Putin’s abduction of Ukrainian children

Maksimas Milta is Ukraine country director at The Reckoning Project. Fredrik Wesslau is a distinguished policy fellow at the Stockholm Centre for Eastern European Studies and former chair of the board of The Reckoning Project.

A defining feature of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine is the policy of deporting and indoctrinating Ukrainian children. 

This sinister act is nothing less than Russian state policy but also reflects what this war is about for Russia, namely to destroy Ukraine not just as a state but as a nation, and to eradicate Ukraine as an identity. 

It is the crime on which the International Criminal Court has based its arrest warrant against Vladimir Putin and his children’s rights commissioner, Maria Lvova-Belova. The tragic reality is that over 19,500 Ukrainian children have been abducted by Russia. 

Kyiv has made the return of the children a central demand in negotiations with Russia on a ceasefire and peace agreement. The desire to bring the children home runs deep in Ukrainian society. A list of 339 names was presented to the Russian delegation in Istanbul on June 2.

But Russia has rejected even the notion that these children have been deported and mocked the idea that it would return them to Ukraine.

The head of the Russian delegation, Vladimir Medinsky, claimed at the talks in Istanbul there are no abducted children — only Ukrainian children “rescued” by Russian soldiers. He dismissed Ukrainian demands as a performance for European audiences, suggesting they are meant to impress ‘“sympathetic European grandmothers.” 

This deceptive rhetoric is notable for two reasons.

First, Medinsky’s rejection of the notion that these children have been deported is not only expected disinformation — it’s a calculated attack on the foundations of international justice. By replacing the protection that children are guaranteed under the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute with cynical propaganda, he does more than lie: he seeks to dismantle the very framework defining Russian action as criminal. This is not mere distortion — it’s a deliberate effort to normalize the abduction of children as a legitimate act of war, rather than the grave violation it in fact is.

What makes this notable is its brazenness. Medinsky isn’t simply denying a crime; he’s attempting to rewrite accepted rules of war in real time, erasing legal distinctions between rescue and abduction. By framing Ukraine’s demand for justice as theatrical propaganda aimed at “European grandmothers,” he trivializes the ICC’s arrest warrants for Putin and Lvova-Belova — warrants rooted in meticulously documented evidence. This is Russia’s playbook: weaponize absurdity to corrode the credibility of international institutions, all the while continuing to commit the crimes those institutions are designed to punish.

There’s simply no ambiguity about abduction by deportation or forcible displacement being a war crime. If there’s no consent from the legal guardian, or the consent is made under duress, then consent is superfluous and bears no legal force. 

For nearly two years now, The Reckoning Project has been working on the ground to collect testimonies from witnesses and survivors of child abductions. The evidence is unequivocal in terms of the scope and intent of abductions staged by the Russians. 

Russia’s long-term goal is to erase the Ukrainian identity of over 1.5 million children remaining under the occupation. They are subjected to pro-Russian indoctrination, forced to adopt Russian names, passports, history, culture and language. But the Kremlin’s efforts go even further: In many cases, Ukrainian children are put through Russian military training and paramilitary youth camps, like those modeled on the Young Army Cadets National Movement, or Yunarmiya. 

These programs are designed to instill loyalty to Russia and to prepare Ukrainian children for potential military roles, effectively weaponizing them against their own people, country and society. 

Second, Medinsky’s claims are not merely rhetorical tricks or alternative viewpoints — they’re calculated attempts to conceal a war crime. If one follows his logic, Ukrainian children are supposedly being saved by Russian soldiers from the very invasion those same Russian soldiers launched. This circular reasoning not only exposes the absurdity of Moscow’s position, but also reveals a deliberate pattern of deception. The narrative of “saving” children serves as a cover-up for internationally recognized war crimes — an effort to deflect accountability and confuse international observers.

This is not the first time that Russia has tried to cover up its crimes, or to lay groundwork for future deniability. The technique of creating information alibis is thoroughly reviewed in the recent report produced by The Reckoning Project and Global Rights Compliance. Russia’s preemptive excuses are not just lies, but carefully crafted narratives meant to muddy the waters before or during the commission of atrocities. Such narratives are designed to obstruct justice and shield perpetrators from consequences. The aim is to shape the international legal and political environment, making it harder to hold Russia accountable — even as its forces continue to commit crimes.

Whether at the talks in Istanbul or during Security Council sessions in New York, Russian officials consistently deploy the “saving children” narrative as a preemptive excuse. The danger is that failing to recognize and counter these preemptive excuses risks normalizing atrocity and emboldening further violations. Exposing and dismantling these narratives is not just about winning a propaganda battle — it is about safeguarding the rule of law and protecting the most vulnerable victims of this war.

What matters most at this stage are three priorities.

First, more resources must be directed toward investigating and prosecuting the war crime of child abduction. While the International Criminal Court faces challenges, it remains the most credible and competent international authority to conduct investigations into the deportation of Ukrainian children. Europe needs to do more, especially given how the Trump administration’s sanctions against the ICC are disrupting its ability to operate.

Second, international pressure must be intensified to ensure the return of abducted children. Experience shows that thorough journalistic investigations and public condemnation can be powerful tools — sometimes leading to the successful return of a child. This is a struggle against time.

Third, international advocacy is essential. As South Africa presides over the G20 and hosts the Johannesburg summit, this is a critical moment to build support for accountability among countries outside the EU.

The international agenda must not lose sight of accountability, even as negotiations continue. The fate of Ukraine’s children is not just a humanitarian issue — it is central to the broader struggle against impunity and for justice. If the world allows Russia’s maskirovka — its strategic deception—to prevail, it will only embolden further crimes.