong, senior presidential secretary for public relations, the presidential office in Seoul issued a statement on Sunday expressing "strong regret over Ukraine's unilateral disclosure" and what it called a subsequent "false announcement that there had not been a non-disclosure agreement." The statement marked the South Korean government's first substantive public response to a controversy that has quickly escalated from a quiet diplomatic arrangement into a highly visible international dispute.
The immediate trigger was Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's address at the annual United Nations General Assembly last week, during which he confirmed that Kyiv had handed over two captured North Korean soldiers to South Korea. The prisoners had been seized in January 2025 after being deployed to fight alongside Russian forces in the Kursk region. They became the first North Korean troops captured alive since Pyongyang began providing military support to Moscow in 2024 under a mutual defense treaty with Russia.
Zelenskyy described the circumstances of their capture in dramatic terms, noting how difficult it had been to take the soldiers alive. He recounted that one of the men had attempted to take his own life upon realizing he would be captured, and expressed surprise that he had survived. The Ukrainian president also sharply criticized North Korea's decision to send troops, arguing that Pyongyang's leader, Kim Jong Un, treats his soldiers as bargaining chips while receiving support from Russia in return.
Zelenskyy initially signaled willingness to exchange the captured soldiers for Ukrainians held in Russian captivity if Kim could facilitate such a swap. However, human rights organizations pressed for the prisoners to be sent to South Korea instead, citing the grave risks of punishment or execution they could face if returned to North Korea. South Korean media also reported that the two soldiers had expressed a desire to defect to Seoul, adding weight to the case for transferring them southward.
South Korea's government had deliberately declined to confirm the soldiers' arrival, invoking security concerns not only for the prisoners themselves but also for family members still living in North Korea. Officials in Seoul have argued that any public acknowledgment could expose relatives to retaliation by Pyongyang, an issue of particular sensitivity given that the two Koreas remain technically in a state of war. The 1950-1953 Korean War ended with an armistice rather than a formal peace treaty, and thousands of United States troops remain stationed in South Korea, with regular joint military exercises that the North routinely condemns.
The decision by Zelenskyy to announce the transfer publicly therefore caught Seoul off guard. In a post on X, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung described the repatriation of North Korean prisoners of war as a "highly sensitive agenda." He suggested that those who publicized the transfer "with enthusiastic fanfare to show off their achievements" likely could not appreciate his government's efforts to maintain confidentiality, and he noted that such figures might even question whether there was something wrong with Seoul's cautious approach. Lee added that the reasons behind Ukraine's disclosure, which he characterized as a violation of a non-disclosure agreement, remained unclear but were "deeply regrettable."
Seong's follow-up statement on Sunday sharpened the criticism, asserting that Zelenskyy had disclosed the repatriation without sufficient prior consultation and had later denied that any confidentiality arrangement existed. According to Seoul, that denial has seriously damaged trust between the two governments and threatens broader bilateral relations. South Korean officials insist that Ukraine had repeatedly discussed the transfer through multiple channels and had explicitly requested secrecy — a claim Kyiv disputes.
The controversy has also become a domestic political flashpoint in South Korea. Opposition politicians have condemned President Lee's administration for failing to inform the public about the transfer. Ahn Cheol-soo of the People Power Party asked on social media whether it was fair that South Koreans learned about North Korean prisoners of war being in their country only through Zelenskyy's UN speech. He pressed the president directly, asking why the matter had been hidden and speculating about whether the government had intended to return the prisoners to North Korea. The episode thus carries potential political consequences for Lee's government well beyond the diplomatic sphere.
Militarily, the stakes are substantial. Ukrainian and South Korean estimates suggest that roughly 14,000 to 15,000 North Korean soldiers have been dispatched to support Russia's war effort, with most deployed to the Kursk region to counter Ukraine's incursion. Ukraine seized a large portion of that Russian border territory in August 2024, though it has since lost most of the ground it held. In addition to personnel, Pyongyang has supplied Moscow with artillery and mortar rounds, ballistic missiles, long-range artillery systems and multiple-launch rocket systems, according to Ukrainian and independent assessments.
The two captured soldiers are expected to undergo questioning, a process that could yield valuable intelligence for South Korea and its allies about North Korean military operations, training and battlefield performance. Their treatment and ultimate destination also raise complex legal and humanitarian questions. Under international law, prisoners of war are entitled to protections, and any decision about repatriation must weigh the principle of non-refoulement against the prisoners' own expressed wishes.
For now, the dispute leaves two otherwise friendly governments working to contain the damage. Seoul wants an official apology and a credible explanation for what it regards as a breach of trust. Kyiv, for its part, appears to view the transfer as a humanitarian success worth publicizing on the world stage. How the two sides reconcile those competing priorities will test a relationship that has quietly deepened as both countries confront shared security challenges posed by Russia and North Korea.
Comments (0)