Kremlin says Russia is still ready for prisoner swap with Ukraine despite problems
MOSCOW, June 9 (Reuters) - The Kremlin said on Monday that Russia was still ready to honour agreements with Ukraine on a new prisoner of war exchange and on the repatriation of dead soldiers despite what it said was Kyiv's failure to so far honour its side of the bargain.
Russia accused Ukraine on Saturday of indefinitely postponing the exchanges, something Kyiv denied.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Monday repeated Russian accusations against Ukraine.
"We have seen and heard a hundred different excuses, justifications and so on, but it is difficult to view them as credible," Peskov told reporters.
"The Russian side remains ready to implement the agreements reached in Istanbul."
The exchanges were agreed to during a second round of direct peace talks in Istanbul on June 2 and are meant to see a new prisoner of war swap of at least 1,200 POWs - focusing on the youngest and most severely wounded - as well as the repatriation of thousands of bodies of those killed in the war.
The return of prisoners of war and the return of the bodies of the dead is one of the few things the two sides had been able to agree on, even as their broader negotiations have failed to get close to ending the war, now in its fourth year.
Kremlin aide Vladimir Medinsky said on Saturday that the Russian side had shown up at the agreed exchange point with the bodies of 1,212 Ukrainian dead soldiers only to find nobody from Ukraine to take them. He said a first list of 640 POWs had also been handed to Ukraine in order to begin the exchange.
Ukrainian officials rejected those accusations and President Volodymyr Zelenskiy vowed on Sunday to press on with prisoner exchanges despite tensions around the issue.
He said though that Ukraine had not yet received a full list of prisoners to be released and accused Moscow of "trying to play some kind of dirty political and information game."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
20 minutes ago
- Reuters
North Korea will always stand with Russia, leader Kim tells Putin
SEOUL, June 12 (Reuters) - North Korean leader Kim Jong Un said in a message to Russian President Vladimir Putin that his country will always stand with Moscow, state media reported on Thursday. In a message for Russia Day, a patriotic holiday celebrating Russia's independence, Kim called Putin his "dearest comrade" and praised their bilateral relations as a "genuine relationship between comrades-in-arms," KCNA reported. "It is an unshakable will of the government of the DPRK and of my own steadfastly to carry on the DPRK-Russia relations," Kim was quoted as saying. The DPRK stands for North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. KCNA reported on Wednesday that Kim had sent congratulations on Russia Day to Putin. Earlier this year, Pyongyang for the first time confirmed that it had sent troops to fight for Russia in the war in Ukraine under orders from leader Kim Jong Un after months of silence.\
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
Putin says special attention should be paid to nuclear triad in Russia's new arms programme
MOSCOW, June 11 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday that special attention in the country's new arms programme should be paid to the nuclear triad - land-based, sea-based and aircraft-launched weapons. Putin's remarks, broadcast on state television, were made at a meeting of senior officials devoted to the country's arms industry. "Undoubtedly, special attention should be paid to the nuclear triad, which has been and will remain the guarantee of Russia's sovereignty and plays a key role in upholding the balance of forces in the world," Putin said. A total of 95% of weapons in Russia's strategic nuclear forces, he said, were fully up-to-date. "This is a good indicator and, in essence, the highest among all the world's nuclear powers," he told the gathering.
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Lammy is picking a needless fight with America
The alarming revelation that 2024 recorded the highest number of global conflicts since the Second World War should be taken as an incentive to deepen ties with key allies, not fracture them. That would certainly be the response of any government committed to the defence of the realm faced with the depressing statistic that last year saw 61 conflicts taking place in 36 countries. Of these, 11 were defined as full-blown conflicts – those that claimed at least 1,000 battlefield deaths – and included the ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza, as well as other less-publicised violent eruptions in Sudan, Syria, Nigeria and Ethiopia. At a time when Sir Keir Starmer is attempting to promote his national security credentials, the rising tide of conflict detailed in a report by Sweden's Uppsala University should prompt his Government to strengthen ties with key allies such as the US and Israel. Instead, by opting to target two members of the Israeli government with sanctions, Starmer has shown that he is more interested in virtue-signalling than common sense. National security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and finance minister Bezalel Smotrich may come from the ulta-nationalist fringe of Israeli politics, but they remain important members of Israel's democratically elected government, which is one of the UK's closest allies in the Middle East. Moreover, Israel, just like Ukraine, finds itself in the vanguard of the West's deepening confrontation with two of the most potent threats it faces, in the form of Vladimir Putin's Russia and Iranian-sponsored Islamist terrorism. The UK's support for Ukraine, together with its European allies, is predicated on the understanding that Western security would be fatally compromised if Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine were to succeed. Similarly, the UK's declaration of support for Israel in the wake of the October 7 attacks in 2023 was based on the tacit acknowledgement that it was in the West's interests that Iran's backing for Hamas terrorists must not be allowed to go unchallenged, especially given the ayatollahs' fixation with developing nuclear weapons. The Labour Government's decision, therefore, to single out two prominent members of the Israeli government for public censure not only threatens to undermine relations with a key regional ally. It runs the risk of jeopardising our own national security, especially if the Israelis conclude it is no longer in their interests to share vital intelligence with the UK. Israeli foreign minister Gideon Saar has already announced the Israeli cabinet will meet next week to respond to what he called an 'unacceptable decision'. The British Government's decision to pick on the two politicians is hardly surprising given its previous lamentable track record of targeting Israel, with Foreign Secretary David Lammy declaring his support for the International Criminal Court and its highly politicised move to prosecute Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu for war crimes. Yet, by siding with other self-righteous, but wholly naive, administrations in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway, to provoke an entirely avoidable diplomatic row with Israel, Starmer and Co have placed themselves firmly on the wrong side of history. Apart from alienating Israel, the move also risks causing a rift with the US, another key ally. America's secretary of state Marco Rubio was particularly critical of the measures imposed against Ben-Gvir and Smotrich for 'inciting violence against the Palestinian people'. The sanctions 'do not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home and end the war,' he said, urging the UK 'not to forget who the real enemy is'. Hitting two controversial Israeli politicians with sanctions might play to Labour's vociferously anti-Israel supporters, but it could prove to be a self-defeating move in terms of safeguarding our own long-term interests. In terms of the likely impact it will have on Israeli policy, the sanctions will be about as effective as Greta Thunberg's equally puerile attempt this week to break Israel's Gaza blockade with her Freedom Flotilla. At the same time they run the risk of sending a signal to Iran and other hostile regimes that the UK is more interested in embarrassing its allies than confronting its enemies. It is certainly hard to grasp the logic of why, when Western powers like the UK are preparing to confront Iran over its nuclear programme, they should choose this moment to pick a fight with Israel, Tehran's sworn enemy. The need to impose fresh sanctions against Iran was very much in evidence at this week's meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, when Rafael Grossi, the body's director general, confirmed three new previously undeclared nuclear sites had been identified in Iran that could be used for developing nuclear weapons. The UK is among a number of European powers that have responded by pressing for the reimposition of sanctions against Tehran. But the ayatollahs are unlikely to change course on their nuclear ambitions if they believe they share a common interest with Britain and its allies in targeting the Israelis.
