OPEN LETTER: Mr. Putin, 370 prisoners don't buy back four years of war

Introduction: a letter I had to write

Why address the Kremlin directly

Mr. Putin, I am writing you this open letter the day after the announcement, confirmed by The Moscow Times, of the exchange of 370 prisoners of war between your country and Ukraine, carried out on June 5, 2026. One hundred and eighty-five people on each side were reunited with their families, according to Reuters, a figure that, on paper, looks like a gesture of goodwill.

I choose the form of the open letter because I want to address you directly, without intermediaries, with the frankness this war you launched in February 2022 demands. This piece is not a negotiation. It is a statement of fact, written by a columnist who refuses to mistake a one-off humanitarian gesture for proof of good faith.

What I know, what I cannot prove

I know, thanks to the verifiable journalistic sources I cite in this piece, that this exchange did in fact take place. I also know, thanks to testimonies gathered by multiple independent organizations, that Ukrainian prisoners held in Russia report extremely harsh detention conditions.

What I cannot do, however, is attribute to you intentions I cannot verify with certainty. I can only judge your actions against documented facts, and that is precisely what I intend to do in this letter.

What this exchange reveals about your political calculus

A calculated move, not a confession

Mr. Putin, this prisoner exchange is not, I know, a gesture of spontaneous compassion. It is a cold calculation, documented by numerous Western analysts: every successful exchange lets you project, at little cost, an image of rationality on the international stage, even as your army continues to pound Ukrainian civilian infrastructure every week.

This double game, between one-off humanitarian gestures and the relentless pursuit of war, is lost on no one who follows this issue closely. You know that these images of family reunions temporarily soften your regime's image abroad.

A façade of diplomacy that fools fewer and fewer people

According to several analyses relayed by the Western press, your government uses these exchanges as a tool of international communication, seeking to show that Russia respects, at least partially, certain humanitarian norms, even when documented reports contradict that image on the ground.

I am not fooled, Mr. Putin, and I doubt the majority of international observers are either. A single humanitarian gesture does not offset a war record measured in tens of thousands of dead.

What your Ukrainian prisoners have endured

Testimonies that accuse you directly

Accounts gathered from Ukrainian soldiers freed in previous exchanges, relayed by the Kyiv Independent and other independent media, describe detention conditions marked by malnutrition, lack of proper medical care, and, in many documented cases, systematic physical mistreatment.

These testimonies, Mr. Putin, do not come from a single isolated source that could be dismissed as Ukrainian propaganda. They converge, year after year, exchange after exchange, painting a coherent picture of a prison system that treats prisoners of war with a harshness that violates, according to several human rights organizations, the international conventions your country nonetheless signed.

Your government's silence on these accusations

Your government has, to my knowledge, never substantively responded to these documented accusations, preferring silence or outright denial. That silence, in itself, constitutes a form of answer: that of a regime that does not wish to open its detention centers to independent, transparent international scrutiny.

A country with nothing to hide generally has no difficulty letting international observers verify the detention conditions of its prisoners of war. The systematic refusal of such access speaks for itself.

What the West should demand of you

Full access for international observers

Mr. Putin, if your government truly wishes to demonstrate its humanitarian good faith, it should accept, unconditionally, full and regular access for the International Committee of the Red Cross to all detention centers holding Ukrainian prisoners, military and civilian alike.

This demand is not excessive: it corresponds exactly to the obligations Russia accepted by signing the Geneva Conventions. The persistent refusal of such access, year after year, is itself an implicit admission of what those centers might reveal.

The release of all civilians detained without legitimate grounds

Beyond service members, the West should demand, with a firmness too often lacking so far, the immediate release of all Ukrainian civilians detained without legitimate grounds in occupied territories or in Russia itself, a category of victims these highly publicized exchanges tend to obscure.

These civilians, often arrested on mere suspicion of pro-Ukrainian sympathies, deserve diplomatic attention at least equal to that given to military prisoners, or their fate will keep languishing in the shadow of negotiations.

What Kyiv does better, without complacency

A relative transparency that deserves recognition

I will not pretend, Mr. Putin, that Ukraine is beyond reproach in its treatment of its own Russian prisoners. But it must be said that Kyiv accepts, far more regularly than your government, the presence of independent international observers in its detention centers.

This difference in transparency, documented by several international humanitarian organizations, is not a minor detail: it reflects a fundamental difference in approach between a country defending itself and a country that chose to attack.

The limits Kyiv must also acknowledge

That said, in the interest of rigor, I must note that some isolated reports also point to imperfect conditions in certain Ukrainian detention centers, a point Volodymyr Zelensky's government should continue to correct with the same rigor it demands of the Russian side.

Moral consistency requires applying the same standards to both sides, even though the scale and severity of documented violations remain, based on available evidence, vastly disproportionate on the Russian side.

What this letter cannot change

The limits of a text in the face of a war

I know, Mr. Putin, that this letter will probably change nothing about your strategic calculations. You will likely never read it, and if you did, it would carry no more weight than one more Western statement in your long list of grievances against the collective West.

But I write it anyway, because silence in the face of documented violations of prisoners' rights would be, in my view, a form of complicity by omission I refuse to accept as a columnist.

What I will keep documenting

I will continue, exchange after exchange, to document the fate of Ukrainian prisoners, to cross-reference available testimonies, and to refuse any leniency toward a regime that chose war of aggression as a political instrument in 2022 and has pursued it relentlessly ever since.

This journalistic vigilance, however modest on the scale of the conflict, remains one of the few weapons a columnist has to refuse forgetting and indifference in the face of the documented suffering of thousands of prisoners.

What Ukraine's allies must keep up

Sanctions pressure, a lever that must endure

Mr. Putin, as long as Ukrainian prisoners remain held in conditions documented as inhumane, Western sanctions against your government and your inner circle must stay in place, or even be strengthened. Giving in to the temptation of premature easing would send a disastrous signal: that impunity pays.

Ukraine's Western allies, from the United States to the European Union, must continue to explicitly tie any discussion of sanctions relief to verifiable progress on the humanitarian file of prisoners, not solely to territorial or military issues.

Military support, a condition for any credible negotiation

I'll say it plainly: only a militarily strong Ukraine, sustainably backed by its Western allies, will be able to negotiate these humanitarian files from a position of strength rather than weakness. Arms support, including the Western fighter jets recently promised to Kyiv, remains inseparable from any future progress on the prisoner file.

Weakening that military support in the name of supposed appeasement would, in practice, amount to weakening Ukraine's ability to secure new, favorable exchanges in the future.

The precedent of the Minsk agreements, a lesson you ignore

Commitments never kept

Mr. Putin, your government has, in the past, already signed international agreements that Russia never fully honored, starting with the Minsk agreements meant to settle the conflict in the Donbas back in 2015. This history of broken commitments weighs heavily on the credibility of any gesture of goodwill your government might display today.

Western analysts who have followed this file for years regularly point out that Russia used those past negotiations not to resolve the conflict, but to buy military and political time, a strategy several observers fear could repeat itself with the current prisoner exchanges.

Why Western distrust remains justified

This historic distrust, documented by numerous Western think tanks, explains why Kyiv's allied governments continue to demand concrete, verifiable guarantees before any easing of diplomatic and economic pressure on your government.

A single humanitarian gesture, however welcome, is not enough to erase a track record of broken promises that goes back well before the 2022 invasion itself.

The murky role of Russian state propaganda

A carefully orchestrated production

Russian state media, under your government's tight control, systematically present these prisoner exchanges as proof of Russia's humanity and restraint in the face of a Ukrainian enemy portrayed as intransigent. This staging, documented by several independent observers of Russian media, is aimed above all at a domestic audience that must be kept mobilized behind the war effort.

This media instrumentalization, Mr. Putin, no longer fools most Western observers, but it continues to effectively shape Russian public opinion, largely denied access to independent sources of information since the invasion began.

The absence of dissenting voices in Russia

The systematic repression of dissenting voices in Russia, whether independent journalists or human rights organizations, prevents any substantial internal criticism of your handling of the prisoner-of-war file.

This absence of internal checks, documented by numerous international press freedom organizations, reinforces my conviction that only external international pressure can still influence, even marginally, the treatment of Ukrainian prisoners held in Russia.

What Ukrainian families truly expect

Beyond the numbers, specific faces

Behind every exchange statistic, Mr. Putin, there are specific Ukrainian families who have been waiting, sometimes for years, for news of a son, husband, or brother missing or detained. These families are not asking for speeches: they are asking for complete lists, access to detention centers, and precise release dates.

This wait, documented through numerous testimonies gathered by the Ukrainian and international press, constitutes one of the most painful and least visible dimensions of this war, far from the grand diplomatic statements.

A demand for clarity you refuse

Your government, Mr. Putin, continues to refuse full transparency on the exact number of Ukrainian prisoners held, military and civilian alike, an opacity that needlessly prolongs the suffering of thousands of families who do not even know whether their loved one is alive.

This demand for clarity, though minimal under international humanitarian law, remains one of the most consistent and legitimate demands made by Kyiv since negotiations on prisoners began.

Comparison with other contemporary conflicts

A mechanism that exists elsewhere, with more transparency

Other contemporary conflicts have seen prisoner exchange mechanisms put in place with a level of transparency and international oversight far greater than what is observed between Kyiv and Moscow. This comparison, documented by several organizations specializing in international humanitarian law, highlights the considerable room for improvement that remains on this specific file.

Your government, Mr. Putin, could draw on these precedents to strengthen the credibility of its own humanitarian gestures, provided it accepts an international oversight that it has, so far, systematically limited.

Why this refusal of transparency is telling

This persistent refusal of enhanced international oversight, despite existing precedents elsewhere in the world, reinforces the legitimate suspicion that your government has specific reasons for wanting to limit independent observers' access to its detention centers.

A regime confident in the legitimacy of its practices generally has no reason to fear a thorough international review of its prisoner-of-war detention centers.

This war's impact on international humanitarian law

A dangerous precedent for the world order

This war, and the way your government handles the prisoner file, sends a dangerous signal to the entire international community: that a country can massively violate international humanitarian law without any real judicial consequence, so long as it has enough military and diplomatic power to withstand pressure.

This precedent, if not firmly challenged by the West and the international community as a whole, could inspire other authoritarian regimes to adopt similar practices in future conflicts, durably weakening the architecture of international law built since 1945.

Why Ukraine is also fighting for this principle

Beyond defending its own territory, Kyiv is also fighting, whether it states it explicitly or not, to preserve an international order in which humanitarian law retains real, binding value, rather than becoming a mere rhetorical façade invoked according to the interests of the moment.

This dimension of the war, less visible than the fighting on the front, deserves to be recalled with the same insistence as the territorial stakes that usually dominate media coverage of this conflict.

What Western diplomacy still has to accomplish

Coordination that is too often fragmented

Despite constant declarations of support for Ukraine, Western diplomacy remains, on the specific issue of prisoners of war, too often fragmented among various capitals that do not systematically adopt a common, coordinated position toward your government, Mr. Putin.

This fragmentation, documented by several analysts of transatlantic relations, weakens the collective leverage the West could exert if it spoke with one voice on this specific humanitarian file.

A call for a common, firm position

I am arguing, in this letter, for Western governments, from the United States to the European Union to the United Kingdom, to adopt a common, public position demanding full access for the International Committee of the Red Cross to all Ukrainian prisoners held in Russia.

This strengthened coordination would send a clear signal to your government: the humanitarian file on prisoners will not be pushed to the back burner of negotiations, whatever the geopolitical priorities of the moment.

What will be at stake in the coming months

New exchanges to watch closely

Mr. Putin, further prisoner exchanges will probably follow in the coming months, according to analysts tracking this file. Each one will be scrutinized with the same rigor by the international community and by Ukrainian families still waiting for news of their loved ones.

The true measure of your good faith will not be found in the one-off announcement of an exchange, but in the regularity, transparency, and scale of these gestures over time, as well as in your willingness, or lack thereof, to finally open your detention centers to independent international oversight.

A responsibility that is entirely yours

This war, Mr. Putin, remains your choice and your responsibility. Every detained prisoner, every separated family, every documented suffering traces back to the decision to invade Ukraine in February 2022, a decision that continues to produce its human consequences four years later.

No prisoner exchange, however well-orchestrated for communication purposes, can erase this fundamental responsibility that weighs on your government before history and before international law.

Conclusion: this letter remains open, like this war

A gesture that is not enough

Mr. Putin, 370 prisoners exchanged, 185 on each side according to Reuters and The Moscow Times, represent real and sincere relief for the families involved. But that number does nothing to redeem four years of war, illegal annexations, and bombardments that continue to strike Ukrainian civilians every week.

This letter remains open, literally and figuratively, because the humanitarian file of this war also remains, tragically, open, with no guarantee of a quick or complete resolution.

What history will remember

History will judge your government not on the one-off prisoner exchanges you agree to negotiate, but on the overall record of this war you chose to launch. No isolated humanitarian gesture, however welcome for the families involved, can erase that record before history.

I will continue, as a columnist, to document every stage of this file, with the same rigor and the same absence of leniency toward your regime.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Columnist's transparency note

My acknowledged biases in this letter

I am a columnist-analyst, openly pro-Ukraine and critical of Vladimir Putin's government. This open letter, by its very nature, takes a clear stance and makes no claim to conventional journalistic neutrality. I state this explicitly so the reader understands the nature of this editorial exercise.

Every fact presented in this piece, however, rests on verifiable journalistic sources that I cite explicitly, and I invent no quote or detail not corroborated by those public sources.

What I cannot guarantee

I cannot guarantee the exact intentions of the Russian government behind each prisoner exchange, nor the complete exhaustiveness of the mistreatment testimonies reported by released Ukrainian prisoners. I flag this limitation rather than concealing it behind false certainty.

My method remains constant: distinguish facts confirmed by multiple sources from interpretations and judgments that are my own, clearly identified as such in this piece's editorial passages.

Sources

Primary sources

The Moscow Times — Russia and Ukraine exchange 370 POWs — June 5, 2026

Reuters — Ukraine, Russia exchange 185 prisoners of war each in swap — June 5, 2026

Secondary sources

The Kyiv Independent — coverage of prisoner exchanges and captivity testimonies — June 2026

Ukrinform — Ukraine's national news agency — June 2026

The Guardian International — coverage of the war in Ukraine — June 2026

Foreign Policy — analyses of Russian-Ukrainian humanitarian diplomacy — 2026