Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

"277 home, 246 for 246: what stands behind the largest Easter exchange"

On April 19, Ukraine returned 277 military personnel — 246 in a direct exchange and 31 severely wounded outside of it. Behind these figures lies three years of work by the UAE as the sole stable mediator between Moscow and Kyiv.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 11, 2026 · 2 min read

"277 home, 246 for 246: what stands behind the largest Easter exchange"

On the eve of Orthodox Easter, April 19, 2025, Ukraine and Russia conducted one of the largest prisoner exchanges of the full-scale war. 277 Ukrainian military personnel returned home — 246 under the direct formula "246 for 246" and another 31 seriously wounded through measures outside the official exchange.

Who returned and from where

Among the freed — defenders of Mariupol, National Guard members, naval personnel, Territorial Defense fighters, State Special Transport Service servicemen, Airborne Assault Forces and Unmanned Systems Forces. 268 servicemen are privates and sergeants, nine more are officers.

The Mariupol garrison is a separate category: people captured in April 2022 spent over three years in captivity. For their families, this exchange is not a diplomatic event, but the end of a thousand days of uncertainty.

UAE: the quiet mediator with a count in thousands

The exchange took place again through the mediation of the United Arab Emirates. According to Emirates News Agency, the total number of people returned home through the Emirates as mediator has reached 3,771 individuals — after 14 separate rounds of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine.

"When Russia invaded Ukraine, we took a position — to be on the side of international law"

— UAE diplomatic adviser Anwar Gargash

Abu Dhabi did not join sanctions against Moscow, maintains trade relations with both sides — and it is precisely this neutrality, often criticized in the West, that allows the UAE to do what no NATO member can: physically retrieve people from captivity.

2025 chronology: exchanges accelerating

  • February 5 — 24 seriously ill and wounded and one civilian
  • March 19197 servicemen, of which 22 seriously wounded were freed outside exchanges
  • April 19 — 277 people (246 + 31 seriously wounded)

In total, since the beginning of 2025, 596 Ukrainians have returned home, another 53 — outside the exchange process. The pace is accelerating: between the March and April exchanges — exactly one month.

"Ceasefire" against the backdrop of exchange

Putin unilaterally declared an "Easter ceasefire" — Kyiv was skeptical of it even before it began. The occupiers advanced in three places on the front and captured a village during the same day the exchange took place. Humanitarian action and combat operations existed in parallel — as they have every time since 2022.

Three of the freed Ukrainian military personnel were under so-called "investigation" in Russia — formally they were not prisoners of war, but "suspects." The fact that they were included in the exchange anyway either indicates Moscow's flexibility, or the pressure of mediators — or perhaps both.

If the monthly rhythm of exchanges continues through the end of summer, and the "1000 for 1000" format, which Ukraine has already submitted for consideration, is adopted — several thousand people could return home by September. The question is whether Moscow will agree to a scale that would make it impossible to hide losses among its own prisoners of war.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026