- January 21, 2026
- 12:56 pm
- World News
From the news: “US President Donald Trump among 49 invitations to the ‘Council of Peace’ – also sent an invitation to Russian President Putin”.
Journalists named the Russian surgeons who could have burned the inscription “Glory to Russia” and the letter Z on the body of Ukrainian prisoner of war Andriy Pereverzev during surgery in a hospital in occupied Donetsk.
This is reported by “Schemes”.
According to investigators, the surgeons from Krasnodar — Yuri Kuznetsov and Andrey Kryachko — are involved. As journalists note, since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, they regularly travel to occupied Donetsk, bring “humanitarian aid,” and participate in operations.
The story of the Ukrainian serviceman, on whose body the inscription “Glory to Russia” was burned during Russian captivity, became one of the most documented and simultaneously the most severe episodes of cruel treatment of prisoners of war during the war. It is not about spontaneous violence, but about a cold, deliberate act committed in a medical institution during surgery when the person was under anesthesia and could not resist.
Who suffered and how events unfolded
The victim is Andriy Pereverzev, a serviceman of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
- Spring 2023 — Pereverzev receives a severe shrapnel wound and is captured by Russia.
- 2023–2024 — held in illegal detention, transferred, surgical treatment.
- February 2024 — surgery in the temporarily occupied territory of Donetsk region.
- Summer 2024 — return to Ukraine as part of a prisoner exchange and documentation of torture traces by Ukrainian doctors.
After returning, he was hospitalized, where doctors officially documented the inscription “Glory to Russia” and the symbol “Z” as a result of deliberate impact.
Where the inscription could have been made
It was found that the inscription on the prisoner’s body was made during surgery on February 24, 2024, in the largest hospital in occupied Donbas — “Donetsk Clinical Territorial Medical Association” (DOCTMO). According to journalists, Kuznetsov and Kryachko regularly visit this medical institution with colleagues from the so-called “Friends of Donbas Medicine” group, which includes about two dozen Russian doctors from different regions.
The investigation states that the collected evidence may indicate: Kuznetsov and Kryachko were at DOCTMO on the day Pereverzev was operated on, and the inscription could have been burned on his body then.
Ukrainian doctors established:
the inscription was made during surgery when the prisoner of war was under anesthesia. The nature of the scar excludes accidental damage or the consequence of a combat wound. It was a deliberate action using a medical instrument.
Possible perpetrators: why the investigation points to specific doctors
At the beginning of 2026, the investigation by TSN named two Russian surgeons who could be involved in this episode:
- Yuri Kuznetsov
- Andrey Kryachko
It is important to emphasize: this is a journalistic identification, not a court verdict. However, the investigation relies on a set of facts that are hard to ignore.
Firstly, the time and place coincide. The operation is dated February 2024 — during this period, both surgeons, according to open sources and publications, were in the temporarily occupied territory of Donetsk region.
Secondly, their physical presence in Donetsk is recorded. Both doctors repeatedly traveled there on official business trips and participated in surgical interventions.
Thirdly, their professional profile. These are surgeons with direct access to operating rooms and instruments. Ukrainian doctors emphasize: the inscription could only have been made by medical personnel, not by guards or third parties.
Fourthly, the ideological context is important. Public materials of these doctors recorded loyalty to Russia’s military rhetoric and participation in work in occupied territories. This is not proof of guilt, but an environment where such an action ceases to be perceived as unacceptable.
Medical examination after release
After returning to Ukraine, Pereverzev underwent an examination by Ukrainian surgeons and forensic medical experts.
It was established:
- the scar shows signs of deliberate surgical or thermal impact;
- the damage was inflicted during the operation, not after healing;
- it had no therapeutic purpose and was not related to medical necessity.
All traces were documented before procedures to reduce scar visibility began.
What must be in a person’s mind to do such a thing
This is where the dry chronology ceases to be sufficient.
To burn an inscription on the body of a living person under anesthesia requires not just hardening. One must undergo an internal process of dehumanization.
This is not a flash of anger.
Not the chaos of battle.
Not “war emotions”.
This is a calm, deliberate action, in which:
- the patient ceases to be a person and becomes a surface;
- the doctor ceases to be a doctor and becomes a carrier of ideology;
- the operation becomes a tool of humiliation.
The inscription does not carry military benefit. It does not heal, save, or affect the outcome of hostilities. It is a brand, intentionally left — to humiliate, intimidate, leave a mark of “power” over the body of the defenseless.
It is especially frightening that this was done at the moment of maximum vulnerability — when a person cannot defend themselves or even comprehend what is happening.
Why this goes beyond “ordinary war cruelty”
War knows violence.
But medical torture is a separate boundary.
When a weapon is in a soldier’s hands — it’s war.
When a scalpel is used as a means of humiliation — it’s the destruction of the basic principles of civilization.
Here, everything is violated at once:
- medical ethics;
- Geneva Conventions;
- the fundamental concept of human dignity.
Legal perspective
The Ukrainian side qualifies the incident as a war crime and a violation of international humanitarian law. Such crimes have no statute of limitations.
Even if the scars become less visible over time, facts, names, dates, and medical conclusions are already documented. The story will not disappear.
Political and legal context: investigation of torture, “Council of Peace,” and Putin’s status
The publication of the investigation with the names of Russian surgeons who could be involved in the medical torture of a Ukrainian prisoner of war coincided with an international event.
US President Donald Trump sent invitations to 49 world leaders to participate in a new international format — the so-called “Council of Peace.” Among the invitees was Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Formally, these events are not related. However, in reality, they exist in the same temporal and political space — and this creates a sharp contrast. While journalists name specific names of possible perpetrators of medical torture, and Ukrainian doctors and experts document the fact of deliberate injury to a prisoner of war, the head of the state under whose jurisdiction such crimes occur receives a diplomatic invitation to a format declared as a platform for discussing peace.
This contrast is heightened by the fact that Putin already has a clearly defined international legal status. Since March 2023, he has been under an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court on charges of war crimes related to the illegal deportation and forced transfer of Ukrainian children.
This is not about political assessment or rhetoric. This is a decision of an international judicial body, meaning that Putin is a person officially wanted by international justice. In this context, inviting such a person to a structure named “Council of Peace” inevitably raises the question: is it possible to talk about peace without accountability for already documented crimes — including the torture of prisoners of war.
Legal reference
Why the torture case directly falls under the Geneva Conventions
The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols explicitly prohibit torture, cruel treatment, and intentional infliction of physical suffering on prisoners of war. This applies not only to interrogations or conditions of detention but also to any actions committed in medical institutions.
It is specifically emphasized: a prisoner of war has the right to medical assistance solely for therapeutic purposes. Using surgical intervention for humiliation, branding, or ideological “messaging” is a gross violation of international humanitarian law.
International law also enshrines the principle of command responsibility. This means that responsibility lies not only with the direct perpetrators but also with those who:
- allowed the systematic nature of such crimes,
- did not prevent them,
- did not ensure investigation and punishment of the guilty.
War crimes, including the torture of prisoners of war, have no statute of limitations. They are subject to investigation regardless of time, political circumstances, and current diplomatic processes.
Why this case concerns more than one person
This case is important not only because of the fate of one Ukrainian soldier.
It shows what society and the system become if:
- a doctor ceases to be a doctor;
- a hospital ceases to be a place of help;
- captivity ceases to be a protected status.
That is why such stories must be called by their names — without softening, without euphemisms, and without attempts to “understand both sides”.
NANews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency continues to monitor the development of the investigation and the publication of new data on this case.
