[ED] Zelenskyy's credibility crisis: From Seoul to Washington

Volodymyr Zelenskyy disclosed the transfer of two North Korean prisoners of war to South Korea at the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 23, triggering a diplomatic dispute with Seoul. South Korea says the governments understood that the transfer would remain confidential, while Kyiv denies that a formal agreement existed. Zelenskyy’s confrontation with Donald Trump over Russian diesel supplies has further strained confidence in his leadership. The editorial argues that Ukraine must respect partners’ interests, explain the disclosure and engage Washington without compromising its security.

South Korea recalled its ambassador to Ukraine on Oct. 8 and continues to demand an explanation and apology over the disclosure.

South Korea acknowledges that no written nondisclosure document was signed but says discussions at multiple levels established an understanding of secrecy.

Trump announced an arrangement to release Russian diesel supplies into international markets, beginning with an initial shipment exceeding 300,000 tons, and his administration later eased sanctions to facilitate the exports.

Zelenskyy criticized the diesel arrangement as a gift to Vladimir Putin, while Trump accused Zelenskyy of repeatedly missing opportunities to end the war and called for Ukraine to have a new president.

Published Oct 14, 2026 1:32 pm KST

Zelenskyy should provide credible account of POW transfer dispute

People watch Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on a large screen as he speaks at the Warsaw Security Forum in Warsaw, Poland, Monday. AP-Yonhap

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy must answer for a damaging diplomatic disclosure, while U.S. President Donald Trump’s demand for new leadership raises difficult questions about Kyiv’s future.

Zelenskyy’s increasingly strained relations with international partners highlight a fundamental problem of leadership: a country fighting for survival cannot afford to squander the trust of those whose support it needs. The Ukrainian president’s disclosure of the transfer of two North Korean prisoners of war (POWs) to South Korea has triggered a serious diplomatic dispute with Seoul. His subsequent confrontation with Trump over Russian diesel supplies has further exposed the dangers of personalizing diplomacy and treating allies’ concerns as secondary to political messaging.

On Sept. 23, Zelenskyy announced at the United Nations General Assembly that Ukraine had sent two captured North Korean soldiers to South Korea. Seoul maintains that both governments had clearly understood the transfer would remain confidential because of the potential danger to the POWs and their families. Kyiv, however, denied that a formal confidentiality agreement existed. South Korea has since acknowledged that no written nondisclosure document was signed, while insisting that discussions at multiple levels established an understanding of secrecy. The distinction matters, but it does not excuse either side from explaining what was communicated and why expectations diverged.

The controversy is therefore not simply about whether a document was signed. It concerns whether one government can rely on another to respect the sensitivities surrounding a humanitarian and security operation. Publicity may have helped Zelenskyy draw attention to North Korea’s military involvement in Russia’s war. Yet that objective did not eliminate the need to consider Seoul’s security concerns or the possible repercussions for the families of the POWs.

The more damaging development came when Ukraine’s presidential office rejected Seoul’s account of the confidentiality understanding. If Kyiv agreed in substance to secrecy and subsequently denied that understanding without adequately explaining the discrepancy, it would have compounded the original diplomatic mistake. South Korea has demanded an explanation and apology, recalled its ambassador to Ukraine on Oct. 8 and continued pressing its case. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha has described the dispute as resolved, but Seoul has made clear that it does not consider the matter settled.

For Zelenskyy, the implications extend beyond bilateral relations. South Korea has provided substantial humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and has its own compelling reasons to monitor the growing military cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang. Alienating Seoul would be strategically shortsighted. Ukraine needs international support, but support cannot be treated as an unconditional entitlement. Credibility depends on respecting partners’ legitimate interests, acknowledging misunderstandings and accepting responsibility when mistakes occur.

Zelenskyy’s confrontation with Trump has added another dimension to his credibility problem. On Friday, Trump announced an arrangement with Russian President Vladimir Putin to release Russian diesel supplies into international markets, starting with an initial shipment exceeding 300,000 tons. His administration subsequently eased sanctions to facilitate the exports. Zelenskyy criticized the arrangement as a gift to Putin, arguing that additional Russian energy revenue will help sustain Moscow’s war effort. Critics in Washington have also questioned whether the move undermines sanctions and delivers meaningful relief from elevated fuel prices.

On Saturday, Trump responded by accusing Zelenskyy of repeatedly missing opportunities to end the war and demanding that Ukraine get a new president. His remarks reflect growing frustration with Kyiv’s refusal to accept terms Washington considers necessary for a settlement. However, Trump’s demand is not a solution in itself. Russia launched the invasion, and any durable peace must address Ukraine’s security, rather than merely reward Moscow’s willingness to negotiate. Nor can a foreign leader legitimately decide who should lead Ukraine.

Still, Zelenskyy cannot dismiss the political reality behind Trump’s intervention. Ukraine depends heavily on external assistance, and Washington’s willingness to sustain that support cannot be taken for granted. On Tuesday, Trump said the United States was continuing to share intelligence with Ukraine and working with both Kyiv and Moscow to end the war, even as criticism of the diesel arrangement persisted. The relationship remains consequential but increasingly unpredictable.

Ukraine also faces a difficult constitutional and security question over wartime elections. Trump’s demand for new leadership should not dictate Ukraine’s democratic choices, particularly while Russian attacks continue. Nevertheless, Zelenskyy must demonstrate that his government remains accountable, open to serious negotiations and capable of maintaining the confidence of its partners.

The lesson from Seoul and Washington is clear: International solidarity cannot survive on appeals to sympathy alone. Zelenskyy should provide a credible account of the POW transfer dispute, acknowledge any failure to honor the parties’ understanding and work toward repairing relations with South Korea. He must also engage Washington pragmatically without compromising Ukraine’s essential security interests.

A leader’s credibility is measured not only by the cause he defends, but by how reliably he deals with those who support it. Zelenskyy cannot afford to forget that distinction.

9月23日，弗拉基米尔·泽连斯基在联合国大会上披露了向韩国移交两名朝鲜战俘的消息，引发了与首尔的外交争端。韩国方面表示，双方政府此前已达成共识，认为移交过程应保密；而基辅方面则否认存在正式协议。泽连斯基与唐纳德·特朗普就俄罗斯柴油供应问题发生的冲突，进一步削弱了外界对其领导能力的信心。社论认为，乌克兰必须尊重伙伴的利益，解释此次披露行为，并在不损害自身安全的前提下与华盛顿进行对话。

韩国于10月8日召回了驻乌克兰大使，并继续要求乌克兰就此事作出解释和道歉。

韩国方面承认没有签署书面保密协议，但表示多层次的讨论已经达成了保密共识。

特朗普宣布了一项安排，允许俄罗斯柴油进入国际市场，首批出货量超过 30 万吨，他的政府后来放松了制裁，以促进出口。

泽连斯基批评柴油协议是送给弗拉基米尔·普京的礼物，而特朗普则指责泽连斯基屡次错失结束战争的机会，并呼吁乌克兰选出一位新总统。

发布于2026年10月14日下午1:32（韩国标准时间）

泽连斯基应就战俘转移争议提供可信的解释。

周一，在波兰华沙举行的华沙安全论坛上，人们通过大屏幕观看乌克兰总统泽连斯基的讲话。美联社-韩联社

乌克兰总统泽连斯基必须为这一具有破坏性的外交泄露事件负责，而美国总统特朗普要求更换领导层的呼声也引发了人们对基辅未来的担忧。

泽连斯基与国际伙伴日益紧张的关系凸显了领导力的一个根本问题：一个为生存而战的国家不能辜负那些需要它支持的国家的信任。乌克兰总统披露将两名朝鲜战俘移交给韩国一事，引发了与首尔的严重外交争端。随后，他与特朗普就俄罗斯柴油供应问题发生的冲突，进一步暴露了将外交个人化、将盟友的关切置于政治宣传之下的危险性。

9月23日，泽连斯基在联合国大会上宣布，乌克兰已将两名被俘的朝鲜士兵移交给韩国。首尔方面坚称，鉴于战俘及其家属可能面临的危险，两国政府都明确理解此次移交应保密。然而，基辅方面否认存在正式的保密协议。韩国方面随后承认并未签署任何书面保密文件，但同时坚称双方在多层次的磋商中已达成保密共识。这种区别固然重要，但这并不能免除双方解释沟通内容以及预期差异原因的责任。

因此，争议的焦点并非仅仅在于文件是否签署，而是关乎一个政府能否信任另一个政府尊重人道主义和安全行动中涉及的敏感问题。泽连斯基或许利用媒体曝光了朝鲜在俄罗斯战争中的军事介入，但这并不能消除首尔方面对自身安全顾虑以及战俘家属可能面临的后果的考量。

更具破坏性的进展是，乌克兰总统府驳斥了首尔方面关于保密协议的说法。如果基辅方面实质上同意了保密协议，随后又在没有充分解释的情况下否认这一协议，这将加剧最初的外交失误。韩国已要求乌克兰方面做出解释和道歉，并于10月8日召回了驻乌克兰大使，继续推进此事。乌克兰外长安德烈·西比哈称争端已解决，但首尔方面明确表示，他们并不认为此事已经解决。

对泽连斯基而言，其影响远不止于双边关系。韩国向乌克兰提供了大量人道主义援助，并且有充分的理由密切关注莫斯科和平壤之间日益增长的军事合作。疏远首尔在战略上是短视的。乌克兰需要国际支持，但支持不能被视为无条件的权利。信誉取决于尊重伙伴的合法权益，承认误解，并在犯错时承担责任。

泽连斯基与特朗普的对抗使他的信誉危机雪上加霜。周五，特朗普宣布与俄罗斯总统普京达成协议，允许俄罗斯柴油进入国际市场，首批出口量超过30万吨。随后，特朗普政府放松了对俄制裁，以促进出口。泽连斯基批评这项协议是送给普京的礼物，认为俄罗斯额外的能源收入将有助于维持莫斯科的战争行动。华盛顿的批评人士也质疑此举是否削弱了制裁，以及是否能真正缓解高油价带来的压力。

周六，特朗普回应称，他指责泽连斯基屡次错失结束战争的机会，并要求乌克兰更换总统。他的言论反映出他对基辅拒绝接受华盛顿认为达成和解所必需的条件日益感到失望。然而，特朗普的要求本身并不能解决问题。俄罗斯发动了入侵，任何持久和平都必须解决乌克兰的安全问题，而不仅仅是奖励莫斯科的谈判意愿。此外，外国领导人也无权决定谁应该领导乌克兰。

然而，泽连斯基无法忽视特朗普干预背后的政治现实。乌克兰严重依赖外部援助，而华盛顿维持这种援助的意愿并非理所当然。周二，特朗普表示，尽管对柴油供应协议的批评声不绝于耳，美国仍将继续与乌克兰分享情报，并与基辅和莫斯科合作结束战争。美乌关系依然至关重要，但也日益难以预测。

乌克兰在战时选举中还面临着棘手的宪法和安全问题。特朗普要求更换领导人的诉求不应左右乌克兰的民主选择，尤其是在俄罗斯的攻击仍在继续的情况下。然而，泽连斯基必须证明他的政府仍然负责任，愿意进行严肃的谈判，并且有能力维持伙伴国的信任。

首尔和华盛顿的教训很明确：国际团结不能仅仅依靠博取同情。泽连斯基应该就战俘移交争议给出可信的解释，承认任何未能遵守双方谅解的行为，并努力修复与韩国的关系。他还必须务实地与华盛顿接触，同时不能损害乌克兰的根本安全利益。

衡量一位领导人的信誉，不仅在于他所捍卫的事业，还在于他如何可靠地对待支持者。泽连斯基绝不能忘记这一点。