North Korean POWs grow desperate, putting Seoul in a difficult policy bind

Conflict documentary producer Kim Young-mi listens to a briefing from an official at a policy seminar at the National Assembly Members’ Office Building in Yeouido, Seoul, Feb. 3. Newsis

By Hankookilbo

• Published Feb 19, 2026 4:44 PM KST

“The starting point was wanting to give them a chance to publicly say whether they truly want to be repatriated or not.”

These were the words of Kim Young-mi, an international conflict journalist and producer of MBC’s investigative program “PD Notebook,” at a policy seminar in Seoul on Feb. 3, reflecting on the decision that brought two North Korean prisoners of war into South Korea’s public conversation.

Kim recently broadcast interviews with two North Korean prisoners of war she met in Ukraine, stressing the urgency of humanitarian measures. The decision to not blur their faces — a move which she called a bold editorial gamble — prompted debate.

The reaction was immediate. Although images and interviews had surfaced sporadically through Ukrainian authorities and domestic media, it was the first time their living conditions, fears of being sent back to North Korea and stated wish to go to South Korea were presented clearly on television. Public attention, and political interest, rose accordingly.

At a seminar titled “How should South Korea respond to North Korean POWs in Ukraine?” hosted by lawmaker Yu Yong-weon, participants broadly agreed that the two prisoners should be brought to South Korea as soon as possible, given confirmation of their intentions. Several speakers urged the government to take a more active role through organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Government faces complex decision

In Seoul, officials appear to be in unison.

After a closed briefing to lawmakers, Rep. Lee Seong-kweun said the National Intelligence Service confirmed the prisoners’ intention to defect and explained that efforts are under way through multiple channels to support their transfer, noting that respecting individual wishes reflects international legal principles.

The Foreign Ministry has also maintained that North Korean soldiers are regarded as South Korean nationals under the Constitution and would receive protection and support if they seek to come.

From an international legal perspective, there is scope for government intervention. A United Nations General Assembly resolution adopted on Dec. 3, 1952, stipulates that force shall not be used against prisoners of war to prevent or effect their return to their homelands, and that they must at all times be treated humanely in accordance with the Geneva Convention.

So far, there is little disagreement that North Korean prisoners of war face a risk of severe punishment if sent back to North Korea and therefore require protection from forced repatriation.

However, signs of constraints on intervention from the South are also evident.

The most obvious hurdle is that South Korea lacks a direct voice, as it is not a party to the war. While Ukraine and Russia — as well as North Korea, which has indirectly intervened by sending troops — have a say in the matter, South Korea does not. This limited standing translates into a weaker position under international law.

The remarks made by Elizabeth Salmon, the U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in North Korea, offer a glimpse of the same constraint. While underscoring the importance of respecting the principle of non-refoulement in dealing with North Korean prisoners of war, she said the final decision rests with the Ukrainian government.

“It means that one state should not repatriate people to a place where there are reasonable grounds to believe they would face torture or ill treatment,” Salmon said, explaining the non-refoulement principle. She added that all parties should wait until Ukraine makes their decision.

From a third-party perspective, it is evident that the Ukrainian government has the first say in the matter, regardless of South Korea’s position.

Discretion and bipartisan support needed

Further hurdles lie ahead. Ukraine would first have to decide not to return the prisoners to Russia or North Korea, after which Seoul would likely need sustained behind-the-scenes negotiations to secure their transfer.

From Kyiv’s perspective, refusing to hand over the prisoners to North Korea could complicate negotiations over Ukrainian prisoners held by Russia, raising the possibility that concessions might be sought. Kyiv could also look to Seoul for compromises in exchange for withholding their return.

The public disclosure of the prisoners’ identities and intentions is another risk factor that could complicate future negotiations. Salmon stressed that their privacy must be protected, saying she was shocked by the widespread circulation of their images.

Analysts point out that the more openly Seoul signals its willingness to accept them, the more strongly North Korea and Russia may press for their return, increasing the chances that the prisoners could be treated as potential bargaining chips as ceasefire negotiations progress.

For that reason, close intergovernmental communication and a high degree of discretion will be essential, experts say. Even if talks progress, arrangements involving Ukrainian authorities, possible transit through a third country and ensuring safe passage would require careful coordination.

For South Korea and the Lee Jae Myung administration, the issue is tied to the country’s broader North Korea policy, further heightening the need for discretion.

“Prisoners should be brought to South Korea based on universal humanitarian values, but the process must be handled carefully to manage the all-but-certain backlash from Pyongyang,” said Jeon Seong-hoon, a visiting research fellow at the Sejong Institute, reiterating that the issue of repatriation is inevitably connected to North Korea policy.

He also urged that the issue be discussed, agreed upon and supported quietly on a bipartisan basis, voicing concern that the issue could spill over into partisan conflict.

Other experts emphasize the need for a long-term strategy that prioritizes the prisoners’ safety over political gains.

Shin Jong-woo, secretary-general of the Korea Defense and Security Forum, said that the prisoners’ exclusion from recent Russia-Ukraine exchanges suggests Kyiv is aware of the global criticism that could follow if they were sent back to North Korea.

“Now that the prisoners have made their intentions clear, assisting their safe transfer to a third country could be a wise move before they are brought to Korea,” he said.

This article from the Hankook Ilbo, the sister publication of The Korea Times, is translated by a generative AI system and edited by The Korea Times.