This post is about impressions and really is suggestive of a research question more than any kind of conclusion. But, I am finding a lot of reactions to Brittney Griner’s release to be rather telling about the state of our politics (and our media environment, but perhaps I repeat myself). This is also one of those times where I feel pretty certain what Fox News is saying about a subject without having to actually watch Fox News.
Let me start with stark facts: the United States government negotiated a deal with the Russian government wherein an American being charged with drug offenses in Russia was released into US custody in exchange for a Russian national, Viktor Bout, serving a lengthy sentence in the United States for arms dealing and related crimes. Bout’s nickname is “The Merchant of Death.”
We know that the US government was unable to secure the release of another American being held, Paul Whelan, who has been
Anything else about this exchange becomes speculation. We do not know specificallty why the US was unable to secure the release of Whelan, who has been held since 2018. CNN reports that to secure Whelan’s release, a spy being held by Germany on murder charges was requested.
US officials made quiet inquiries to the Germans about whether they might be willing to include Krasikov in the trade, a senior German government source told CNN earlier this year. But ultimately, the US was not able to secure Krasikov’s release. The German government was not willing to seriously consider including Krasikov –who assassinated a Georgian citizen in broad daylight in Berlin in 2019 – in a potential trade, the German source said.
The US made several other offers to the Russians, sources said, to try to get them to agree to include Whelan in the swap. Among the names floated by the US was Alexander Vinnik, a Russian national extradited to the US in August on allegations of money laundering, hacking and extortion. The US also offered to trade Roman Seleznev, a convicted Russian cyber-criminal currently serving a 14-year sentence in the US, sources said.
CNN also reports: Whelan talks will continue because Russians have ‘things they want,’ US official says.
So, we know attempts to get Whelan alongside Griner were made, and we know that attempts to secure his release will continue.
Beyond that, we don’t know much that is definitive.
But that hasn’t stopped many people from having a lot of opinions about what the Biden administration should, or should not, have done here.
Some of it is just a weird attempt to turn this into NFL trade talks as if prisoner exchanges can be graded the way player trades are. After all, surely an arms dealer is worth more than a basketball player accused of possessing a small amount of cannabis oil, right? Can’t they throw in a retired Marine and prisoner to be named later?
For example:
But, of course, it doesn’t work like that. While I have little doubt that Bout deserves to remain in prison, I also am of the view that the moral gain of his staying in prison is not such that it outweighs the moral gain of Griner’s freedom. As such, while I would have liked a better deal (better is, after all, always better), I have no problem with the basic outcome.
And, yes, I want Whelan freed as well. But there is nothing to be gained by keeping Griner imprisoned just because Whelan’s freedom has not been obtained.
There is a longer discussion to be had here about the potential moral hazard of making these deals and the intricacies of these types of negotiations. And on the latter point, in particular, I will note that I am not an expert.
This leads me to my main point: most people are not experts in this area. Yet, a lot of people sure have strong feelings about this. I note that a lot of anti-Biden folks seem convinced that the administration must have hosed Whelan to get Griner back. There is also, I would argue, a lot more concern about whether the deal was a good one or not.
I am thinking that if the year was, say, 1978, and we all watched one of the three evening news broadcasts, our general impression would have been: Hooray! An American who was being unjustly held by the Russians was freed!
But, in 2022, we have to decide whether a success by a Democratic administration should be praised or critiqued because of partisanship. And I think Whelan’s captivity is just a good hook for criticism
I find this interesting because I am willing to bet that the vast majority of persons asking, “What about Whelan?” had no idea who Whelan is (or had, at best, vague memories) until media outlets started bringing him up. Likewise, it is rather interesting from a partisan media POV to note that Whelan was taken when Trump was president, but now it is Biden’s fault he isn’t free.
I just can’t help but think that a lot of this is a direct artifact of how the story is spun rather than some spontaneous mass opinion. It reminds me of ongoing experiences wherein talking to people over the course of a day or so, I can tell what the current spin is. Earlier in the year I was going on a long weekend trip to NYC and I had a number of people warn me to be careful on the subways. I had no idea what they were talking about until I googled it and noted that FNC had been heavily flogging subway crime stories around the time I was travelling.
Note the tone of this Fox News report about Griner’s release (which was what I expected it would be): https://www.foxnews.com/video/6316850522112.
The focus is mainly on Bout’s “Merchant of Death” status and maybe what he might do next as well as raising questions about Whelan.
Again, I agree we need to get Whelan released and, again, all of this can be pretty complicated, but it is unfortunate that we make every single thing into partisan point-scoring and that outlets like FNC see these events as just another way to stir up their audience.
It really would be an interesting study to see how things like this work their way through the populace in terms of direct exposure to specific news outlets. Another example would be the way that the moral panic over CRT spread.
What I suppose really strikes me about this case is that there is no especially good reason for Americans, in general, to have a negative view of Griner’s release nor to know a lot about Whelan without being told why they should be critical (if not why they should be angry or even afraid instead of happy).
I also find it more than a bit sad that instead of celebrating the freedom of an American who was being unjustly held, that we turn this into partisan point-scoring theater.
I will note that I suspect that race, gender, and sexual identity play into these perceptions as well.
Let me conclude with this from the AP: Family of American prisoner Paul Whelan backs Griner deal.
