Log in to get started!

Don't have an account yet? You can create one below.

Student Instructor
shadows at a prison

Prisoner Swap


Two American citizens have been unjustly detained abroad, and although one was returned, another remains in Russia. The United States needs to decide what action to take when an American citizen’s life is swept up in a geopolitical conflict.

Students will learn how geopolitical conflict can affect U.S. citizens traveling abroad and about the tools available to negotiate their release if they are detained.

The Situation

Paul Whelan, a U.S. citizen, was arrested while traveling in Russia on December 28, 2018, on accusations of spying and received a sixteen-year prison sentence. His case gained attention when, in February 2022, Brittney Griner, a thirty-one-year-old American basketball player, was arrested at an airport in Moscow on drug-related charges and sentenced to nine years in prison.

The arrests of Whelan and Griner were widely viewed in the United States as unjust. Their detentions unfolded as the United States’ relationship with Russia became increasingly tense due to Russian aggression in Ukraine. Many experts have therefore seen the imprisonment of Griner and the continued detainment of Whelan as a political tactic by Russia’s government, shaped by its deteriorating relationship with the United States.

A “prisoner exchange” or “swap” is a manoeuvre where opposing countries agree to release one imprisoned citizen in exchange for another. Many high profile examples of prisoner swaps have occurred throughout history, especially those relating to spies. More recently, everyday citizens have been imprisoned abroad, such as a case of a young American student detained in North Korea on charges of espionage.

Although swapping prisoners can be an effective tool for liberating Americans detained abroad, the method also has downsides. The United States must agree to exchange a foreign national deemed dangerous enough to incarcerate, which runs the risk that, once released, the individual will perpetrate further crimes against the United States or other countries. Swaps can also signal that the United States is willing to bargain with other countries, even when a negotiation could mean releasing a dangerous individual. Although research is limited, some evidence suggests [PDF] that swaps or other concessions made in return for detainees abroad can incentivize governments to arrest Americans to elicit a reaction from the United States.

In December 2022, the United States successfully negotiated Griner’s release through a prisoner swap but failed in the same negotiation to liberate Whelan, leaving him imprisoned in Russia. The United States had initially requested to swap Russian arms dealer Victor Bout in exchange for both Whelan and Griner. The exchange of Victor Bout was controversial, as Bout’s illicit arms deals have led to many deaths in multiple countries and world regions. The United States’ next move could now determine whether or not Whelan is set free.

Decision Point

The president has convened the National Security Council (NSC) to determine a course of action concerning Whelan's detainment. The council should consider whether to negotiate for Whelan’s release, what the optimal offer is—not just for Whelan but for U.S. interests and the preservation of American lives abroad—and how long to keep an offer on the table.

Note: Although U.S. policy does not prohibit private parties from paying ransom to release U.S. citizens held abroad, the United States discourages doing so and has not offered payment for Whelan. As a general rule, the United States does not pay for the release of its citizens held abroad out of concern that it will encourage further unjust detentions.

NSC members should consider the following policy options:

  • Offer a new one-to-one prisoner exchange for Whelan. This proposal could help revitalize momentum for the release of Whelan but could signal U.S. weakness, given that the United States had initially demanded a more favorable deal in a two-for-one swap. The United States would also need to identify another Russian detainee it would be willing to swap who could potentially harm the United States or other parties once free.

  • Expand the deal, offering to release additional Russian prisoners or make other concessions such as payments or political concessions to expedite the swap. Offering a more favorable deal to Russia is likelier to liberate Whelan, who has been languishing in detention for years. However, such actions could incentivize future wrongful detentions and could reduce U.S. credibility in the future.

  • Hold back on provisional proposals for a prisoner swap. This option would demonstrate U.S. resolve, likely enhance U.S. credibility, and avoid releasing another dangerous foreign national imprisoned in the United States. It would also bolster the impression that the United States will not capitulate to bullying through wrongful detentions. It would, however, cause more suffering for Whelan and his family and run the risk of him dying in prison in Russia.

More Pop-Up Cases

Illustration picture of Tiktok with U.S. and Chinese flags

U.S. politicians have raised alarm that TikTok, a popular video-sharing social media app owned by the Chinese company, threatens U.S. national security. Should the United States impose a ban on TikTok to safeguard citizens’ data and the country’s security?

A U.N. chemical weapons expert, wearing a gas mask, holds a plastic bag containing samples from one of the sites of an alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria.

In 2013, reports emerged that Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad had deployed chemical gas as a weapon in Ghouta, Syria, during the country’s ongoing civil war. Months prior, U.S. President Barack Obama had referred to this type of attack as a “red line” that, if crossed, would move the United States to act militarily. The United States now had a choice: whether to uphold its word and respond with military action at the risk of escalating a violent conflict.

The UN Security Council

The UN Security Council, created more than fifty years ago, has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Some experts argue that the current structure of the UN Security Council, formed in the aftermath of World War II, does not reflect today’s geopolitical reality. As a result, the legitimacy, effectiveness, and representativeness of the Security Council has been subjected to ongoing debate. The United States will need to decide where it stands on the issue of UN Security Council reform.


Do you find pop-up cases helpful?

We are looking for feedback from instructors!

If you have used a pop-up case in the classroom, please fill out our pop-up case survey or email us at [email protected] and let us know how it went. And be sure to follow us on Twitter at @Model_Diplomacy to hear about our most recent pop-up cases the moment they come out.

For Instructors

Pop-Up Case Guidelines View the Pop-Up Case Guidelines for some inspiration for how to structure your conversation.

Classroom handouts

PDF / 2.01 MB