Exchange on a one-way street

Suggesting that Zelensky and Putin exchange civilian prisoners is as unrealistic as it is novel. Nobel laureate Muratov’s appeal raises philosophical, political, logistical, legal, and logical questions. However well-intended his plan, the motives are lopsided, the numbers don’t add up, and the onus seems unfairly placed on Ukraine.

In a YouTube video broadcast on May 26, Dmitri Muratov addressed the presidents of Ukraine and Russia, asking them to carry out an unprecedented exchange of civilian prisoners. The point of departure in Muratov’s reasoning was the recent successful exchange of prisoners of war: If Russia and Ukraine could swap soldiers, why not civilians, namely anti-war prisoners in Russia in exchange for Ukrainians jailed for collaboration with Russia? Continuing with heartbreaking tales of political prisoners held in Russia who endure torture, medical neglect, and death, Muratov begs for their release “while they are still alive”.

The plight of political prisoners in Russia is a humanitarian tragedy, its gravity indeed demands a response. Muratov’s plan however, runs into many obstacles, especially in deciding which prisoners to exchange and what to do with them.

Who is a political prisoner in Russia? Legally, they are a heterogeneous group, with charges ranging from espionage to trading of narcotics to extremism and terrorism. The human rights organization OVD-Info has painstakingly documented the faulty logic, chronology, and political motives indicating charges are unwarranted in the cases of over 1600 individuals, and estimates that the true number may be several times as many. Given that it is nearly impossible to identify all the political prisoners in Russia, the only way to achieve a comprehensive release would be through a general amnesty, similar to that declared after the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia in 1990 and in 2024 after the toppling of the Assad regime in Syria. While Muratov’s primary focus is on incarcerated Russians, there are many Ukrainians, according to some estimates thousands of them, as well as people of other nations, in Russian jails and penal colonies.

Who will political prisoners be exchanged with? Muratov suggests that Ukraine could offer their citizens convicted for supporting the Russian aggression on their territory. But these pro-Russian Ukrainians are considered to pose a threat to Ukraine, meaning they are criminals, hardly comparable to the victims in captivity in Russia. Ukraine has no reason to let them go.

Where will they go? On both sides of this unbalanced equation, there is no sensible destination for these prisoners. They can’t just be let out of the prison doors: the Russian prisoners would be re-arrested on the same or other trumped-up charges, and the Ukrainian collaborators would undermine Ukraine’s security. And they can’t be swapped across the border between the two countries: Russians are not very welcome in Ukraine which shouldn’t have to shoulder the burden of medical care and other support services for Russian citizens, nor does it make sense to deport Ukrainian citizens from their home country. Third-party countries are also unlikely to accept large numbers of Russian and pro-Russian Ukrainians, both of which present potential security risks.

Perhaps the biggest flaw in Muratov’s proposal is its failure to take into account Zelensky’s main concern, which is to end the war in a way that preserves Ukraine. From this perspective, the first priority concerning imprisoned citizens would be to get back Ukraine’s prisoners, as well as the thousands of children that have been abducted. Yes, the massive incarceration of political prisoners in Russia is an urgent humanitarian crisis. But it is a problem that Russia created. Ukraine isn’t fighting this war in order to save Russia from its mistakes, they are fighting for their own sovereignty.