JGAS

Article Details

Vol. 6 No. 2 (2026): July

Dead Diplomacy and Battlefield Dynamics: Fallen Soldiers’ Repatriation in the Russia-Ukraine War in 2022– 2026

https://doi.org/10.35912/jgas.v6i2.4451

Abstract

Purpose: This study analyzes the dynamics of battlefield recovery, transfer, identification, and repatriation of dead soldiers in the Russia-Ukraine war from February 2022 to August 8, 2026. It introduces the concept of "dead diplomacy" to describe the limited humanitarian cooperation on deceased combatants that persists alongside an active war.

Research Methodology: The research employs a qualitative documentary case-study design, drawing on secondary data from international humanitarian organizations, official Ukrainian institutions, major news agencies, and peer-reviewed forensic and conflict scholarship. Content and thematic analysis is applied to interpret a non-graphic pictorial corpus of recovery and transfer operations.

Results: The timing, volume, and asymmetry of repatriations are shaped primarily by territorial control and battlefield turnover, meaning exchange ratios cannot be equated with casualty ratios. High-intensity artillery, mines, drones, fragmentation, decomposition, and inaccessible kill zones render battlefield recovery a forensic problem, creating a second delay between physical repatriation and definitive identification. Large-scale returns nonetheless remain possible through institutionalized humanitarian channels and neutral-intermediary arrangements even without ceasefire diplomacy, as demonstrated by the June 2025 Istanbul process and repatriations continuing through July 2026.

Conclusions: The study proposes a Battlefield-Humanitarian Bargaining Framework linking territorial access, negotiated transfer, and forensic identification.

Limitations: Findings rely on secondary and open-source materials, limiting verification of contested details.

Contributions: Repatriation is reframed as a diplomatic instrument negotiating legal responsibility, family rights, evidence, and the political meaning of loss.

Keywords

Battlefield Dynamics Dead Diplomacy Fallen Soldiers Humanitarian Diplomacy Russia-Ukraine War

How to Cite

Eyina, N. N. . (2026). Dead Diplomacy and Battlefield Dynamics: Fallen Soldiers’ Repatriation in the Russia-Ukraine War in 2022– 2026. Journal of Governance and Accountability Studies, 6(2), 227–246. https://doi.org/10.35912/jgas.v6i2.4451

References

  1. Andén-Papadopoulos, K. (2022). Citizen camera-witnessing: Visual politics and the mediation of war and conflict. Media, War & Conflict, 15(4), 438-455. https://doi.org/10.1177/17506352211069144
  2. Ashbridge, S. I., Randolph-Quinney, P. S., Janaway, R. C., Forbes, S. L., & Ivshina, O. (2022). Environmental conditions and bodily decomposition: Implications for long term management of war fatalities and the identification of the dead during the ongoing Ukrainian conflict. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 5, 100284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2022.100284
  3. Assarroudi, A., Heshmati Nabavi, F., Armat, M. R., Ebadi, A., & Vaismoradi, M. (2021). Directed qualitative content analysis: The description and elaboration of its underpinning methods and data analysis process. Journal of Research in Nursing, 26(1–2), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120975620
  4. Ball, K., & Gilligan, C. (2023). Visual methods and the ethics of researching violence: Representing suffering, trauma and human vulnerability. Visual Studies, 38(3), 451-465. https://doi.org/10.1080/1472586X.2022.2128978
  5. Bjola, C., & Pamment, J. (2021). Digital containment: Revisiting containment strategies in the context of disinformation and information warfare. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 16(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-BJA10055
  6. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
  7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
  8. Castleberry, A., & Nolen, A. (2021). Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 13(7), 807–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.c ptl.2021.03.019
  9. Cordner, S., & Tidball-Binz, M. (2017). Humanitarian forensic action - Its origins and future. Forensic Science International, 279, 65-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2017.08.011
  10. Dimitrova, D. V., & Strömbäck, J. (2021). Election news in the hybrid media environment: Political communication, misinformation, and source credibility. Digital Journalism, 9(3), 265-282. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1854897
  11. Fearon, J. D. (1995). Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization, 49(3), 379-414. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300033324
  12. Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2021). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1– 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211002452
  13. Gady, F.-S., & Kofman, M. (2024). Making attrition work: A viable theory of victory for Ukraine. Survival, 66(1), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2024.2309068
  14. Gunas, M., et al. (2024). Manifestations of cruel, inhuman types of behavior and torture of Ukrainian military who died in captivity.
  15. Hoskins, A., & O’Loughlin, B. (2021). War and media: The new visual battlefield. Media, War & Conflict, 14(3), 259-276. https://doi.org/10.1177/17506352211001329
  16. International Committee of the Red Cross. (2021). The forensic human identification process: An integrated approach.
  17. International Committee of the Red Cross. (2026). Customary IHL: Rule 112 Search for and collection of the dead. Retrieved from https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule112
  18. Kaźmierczak, K. (2024). Land warfare during the Russian-Ukrainian war and international humanitarian law. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Iuridica, 106, 45–58. https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.106.04
  19. Kofman, M. (2024, October). Assessing Russian military adaptation in. (2023). Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
  20. Kozan, N., Kotsyubynska, Y., Chadiuk, V., Henyk, B., Onyshchuk, I., Makivnychuk, V., Lampel, V., Kostyshyn, Z., & Kotyk, T. (2026). Wartime identification of repatriated military remains in Ukraine: A bureau-level local audit from Western Ukraine. Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 16, 51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41935-026-00550-9
  21. Mbembe, A. (2003). Necropolitics. Public Culture, 15(1), 11-40. https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-15-1-11
  22. Melzer, N. (2021). International humanitarian law and the protection of persons affected by armed conflict. International Review of the Red Cross, 103(916–917), 37–63. https://doi.org/10.1017/S18 1638312100026X
  23. Morgan, H. (2022). Conducting a qualitative document analysis. The Qualitative Report, 27(1), 64-77. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5044
  24. Mortensen, M. (2021). The ethics of witnessing: Media, images and humanitarian communication. International Journal of Communication, 15, 3247–3265. Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/16735
  25. Mrozek, J., Gawliczek, P., & Sobon, A. (2023). Legal and moral aspects of dealing with the bodies of fallen soldiers in the Russian aggression war against Ukraine. European Research Studies Journal, 26(2), 540-552. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/3188
  26. Murray, C. (2021). The ethics of representing death and suffering in visual media. Journal of War & Culture Studies, 14(4), 425-442. https://doi.org/10.1080/17526272.2021.1894568
  27. Parrin, A. (2023). “How did they die?” Bridging humanitarian and criminal-justice objectives in forensic science to advance the rights of families of the missing under international humanitarian law. International Review of the Red Cross, 105(923), 1047-1070. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383122000686
  28. Petrig, A. (2009). The war dead and their gravesites. International Review of the Red Cross, 91(874), 341-369. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383109990270
  29. Reiter, D. (2009). How wars end. Princeton University Press.
  30. Reuters. (2026b, June 8). Ukraine recaptures more than 600 square km of territory in. (2026). Military chief says. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/world/ukraine-recaptures-more-than-600-square-km-territory-2026-military-chief-says-2026-06-08/
  31. Shevchuk, V., Dunaev, O., Tyshchenko, O., Biletska, G., & Nehrebetskyi, V. (2025). Innovative methods in the identification of deceased persons during armed conflicts and disasters: Criminalistic and forensic medical issues. International Annals of Criminology, 63(4), 646-665. https://doi.org/10.1017/cri.2025.10094
  32. Slim, H. (2019). Humanitarian diplomacy: The ICRC’s neutral and impartial advocacy in armed conflicts. Ethics & International Affairs, 33(1).
  33. Ukrainska Pravda. (2022). Another 50 bodies of fallen Ukrainian defenders returned; 37 are Azovstal defenders. Retrieved from https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/06/08/7351291/
  34. Verdery, K. (2000). The political lives of dead bodies: Reburial and postsocialist change. Columbia University Press.
  35. Wels, W. (2016). Dead body management in armed conflict: Paradoxes in trying to do justice to the dead. Jongbloed.
  36. Çakıroğlu, A. C. (2024). Russian operational art for attrition in Ukraine. Turkish Journal of War Studies, 5(1), 90-128. https://doi.org/10.52792/tws.1467513
  37. Winaldi, Y., & Setiyono, J. (2022). Russian conflict on Ukraine based on humanitarian law perspective. LAW REFORM, 18(2), 252-263. https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v18i2.46679
  38. Yin, R. K. (2021). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.).
WhatsApp Instagram Facebook LinkedIn Email