“Prisoner exchanges are never linear, it’s not criminal against criminal”

A “historic” exchange. A “diplomatic victory.” “A feat.” Rarely have such superlatives been used to describe a prisoner exchange. Sixteen people detained in Russia and Belarus landed Thursday evening in Germany and the United States. Among them, several journalists, a former American Marine and well-known opponents of Putin. In exchange, ten Russians, including two minors, children of a couple of spies, were sent back to Moscow. What analysis can be drawn from this extraordinary exchange? The insight of geopolitical researcher Carole Grimaud, a specialist in Russia.

There have been other exchanges in the past. Why is this one called “out of the ordinary”?

Its particularity lies first in the number of prisoners exchanged: 26, that’s huge. Usually, we’re talking about two or three people. There’s also the profile. Russia had been trying for a long time to get Krassikov back, the FSB agent who was sentenced to life in Germany for the assassination of a Chechen separatist. He’s close to Putin. He was apparently supposed to have been exchanged for Navalny, who died in prison last February. However, other well-known opponents of the regime have been released, including Vladimir Kara-Murza, who was sentenced last year to 25 years in prison. The conviction in July of journalist Evan Gershkovich probably accelerated the negotiations.

There is a feeling of “disproportion”: criminals or spies are exchanged for a journalist, a soldier or intellectuals…

Prisoner exchanges are never linear: you don’t exchange a soldier for a soldier, a criminal for a criminal… If only because otherwise there would be relatively few exchanges: Russia, for example, very rarely imprisons soldiers. The value and quality of the prisoners are not taken into account. What we witnessed last night is an illustration of hostage diplomacy, exactly like that conducted by Iran. Foreigners, particularly journalists, will be targeted by false accusations of espionage in order to be used later as a means of pressure and exchanged with prisoners. Moscow does not hesitate to specifically target European or American nationals, this is nothing new.

Laurent Vinatier, the Frenchman arrested at the beginning of June, was not part of this exchange. How should we interpret this?

I was actually surprised to see that he was not part of it. This probably means that France was not involved in these negotiations. The question is why. Since his arrest, there has been very little talk about this man. Immediately after his arrest, the French authorities insisted on the fact that Laurent Vinatier was working for a Swiss NGO. But just because we are not talking about it does not mean that nothing is happening behind the scenes. The proof is in this exchange during the night.

There was no indication of this prisoner exchange?

No, it is a very big surprise. And rather an encouraging sign for the future. It means that the war in Ukraine has not completely interrupted secret diplomacy. We do not know how long these exchanges have been going on, but if the exchange of Navalny was indeed envisaged, it has been several months since his death was announced in February. This means that dialogue is still possible. If we are capable of making such an exchange, we are capable of reaching an agreement, everyone has done their part. The fact that notorious opponents of Putin have been released is not anecdotal. Perhaps this is a pre-return of diplomacy for the end of the war. We must put ourselves in the future peace conference: we are perhaps closer to considering meetings between Russia and Ukraine than we imagined.

source site

Related Articles