The writer is a faculty member at Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University and pursues studies in the field of defense, security, and intelligence.
ISTANBUL
On Thursday, Aug. 1, Türkiye's capital Ankara hosted a significant intelligence operation. The largest prisoner exchange between the US and Russia since the Cold War took place, mediated by Turkish intelligence. In the operation, a total of 26 detainees were exchanged. Ten people imprisoned in the US and other Western countries were released, while Russia handed over 16 detainees to the US.
Importance and impact of prisoner exchange operations
One of the key parameters when measuring the intelligence capabilities of states is their organizations' “counterintelligence” and “counter-espionage” abilities. In this context, the capabilities demonstrated by organizations in both offensive and defensive activities are important. Therefore, outside of foreign officials with formal permission to be in a country, such as those in military and diplomatic missions, it is crucial for a state to identify spies illegally present within its borders. Equally important is ensuring the security of operatives and networks operating abroad for its own interests.
From this perspective, identifying spies from hostile/rival countries operating within their own territories is a matter of "prestige" for states with historically established intelligence cultures and institutions, like Russia and the US. The prestige of a state's counter-espionage capabilities in the global intelligence community is not only about their technical and technological capacities but also their network and operation management and intelligence diplomacy skills. However, in the intelligence world, prestige is not just about catching spies within the country. The principle of not compromising the fundamental principles of the intelligence community is also critical. Just as it is a matter of "professional honor" for agents to safeguard state secrets and not reveal operations despite any form of pressure or torture, it is equally an ethical prerequisite for states to retrieve their agents, regardless of their profile, when they are captured and compromised. For the US and Russia, prisoner exchanges are extremely significant in terms of intelligence responsibility, ethics, and morality. States with strong intelligence cultures must mobilize all their resources and negotiate to the last moment even for a single agent. It should be remembered that one of the primary determinants of intelligence culture and institutionalization is the "sense of belonging." An organization that can easily disregard its personnel or sources creates a significant security gap in terms of institutional identity.
Beyond professional loyalty, ethics, and honor, prisoner exchanges involve several important inputs and impacts. First, they provide a sense of security to the public, reassuring them that the US protects its citizens. Given today's rapid, uncontrolled, and limitless spread of information, the anxiety and reaction that a captured or detained agent's family and the public may feel are understandable. In this context, it is known that the state in question might face serious public pressure from both the detainee's family and society. This can reflect on domestic politics and become a political issue attributed to the government's incompetence. In the aftermath of this initiative, both Biden and Putin emerged as victorious leaders, demonstrating their loyalty to their agents and citizens.
Second, prisoner exchanges prevent the potential compromise of operational integrity and information gaps. While some covert operations are planned for six months, others continue uninterrupted for 10 years. So, the "information capital" of an exposed individual is of crucial importance, depending on the scope and depth of the operation or espionage. This is why the course and nature of negotiations and bargaining can change completely based on the status and profile of the captured individual. The high profile of prisoners exchanged in recent years is a vital issue in which time is of the essence for states. The information that high-profile individuals may disclose can create security vulnerabilities and gaps in defenses that can impact national, regional, and even global security. Therefore, the secrets they might reveal under interrogation and how much they might disclose are weighed. The crimes they are accused of, the nature of their imprisonment, and the length of time they have been detained are also significant. Prolonged interrogations and trials can cause potential damage, leading intelligence organizations to bear substantial costs over time. Thus, to ensure operational security and preserve state secrets, prisoner exchanges should not be drawn out over many years. This suggests why Putin was so insistent on the release of Vadim Krasikov, who was detained in a German prison. Conversely, prisoner exchanges provide insights into the intelligence concerns and anxieties of the detaining country, allowing for the learning of interrogation processes, methodologies, and techniques, and shaping "counterintelligence" strategies for potential future disclosures.
Thirdly, prisoner exchanges are also a political message. They initially reflect the strength and determination of the governments involved in the exchange, which carries diplomatic merit. On the other hand, the timing, manner, and counterpart of the released detainees within the framework of intelligence diplomacy must be carefully analyzed. Therefore, a country should pay attention to who is given in exchange rather than the number of detainees released. In other words, the latest prisoner exchange should focus on the profiles, status, and actions of the criminals rather than their quantity. The exchanged individuals might be innocent civilians subjected to unjust treatment, or they could be special operatives involved in key assassinations. Lastly, the political message conveyed through the prisoner exchange can be interpreted as an extended olive branch aimed at reducing tensions and deescalating the current conflict between the respective states.
Role and importance of Türkiye in prisoner exchange
The latest prisoner exchange took place after long-term and meticulous negotiations, involving Türkiye's efforts and seven other countries. Among Türkiye's numerous capabilities and merits in the operation, its rising intelligence diplomacy power stands out. While Türkiye has previously played a diplomatic and operational role in various exchanges, such as those between the US and Russia in 2010 and 2022, its role in the latest operation was more significant. The Russia-Ukraine war, which started in 2022, can be seen as a new Cold War period characterized by a fierce East-West struggle. Therefore, only a highly capable country like Türkiye can bring together the White House, determined to conduct a highly destructive and uncompromising war to end Putin's political era, and the Kremlin administration. Furthermore, Türkiye has successfully managed this diplomatic traffic in various areas, from grain shipments to mine clearance.
Thus, Türkiye's intelligence diplomacy between the US and Russia is primarily attributed to its status as a "neutral and humanitarian mediator" agreed upon by the parties. Although Ankara prefers to position itself within the Western alliance as a NATO ally, its stance in the eyes of the Kremlin is a principled one, prioritizing regional and international security. From this perspective, the country is often seen as a neutral or less biased mediator in regional and international disputes. This facilitates Türkiye's integration into intelligence mechanisms that form the backbone of states' existential interests and security. In other words, Türkiye's principled and neutral stance prioritizing international peace, stability, and humanitarian concerns transforms it into a communication and negotiation power capable of conducting intelligence diplomacy between two adversarial sides, even during the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war.
Furthermore, it is impossible to separate Türkiye's role in intelligence diplomacy from its operational capabilities. Türkiye's geostrategic position alone offered significant logistical advantages for the execution of last week's prisoner swap. However, the operational capability of Turkish intelligence is not limited to its geostrategic position; it is the result of experiences gained in dozens of successful operations conducted both within and beyond its borders. Each of these experiences constitutes the total capabilities gained for successfully managing even the most sophisticated operations. Consequently, the operational experience of Turkish intelligence makes Türkiye a more favorable partner for the US and other countries. Undoubtedly, the experience Türkiye has gained from various prisoner cases over the past 20 years serve as valuable references for future exchanges. The country's growing diplomatic influence will allow it to play a more active role in potential future prisoner exchanges involving Russia, Ukraine, or Middle Eastern countries. It is worth noting that these, as well as similar activities, will not only enhance the operational capabilities of Turkish intelligence, but also its capacity to conduct strategic intelligence analysis.
*Opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Anadolu.
