Straight News: What observations do you have on this historic prisoner exchange between United States and Russia?
Special Commentator Liu Heping: I have noticed that this prisoner exchange incident has three characteristics: first, it is the largest prisoner exchange between United States and Russia since the end of the Cold War; Second, this prisoner exchange was realized on a one-to-many model, that is, Russia traded collectively with a number of Western allies, including United States and Germany; Third, if you look at the number of prisoners exchanged, this is actually an unequal deal, because the Russian side only exchanged 8 Russia people at the cost of releasing 16 Westerners. Judging purely by the numbers, the Russian side has suffered a loss, which is a very rare phenomenon in the past. We can also see that the Russian side actually expressed more goodwill.
So here's the problem. At present, Russia's special military operation against Ukraine has not ended, the all-round confrontation between Russia and the West, especially sanctions and counter-sanctions, blockade and anti-blockade, and even high-level diplomatic contacts between the two sides are still completely interrupted. Does this mean that both sides are showing goodwill to each other, especially Russia is showing goodwill to the West? According to this logic, does this mean that the two sides may also reach some kind of deal on the Ukraine crisis in the future? Let's wait and see.
Straight News: In this historic prisoner swap between the United States and Russia, both Russia President Putin and United States President Biden have personally participated in it. What kind of political signals do you think this reveals?
Liu Heping, Special Commentator: I think the political signal behind this is not only very intriguing, but also raises a lot of questions.
First, President Biden, who has clearly announced his withdrawal from the election, will have the most important task in the next six months of his term of office to create political achievements for himself in order to establish his personal political legacy and political positioning. This historic prisoner swap between the United States and Russia will undoubtedly be regarded as one of the major diplomatic achievements of Biden's tenure. As we all know, after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war, it was Biden who personally called for and deployed Western countries' military aid to Ukraine and comprehensive sanctions against Russia, and Putin and Biden did not appreciate each other. In this case, why would Putin take the initiative to "make a ball" to Biden, so that Biden can achieve such a significant diplomatic achievement before leaving office?
Second, Biden's other task for the rest of his term is to help Democratic candidate Harris win the United States presidential election, and only in this case can his political legacy be inherited, not completely overthrown by Trump. The major prisoner swap deal reached by the United States and Russia is not only Biden's political achievement, but also the political achievement of the Democratic Party and Harris, which will help Harris and the Democratic Party defeat Trump and the Republican Party in the next presidential election and congressional re-election. Because the hostage issue has always been a major human rights issue in the United States, it can affect a large number of votes. This also means that Putin facilitated the US-Russia prisoner swap deal, which is actually a disguised election campaign for the Democratic Party and Harris. The question is, why is Putin doing this?
Third, we know that Trump cares about this matter very much, and he often criticizes Biden for his incompetence on the grounds that United States hostages are being held by Russia, saying that once he is elected, there is no need to exchange hostages, and just by virtue of his personal relationship with Putin, he can easily get the hostages back. So, why didn't Putin give this big gift to Trump, but instead offended Trump for it?
In my opinion, all three questions point to the same answer. Because there has been a dramatic change in the recent domestic election in United States: after Biden withdrew from the election, the originally imposing Trump showed a decline in the polls, while Harris showed a strong overtake momentum. It was in this context that Russia began to switch to betting that Harris was elected.
Straight news: In the face of the possible outcome of the next United States presidential election, many countries are taking contingency measures. How do you interpret this phenomenon?
Special Commentator Liu Heping: I once said that the current United States presidential election is not only a struggle between the left and right ideologies and two values in the United States, but even a dispute between the two United States and the two worlds. The election of Trump or Harris is a major difference that will have completely different impacts and consequences on the situation between Russia and Ukraine, the situation in the Middle East, the situation in the Asia-Pacific region, and the relationship between United States and its allies.
It is precisely for this reason that relevant countries and regions are taking precautions and taking contingency measures. Moreover, this kind of response measures are divided into two types: one is active intervention, that is, an attempt to influence the United States presidential election with its own attitude and actions, so that it can be directed to a favorable outcome for itself; The other is reactive response, that is, since the outcome of the United States presidential election cannot be changed, then plan in advance according to the election situation to minimize subsequent losses.
Among the active interventionists, I think the EU and Israel are typical representatives. Because Trump has threatened to impose high tariffs on the EU after being elected, the EU has also listed its own tariff list, that is, after Trump's election, the EU will impose tariffs of 50% or even higher on some United States products. This is undoubtedly meddling in United States' elections by threatening United States voters – if Americans vote for Trump to be elected, there will be a lose-lose trade war between the United States and Europe. Contrary to the European Union, in the past few days, Israel has killed Hamas's political leader Haniyeh in Iran, and bombed the Lebanon capital to kill Allah's No. 2 person Shukur, in order to escalate the situation in the Middle East and sabotage peace talks with Hamas, to block the Democratic Party and Biden, thereby secretly helping Trump to come to power. Because supporters of the Democratic Party generally oppose Biden's full support for Israel and hope that the situation in the Middle East will stabilize as soon as possible.
Among the reactive faction, Ukraine and the Philippines are typical representatives. Some time ago, Ukraine frequently made overtures to China, hoping that China could promote Russian-Ukrainian peace talks, apparently preparing for the possibility of forcing Ukraine to "cede land and seek peace" after Trump came to power, and in recent days, Ukraine's attitude in the Russian-Ukrainian negotiations has become tough again, because it has seen Harris's polls come up and may defeat Trump. Similarly, the Philippines actively negotiated with China on the South China Sea issue earlier and announced that it would withdraw United States intermediate-range missiles because it was worried that Trump would abandon the Philippines after his election, and the Philippines has reversed itself on the deployment of United States intermediate-range missiles in recent days, also because it seems to have "confidence" in the heart of Harris's polls that have come up.
Author丨Liu Heping, special commentator of Shenzhen Satellite TV's "Live Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan".