Was the Brittney Griner Deal the Right Move?

A former Defense Department official doesn’t think so: A Dispatch Q&A.

By
90
Brittney Griner reacts inside a defendants' cage before a hearing at the Khimki Court, outside Moscow, in July. (Photo by ALEXANDER ZEMLIANICHENKO/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

American basketball star Brittney Griner touched down in her home state of Texas on Friday after nearly a year in Russian custody, avoiding a nine-year sentence—what the State Department considered a wrongful detention—for transporting cannabis oil. In exchange for her release, the U.S. turned over Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout, who had been serving 25 years in an American prison for aiding and abetting war crimes. 

Some experts don’t think it was a fair trade. 

Among them is Alex Plitsas, who worked as the secretary of defense’s representative to the 2015 White House Hostage Policy Review Team and continues to advocate on behalf of captive Americans worldwide. His efforts in 2015 led to the creation of the Hostage Recovery Fusion Cell—which coordinates interagency hostage recovery efforts—and the position of special presidential envoy for hostage affairs. 

In an interview with The Dispatch, Plitsas argued that trading a civilian like Griner for a convicted terrorist like Bout sets a dangerous precedent. Below is our conversation, edited for length and clarity. 

Create a free account
Access additional articles and newsletters for no cost, no credit card information needed. Continue ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
90
By
Comments (90)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Scianti7

    I find your failure to mention that the Russian arms trader was slated to be released in 2029, which is only 6 years from now, to be disappointing. Especially when compared with a high likelihood that Brittany Griner was fairly likely to die. So 6 more years of incarceration would have done what exactly, that was more important than the life of an American Citizen?

    By all means everyhing should be considered & given it's proper weight. But a whole life, particularly of our fellow citizen, is worth more than the remaining 6 years on a meager 15 year sentence on someone called "the Merchant of Death". It isn't Brittany Griner's fault that Viktor's sentence wasn't going to fit his crimes. 6 years. That's the argument.

    Collapse
    1. Dhsavidge1

      I posted to your reply to my post below but noticed this post. I found no reports indicating that Ms. Griner was in any danger of being killed. And six years is quite a bit of time. And while a longer sentence was more than warranted, it isn’t meager. Six years is nearly half that sentence. If there were say a year left, then maybe there’s an argument.

      Collapse
    2. Bobby D

      I agree that Bout’s release isn’t that significant. It’s unlikely that, after spending the past 15 years locked up, he’ll be back on the field arming militia groups. He’ll probably accidentally fall out of a hospital window after a few months in Russia.

      But if Griner’s life is so significant, why isn’t Marc Fogel’s life of equal significance? Fogel has been in prison in Russia for 6 months longer than Griner, committed the same offense, and remains classified as lawfully detained by the Biden administration. The Biden administration has yet to explain what the legal difference is between Griner’s case and Fogel’s case.

      Collapse
      1. Scianti7

        I'm not saying one life means more than another to be clear. I will say that someone who has represented our country at the Olympics twice & Gold medaled twice might be considered a national symbol. So, that national symbol might be the difference... but I don't know enough about the other guys case. That in itself might also be a factor. Brittany Griner had people making a coordinated effort to keep at least 1 headline coming per week, which seemed effective in keeping it front of mind. Maybe she got more coverage because of the Olympian & professional athlete status. I'm not saying it is right or fair, just that it is understandable.

        Collapse
        1. Bobby D

          The Biden administration issued a statement following her release. Nothing in that statement indicated that it was her status as a former Olympian that caused her detention to be unlawful while Fogel’s remains classified as lawful. We’re talking about two Americans who committed the same crime in the same foreign country, and received similarly long sentences. The Biden administration has classified Fogel’s detention as lawful, which means that he is not legally entitled to efforts to secure his return. Griner’s detention was quickly classified as unlawful.

          Collapse
  2. Lee Rone

    The US needs to send a message to Russia that kidnapping our citizens will be so painful that they will never kidnap another American. One way to send that message is load up Ukraine with long-range HIMARS, which we can do tomorrow morning at 8:30AM.

    Collapse
    1. Dhsavidge1

      Couldn’t agree more.

      Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Mister D

    Was it a fair trade? No. It was never going to be. The problem is the US doesn't arrest foreign civilians on specious charges and hold them for ransom. We will always have to give up a nasty customer to get our civilians back.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Ethan Cordray

    "At some point, when you’ve tapped out on sanctions, what are you left with? Obviously military action is not something anybody wants to see. "

    Speak for yourself.

    I think the US has tended to be awfully uncreative in considering limited military/clandestine options as "sticks." Such things can be -- and I think should be -- employed as negotiating options as an expected and typical matter.

    How many commandeered Russian-flagged oil tankers would Griner be worth to Putin? How many cyber attacks on Moscow's power grid? How many days of blockading Kaliningrad?

    The imprisonment of Griner -- as well as the imprisonment of other Americans in Russian custody -- can and should be considered an attack on American sovereignty, and should be met with a response similar (though of course with due proportionality) to that which we would consider in response to, for example, the kidnapping of an American ambassador or the assassination of an American diplomat.

    Collapse
    1. BenP

      I agree with the spirit of this, but there is the relevant detail that Griner really did break Russian law. Now, she was denied some due-process rights and her sentence was grossly excessive and we all know this was done for political reasons. But "we think you're selectively enforcing your domestic laws against our citizens" is not the same as "you assasinated one of our citizens". I'd worry about the precedent being set here, and how many foreigners are imprisoned in the US for what seem like excessive terms to people in their home countries.

      Collapse
  5. Dougrhon

    This was a bad idea and not because I think Griner deserves to be imprisoned or because I think the marine should have been released first but for the reasons stated in this piece. We cannot trade major criminals for hostages. In the 80s we had hostages held for years in Lebanon and such because of our policy and Reagan was rightly criticized for among other things negotiating with the Mullahs. There is no question that this will encourage further kidnappings and Americans abroad caveat emptor.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Ms. SSM

    Doesn’t seem to present much alternatives other then send in the military to get them back or start snatching random Russian citizens. I’m not sure what the alternative here is. Or I suppose is he saying the alternative is to do nothing? It’s not very clear what he thinks should happen instead of the trade.

    Collapse
    1. Majorjamesbronan

      The solution is for dumb ass Americans to use common sense and exercise some responsibility. Stay out of adversary nations, no business, no missionary activity, no site seeing.

      Collapse
      1. Dhsavidge1

        Agreed. I think we’ve seen the failure of cultural and business exchange both in Russia and China. Perhaps a few years of being treated like North Korea might wake them up.

        Collapse
      2. BenP

        WNBA players have been going to Russia to play basketball during the US offseason for a long time now. Griner isn't unique in this. I wonder if the league or the State Department had been warning them "don't go there".

        Collapse
        1. Majorjamesbronan

          Warnings are not necessary. Common sense should tell anyone not to a country the USA is in a proxy war with intent to break their laws.

          Collapse
      3. AS Upstate

        I have to say I kind of agree with this. I used to travel to lots of tough places when I ran a human rights organization and we were totally paranoid about breaking this kind of law. It got unhealthy. I would search my own bag like 5 times on the way to the airport. I would limit unnecessary travel to adversarial countries and don't give them any pretext to arrest you!

        That said, I can't imagine Griner's ordeal - this is the kind of thing that gave me nightmares for years! I'm glad she's back.

        Collapse
        1. Majorjamesbronan

          Maybe Griner should find a new job that pays well. That would eliminate travelling for money countries the US is in a proxy war with and that has little or no due process./

          Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    DougAz

    Alex Plitsas, your logic suggests that the United States should arrest any one the many Russian citizens here on trumped up charges.

    Then, according to your logic, we would have an equal exchange for someone like Griner. Or, perhaps there is a nasty CIA arms dealer in custody we don't know about to change for Bout?

    These are all irrational and frankly irrelevant

    If you don't play the hand you're dealt, you can't play at anything at all.

    It seems you preference was to let Griner continue on in Russian jail?

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    LBernard

    I'm grateful to the Dispatch for making this article. If this is the best argument against trading Griner (and I'm sure the Dispatch made an effort to find the best argument), it is a weak argument indeed. As others have pointed out, Alex Plitsas is long on pointing out problems, but comes up short with providing solutions.

    With no other solutions, it seems that trading Griner for an arms dealer was the least bad option out of a list of bad options, and I thank the Dispatch for helping to make that clear.

    Collapse
    1. Dhsavidge1

      Or simply don’t make any trade. We continue to allow this tin-pot emperor to dictate terms. We not only appear weak we are. No more trades.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      WKDawson

      The trouble is, there are no real good solutions. Nevertheless, although maybe they might have found some other reason to arrest her, she should not have given them a solid pretext.

      Maybe that is the nature of the game. Still, it is frustrating that high-profile cases get loud attention while many (far more innocent) people, who lack this PR, rot for __many__ years in foreign detention. I realize that we can all screw up at whatever age, there is no age limit on stupidity and sometimes it can only be clearly seen long after the fact.

      Nevertheless, I really hope she is wise enough to be repentant about her rather brazen display of American privilege. True, Putin is a rotten soul, but don't make it easy for him with a cocky attitude.

      Collapse
  9. Andrw4488

    This is a diplomacy issue. Who wants an American citizen being held in a foreign country? I'd like to think the state dept does all it can to help anyone being held, especially lower profile people. In some situations it's useful to think if your son or daughter was being held in Russia would you be OK w/ trading Bout (sp?). I'd like to offer the proviso that doing this stuff should be weighed by how long someone has been held, what the charges are and (hopefully) credible intelligence says they didn't do anything truly horrific. Don't jump the line for publicity reasons. Go with the most deserving first. This is tough stuff. If the /us rushes to help every time other countries would grab more Americans hoping to make good trades

    I would also appreciate it if Ms Griner would limit her public comments to 'I'm just extremely grateful' for the next 5 years or so

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Michael Dan Martin

      Nice comment for the most part, but respectfully I will disagree on one point. Hell yes, if my son were being held hostage, I would want the US government to trade even the most foul creature on earth for him. But I would not be rational or objective, and the government in theory is supposed to be rational and objective in these types of things.

      Collapse
    2. Dhsavidge1

      I disagree that this is a diplomatic issue. It is an attack on a U.S. citizen and should be treated as such.

      Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      Ms. SSM

      I don’t think we can quantify the most deserving all that easily. Between the three - BG Fogel and Whalen that are fairly high profile who would you have rated most deserving. And whoever you chose i assure you many will disagree. So I’m more inclined to save anyone they can standard. Plus it boils down to who the other country is willing to trade. Russia seemed very set against Whalen for example.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        WKDawson

        Maybe you have a point. It's no fun to make choices like that, for sure.

        I'm not sure who Fogel is in this context.

        BG actually did commit a crime (in Russia) that most of us know we should not be doing. If I am not mistaken, we can even be arrested for carrying that stuff in our luggage in the US. Whereas I think criminalizing drugs is utter folly (we should focus on treatment and moderation) and I don't think I will ever take that stuff even if I live in Colorado or California, not every place in the world looks the other way about this display.

        In the case of Whalen, the State Department claims that he was not a spy. I'd like to believe them, and I hope I can. At any rate, if that is not true, then, whereas I still roundly cheer for my home team and see Pootin as a dirty criminal and a thug, well, ... it is his land.

        Personally, if Whalen is innocent, I might think it would have been better to put more emphasis on hollering about that than someone who was being cocky and got caught. It's an unfortunate reminder that we should be circumspect when we go to foreign countries. On the other hand, often to bring justice for the innocent, we have to work quietly in the background. That was one thing that really comes out in this testimony from Friends of Justice.
        https://friendsofjustice.blog/2022/12/12/the-work-of-friends-of-justice-an-introduction/

        Collapse
  10. Ken Motamed

    The interviewee is long on criticism and short on useful advice. Since we don't imprison civilians on trumped up charges, what do we have to trade with except convicted criminals? Griner was greedy and careless. One could argue that she should have been left to rot in Russia. But that would not have been a practical choice.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Mike B

      She was careless, perhaps, but greedy seems like a stretch. A lot of athletes play overseas in the off season in a variety of sports, nothing wrong with that.

      Collapse
    2. Dhsavidge1

      We should not trade anything. Certainly not criminals.

      Collapse
Load More