By Dr Rajorshi Roy (Ph.D.)
On 1st of August 2024, Russia and the West conducted their biggest exchange of prisoners since the end of the Cold War. This swap in Ankara was notable not only for its scale but also for the stakeholders involved. Twenty-four captives crossed the growing ‘east-west’ divide in the European mainland. Russia and Belarus released sixteen prisoners comprising German, American and Russian citizens. Meanwhile, the US, Germany, Norway, Poland and Slovenia freed eight Russian natives. The charges against the captives varied across a wide spectrum. It included espionage, terrorism, cyber-crime, murder, smuggling of weapons and drugs, and, treason. Notably, both sides had accused each other of levelling fictitious charges for imposing long-term incarceration. This was seen as a strategy to barter assets considered valuable to the ruling regimes.
In doing so, Russia and the West have reprised their Cold War era toolkit of weaponising prisoners. ‘Hostage diplomacy’ was a recurring theme of the Soviet Union-US confrontation. The initial prisoner exchanges starting in 1962 involved swapping of ‘spies’. From 1976 onwards, it expanded to cover political dissidents. The biggest swap occurred in 1985 comprising twenty-seven intelligence personnel. In total, six major prisoner exchanges took place during the chequered Cold War period.
Incidentally, ‘hostage diplomacy’ even today is a marker of deterioration in ties between Russia and the West. This is borne out by the three such exchanges since 2010 which coincide with their growing friction. In contrast, prisoner swaps had stopped completely during the first two decades of Russia’s independence – an era often viewed as the golden age of Russia-West rapprochement.
Paradoxically, the recent exchange in Ankara highlights a rare instance of positive engagement between Russia and the West amidst their worsening hostility. Moscow’s war in Ukraine has led to ties hitting a historic post-Cold War low.
Interestingly, the August prisoner swap appears largely driven by the United States. Biden’s statement hailing the American allies for facilitating the exchange when juxtaposed with German Chancellor Scholz’s remarks of a “difficult decision” point to the US prevailing upon its European partners. Germany’s reluctance is likely linked to the release of a Russian intelligence agent convicted of killing a Chechen rebel on German soil. Similarly, several European countries hold the Kremlin responsible for the death of Russia’s leading opposition figure Alexei Navalny in February this year. They would perhaps have had to reconcile the prisoner exchange to not truly making Moscow accountable for its perceived acts of omission and commission in Navalny’s untimely demise.
The pertinent questions, therefore, are related to the timing of the swap as well as the potential of a thaw in Russia-West hostility.
Timing of the Exchange
Boosting their leaders’ domestic popularity appears to be a key driving force of Russia and the United States green lighting the exchange. This was evident in both sides extending a red- carpet welcome to the freed personnel. It included the two Presidents receiving them at the tarmac.
For Russia, the swap involves ample messaging on multiple fronts. It conveys to the Russian citizens that the state will not abandon the patriots. Similarly, the official media briefing sought to highlight the government’s proactiveness in tackling the vexed issue of foreign spies. It also focussed on the rationale to expel Russian citizens. This strategy was perhaps aimed at quelling incipient domestic discontentment at stifling political opposition through imprisonment and exiles. The expelled Russian nationals were, unsurprisingly, projected as undermining the country’s national security in collusion with Moscow’s external adversaries.
Notably, foreign policy is a source of domestic legitimacy for Putin. Its key pillar is anchored to restoring Russia’s great power status. Against the backdrop of a hostile geopolitical environment, the need to rally the people around the Russian flag is more relevant today than ever before. Amidst Putin’s clarion call of ‘us versus the West’, a government which leaves no citizen behind in the national sacrifice of making Russia great again carries a strong resonance among the people.
The prisoner exchange can also have a ripple effect in energising the intelligence cadre. The Kremlin’s playbook of getting its agents back from foreign shores can be a real morale booster. It can even be the force multiplier in attracting new recruits. This is crucial amidst the growing role of special services in Russia’s toolkit of hybrid warfare. Moscow’s shadow boxing with the West has reinforced the need for robust capabilities to be able to conduct ‘below threshold of war operations’. In the same vein, Putin’s very public lauding of FSB’s Vadim Krasikov for “liquidating a bandit” in Berlin could perhaps be a message to dissidents abroad to not cross the Kremlin’s red-lines. The expelled Russian nationals could mount an opposition campaign from exile.
Incidentally, Putin could also be signalling Russia’s intent to do business with the US irrespective of the political leaning of the American president. This comes amidst intense speculation of a potential Trump 2.0 recalibrating ties with Moscow.
Meanwhile, Biden’s calculus also appears similar to Putin’s. In an election year, the emotive optics of freeing Americans from the clutches of an arch-enemy in Russia can boost the fledgling morale of Democrats. It could even nudge the fence sitters in US politics to choose sides.
In the same vein, attributing the release of seven Russian political dissidents to the US resolve in upholding traditional values of freedom and democracy is likely to strengthen not only the Democrat hand but also Biden’s legacy. This was aptly reflected in his statement of the US ending the “ordeal” of Russians who had “endured unimaginable suffering” in “their own country”.
Crucially, imprisoned Americans coming home will likely blunt Trump’s claims of Biden’s (in effect Democrats’) ineptitude. Unsurprisingly, Democrat Presidential nominee Kamala Harris accompanying Biden to receive the returning Americans at Joint Base Andrews can be seen as riding the popular wave of freeing US citizens.
Interestingly, Biden also hailed NATO allies in facilitating the exchange. His statement of “alliances make Americans safer” reflects the continuing relevance of this military organisation for the US. Incidentally, NATO expansion eastwards towards Russia’s border is seen by many as the casus belli of the full-blown ongoing US-Russia hostility.
Potential of Russia-West Thaw?
The prisoner exchange is one of the few bright spots in the Russia-West antagonism in the last three years. However, it is unlikely to lead to a thaw in their confrontation. The differences between them are not just limited to the war in Ukraine. It fundamentally extends to their conflicting perceptions of each other at both the global and regional levels. This stems from their failure to accommodate each other’s core concerns. As a result, trust deficit and mutual insecurities run deep.
Notably, the Kremlin appears to view the US-led West as seeking to contain and isolate Russia in its neighbourhood. The feeling of the West rebuffing Russia’s rapprochement initiatives has seemingly accentuated Moscow’s security dilemma.
In the same vein, Russia’s perceived assertiveness in Europe appears to have reinforced the Western assessment of the Kremlin being a rogue actor. Moscow, unsurprisingly, is seen as a delinquent state seeking to subvert Western democratic institutions, ethos and way of life. Crucially, there also exist apprehensions that the prisoner exchange could embolden Russia to double down on ‘hostage diplomacy’ to seek Western concessions. This was reflected in the statement of the Chairman of US Foreign Affairs Committee Michael McCaul – “I remain concerned that continuing to trade innocent Americans for actual Russian criminals held in the U.S. and elsewhere sends a dangerous message to Putin that only encourages further hostage taking by his regime.”
As such, Russia and the West are likely to maintain the current course of mutual hostility unless a fundamental recalibration takes place on both sides. The prisoner exchange, therefore, should be seen not as a safety valve but a tactical ploy benefiting both sides.
What does it mean for India?
For India, the Russia-West confrontation continues to complicate India’s geo-strategic calculus. Amidst no signs of lessening of tensions, India would have to continue to deftly navigate the pulls and pressures of this hostility to secure its national interests.
(The author is Associate Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), New Delhi.)
(Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of FinancialExpress.com Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.)