South Korea Says Ukraine Broke Secrecy Deal on North Korean POWs

South Korea's presidential office said on September 27, 2026, it feels "strong regret" after Ukraine publicly announced the transfer of two North Korean prisoners of war to the South. Seoul says Kyiv broke a confidentiality agreement to keep the transfer quiet. Al Jazeera

Senior presidential secretary for public relations Seong Ghi-hong said Seoul objects to both the unilateral announcement and Ukraine's later claim that no secrecy deal existed. Seoul insists the deal was in place. President Lee Jae Myung made the same accusation a day earlier, according to Yonhap. Yonhap

Seoul says the secrecy was about protection. The office said the arrangement aimed to shield the soldiers from danger if the transfer became known, in line with international law and humanitarian principles, the rules for humane treatment in war. It said Kyiv's denial hurts trust and harms friendship between the countries. Seong added the government is weighing extra steps if needed.

Kyiv gives a different account. Ukraine's presidential office said it disclosed the transfer without extensive details, and argued it would have been strange to keep the whole transfer secret. A Ukrainian presidential source denied that any confidentiality agreement with Seoul existed.

The core events are not disputed. Ukrainian forces captured the two soldiers in Russia's Kursk region in January 2025. They were the first North Korean soldiers captured alive, Reuters reported. South Korean media reported both men wanted to defect to the South. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy then confirmed the onward transfer in an address to the UN General Assembly, the annual gathering of world leaders, saying the two are "not easy to capture alive." Reuters

Reuters, citing Yonhap, reported on September 27 that Seoul had protested the denial. The sequence is clear. Zelenskyy's Assembly remarks made the transfer public. Lee responded first, then Seong followed with stronger language about trust and possible next steps.

The broader context here is why a disclosure fight carries weight. A transfer like this touches three interests at once: the holder of the prisoners, the receiving country, and the privacy and safety of the men. Like ground rules for who announces what and when, a prior agreement lets Kyiv document North Korea's role in the war while letting Seoul control the legal and security process for arrivals from the North.

Looking at what this could mean for the relationship, the wording is deliberate. Regret sounds mild but is pointed in diplomacy. Warnings about hurt trust and harmed friendship signal political cost, while talk of extra steps leaves room to escalate. The next signs to watch are whether either side shows the terms in writing, whether more details on the soldiers emerge, and whether cooperation on other issues continues.