Survivors’ Testimonies and UN Findings Point to Russian Responsibility for the Devastating Attack on Ukrainian POWs
Two years have passed since the catastrophic explosion at Olenivka prison that claimed the lives of over 50 Ukrainian POWs. Survivors and a leaked UN analysis now point to Russia as the orchestrator of this tragic event. The haunting memories of that night still puzzle the survivors, who witnessed their comrades perish in a blast that Russia blames on Ukraine. Kyrylo Masalitin, aged beyond his years by captivity, and Arsen Dmytryk, the informal commander, recount their harrowing experiences and the eerie behavior of guards who seemed unfazed as the building burned.
Masalitin, now a father figure to his men on the front lines, recalls the futile attempts to save dying comrades. The Associated Press interviewed over a dozen individuals, including survivors, investigators, and families of the dead, all of whom provide evidence pointing to Russian culpability. An internal UN analysis corroborates this conclusion, yet the UN has stopped short of publicly accusing Russia.
Out of 193 prisoners in the barracks, fewer than two dozen returned home. More than 50 died on that fateful night of July 28, 2022, and around 120 remain missing, believed to be detained in Russia. Despite Russia’s claims that Ukraine attacked its own soldiers, international investigations have been nonexistent, and Ukraine’s probe is just one of thousands of war crimes cases, raising doubts about whether justice will ever be served.
The UN has dismissed Russia’s assertions that Ukrainian HIMARS targeted the prisoners, aligning with the testimonies of returning POWs like Masalitin. Survivors struggle to piece together the events, noting numerous inconsistencies.
In the aftermath of the Olenivka tragedy, UN Secretary-General António Guterres launched an independent investigation. However, Russia’s refusal to guarantee safety for the mission’s members led to its dissolution without any site visits. Nonetheless, when survivors were exchanged and returned to Ukraine, a UN field team conducted a thorough analysis, interviewing 55 freed POWs and reviewing extensive evidence. Their 100-page report concluded that Russia had planned and executed the attack, although this was never made public in full.
The mysterious lists of names drawn up by the Russians in late July 2022 included men from the Azov unit, national heroes who had held out against a larger Russian force in Mariupol. The prisoners were moved to a newly prepared barrack, away from the others. Survivors describe a hastily prepared building with flimsy barbed wire and no mattresses, suggesting a rapid setup for an ominous purpose.
On the night of July 28, the guards’ unusual behavior and the sudden explosion shattered any remaining doubts. Survivors like Dmytryk and Shastun recall the chaos, the screams, and the guards’ disturbing laughter as the building burned. Their pleas for help were met with gunfire and threats, prolonging the agony of the wounded. Hours passed before any medical assistance arrived, and the survivors were treated like cattle, transported in trucks under brutal conditions.
The following days were a blur of isolation and uncertainty. Survivors were kept in small cells, away from other prisoners, to prevent them from sharing their stories. Meanwhile, other Ukrainian POWs were forced to clear the debris and bodies, under the watchful eyes of Russian officials and journalists, who manipulated the scene to support their narrative.
International reactions were mixed, with both Russia and Ukraine blaming each other. The UN’s investigation faltered due to lack of access, leaving many questions unanswered. The Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine, however, continued its work, gathering testimonies and evidence that contradicted Russia’s claims.
Despite a Ukrainian investigation, progress is slow. The challenge lies in identifying the weapon used, which could point to the perpetrators. The Ukrainian prosecutor general’s war crimes unit has narrowed it down to three possibilities: artillery, planted explosives, or a grenade launcher. The director of Olenivka is a suspect, but the investigation suggests a larger conspiracy.
Families of the victims and the missing are left in limbo, their hopes for international justice fading. Mariia Alieksieievych, whose husband was seen in a hospital video, voices a common sentiment: the world has turned its back. She and other relatives push for the International Criminal Court to take up the case, but they know it’s a long shot. Their immediate goal is to save the lives of their loved ones still in Russian captivity, where death is a constant threat.
The Olenivka attack remains a stark reminder of the brutalities of war and the elusiveness of justice. As survivors and families continue their fight for answers, the international community’s response—or lack thereof—will be a testament to its commitment to human rights and accountability.
