Prisoner exchange is the process by which parties in situations of war and conflict mutually return or swap detainees or prisoners of war held by them under specific conditions. This practice has been used throughout history to balance the human dimension of wars and to contribute to the softening of post-war relations.

Prisoner Exchange in Ancient and Medieval Times

The origin of the prisoner exchange practice dates back to the earliest wars in human history. In Ancient Times, especially during the period of Greek city-states and the Roman Empire, prisoner exchange was a frequently resorted method to ensure post-war peace or to maintain political balances. Parties often mutually returned the prisoners they held at the end of a war through negotiation. Such exchanges played a significant role not only in military strategy but also in diplomacy. The release of prisoners sometimes became part of peace treaties and sometimes contributed to the early end of the war.

By the Middle Ages, prisoner exchange was shaped more by individual interests and social statuses. In this period, dominated by the feudal structure, knights captured in wars, in particular, were usually released in exchange for ransom. The capture of a noble person created a financial and political obligation for their family or the lord they served; heavy ransoms were paid to rescue the prisoner. Therefore, prisoners were not only a consequence of war but also became an economic tool. The exchange or rescue of prisoners from lower classes was often neglected, and some were even enslaved and held for long periods.

Prisoner Exchange in the Ottoman Period

The Ottoman Empire used prisoner exchange not only as a humanitarian practice but also as a tool for military strategy and diplomatic negotiation. Especially in the 16th and 17th centuries, during the wars waged by the Ottomans against European states, prisoner exchanges were carried out according to specific rules and mutual agreements. This practice was an important tool both for reducing tension on the front and for softening political relations.

During the Ottoman-Venetian wars, such exchanges constituted one of the most frequent examples. Especially the majority of prisoners captured in naval battles were mutually returned within the scope of peace negotiations held after the war. In wars with a naval power like Venice, captured galley slaves, sailors, and officers were valuable both economically and politically. Therefore, prisoner exchange was not merely a "humanitarian gesture" but also a strategic step taken with consideration for the balance between states.

Prisoner Exchange and International Law in the Modern Period

In the modern period, prisoner exchange is no longer carried out solely through the arbitrary practices of warring parties, but within frameworks determined by rules of international law. One of the most fundamental regulations in this field is the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Specifically, the Third Geneva Convention contains detailed provisions regarding the protection of prisoners of war, their treatment in accordance with human dignity, and their exchange when necessary.

According to this convention, prisoners of war, when they fall into the hands of the enemy, are merely rendered hors de combat; they cannot be subjected to torture, ill-treatment, or arbitrary execution. The protection of prisoners is no longer a post-war gesture but has become the common responsibility of the international community. The Geneva Conventions prioritize treatment based on human rights for prisoners of war, not just their military status. Therefore, today, prisoner exchange processes are conducted much more sensitively and under oversight.

Prisoner exchanges in the modern era generally occur through the following means:

• Bilateral negotiations: Parties come together directly through diplomatic channels and discuss prisoner exchanges by presenting mutual lists.
• Mediation: The United Nations, the Red Cross (ICRC), or a neutral third country (e.g., Switzerland, Qatar) can act as a mediator or observer in this process.
• Humanitarian criteria: Factors such as prisoners' health status, age, whether they are civilians, and whether they are wounded or sick can influence the priority order for prisoner exchange.
• Pressure and public opinion: Pressure from international public opinion, reports from human rights organizations, and media interest also play a decisive role in this process.

For instance, prisoner exchanges carried out during the Russia-Ukraine war or the past Iran-Iraq War are current examples where most of these modern mechanisms were utilized.

Furthermore, the United Nations Human Rights Commission and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) facilitate information flow between parties and oversee that prisoners are held under appropriate conditions during these exchanges.

Examples of Prisoner Exchange in the 20th Century

The 20th century was a period when wars reached massive scales, and millions of people acquired prisoner of war status. During this era, prisoner exchange was used as an important tool in diplomatic processes, both after inter-state wars and as a result of ideological conflicts.

Prisoner Exchange in World War I and II

During World War I, prisoner exchange occurred on a limited scale between the parties. Particularly noteworthy were some bilateral agreements made for the repatriation of sick, elderly, and incapacitated prisoners. Similarly, in World War II, there were attempts at prisoner exchange at different times among Germany, the Soviet Union, the USA, and other allies; however, these processes remained limited due to the intensity of the war, the number of prisoners, and developments related to war crimes.

Spy Exchanges During the Cold War Period

During the Cold War period, despite the absence of direct hot conflict, prisoner exchange practices continued within the framework of intelligence activities and mutual espionage accusations. In this context, spy exchanges carried out between the United States and the Soviet Union were among the notable practices of the era.

One of the places where these exchanges symbolically stood out was the Glienicke Bridge, separating West Berlin from East Germany. For example, in 1962, American U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers, captured by the Soviets, was exchanged here for Soviet agent Rudolf Abel, held by the USA. This event highlights the importance of protocols conducted under third-party oversight in prisoner exchanges between parties.

^{Palestinian Civilians Freed After Prisoner Exchange (AA)}

The Importance of Prisoner Exchange

Prisoner exchange is a multi-layered process not limited solely to individuals regaining their physical freedom. This practice assumes both humanitarian and diplomatic functions in the relations between conflicting parties.

Confidence Building

A prisoner exchange carried out between parties is often considered one of the first steps towards re-establishing mutual trust. The agreement of parties to come together on prisoner exchange enables the opening of direct negotiation channels. Especially in long-standing hostilities, such gestures allow for testing mutual intentions. Therefore, prisoner exchange is not limited to addressing individual grievances; it can also be the beginning of broader peace processes.

Normalization of Diplomatic Relations

Prisoner exchanges can be considered part of the diplomatic normalization process in international relations. These exchanges, carried out through official or back-channel diplomacy between parties, often mean that the parties acknowledge each other. This situation paves the way for re-establishing previously severed or strained diplomatic relations. For instance, in some cases, these processes are conducted under the mediation of third-party states or international organizations (e.g., the Red Cross, the United Nations), which also contributes to increasing the diplomatic capacity between the parties.

Ensuring Post-War Peace

After the cessation of armed conflicts, prisoner exchange emerges as a legal and moral requirement of the peace process. The release of prisoners held by the parties is often included as a provision in peace treaties. Such practices facilitate the redress of grievances and the beginning of post-war social reconstruction. At the same time, within the framework of international law, especially under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the obligation to release prisoners of war gives prisoner exchange a more systematic and institutional structure.

Humanitarian Message to International Public Opinion

Prisoner exchanges are also regarded as actions that convey messages not only to the parties themselves but also to international public opinion. Such steps can be symbolic acts indicating the parties' commitment to human rights and international humanitarian law. Public sensitivity, especially regarding the release of civilians or prisoners with deteriorating health, transforms prisoner exchanges into important tools that can provide diplomatic advantage. In this respect, prisoner exchange is not merely a military practice but also holds importance as a tool of humanitarian diplomacy.

Türkiye’s Role and Significance in Prisoner Exchange Processes (Recent Practices)

In recent years, Türkiye has emerged as a mediator or facilitator in prisoner exchange processes during various regional conflicts. This role has been regarded as a significant tool for building trust between parties with whom Türkiye maintains diplomatic relations, despite not being directly involved in the conflicts. Türkiye’s initiatives in this area have been shaped within the framework of humanitarian diplomacy and grounded in the principles of the protection and exchange of prisoners of war as defined by international law.

One notable example is Türkiye’s active involvement in the prisoner exchange process between Russia and Ukraine in 2022. As one of the few countries maintaining diplomatic ties with both sides, Türkiye provided a platform for direct contact and mediation from the outset of the war. The evaluation of prisoner lists, the determination of exchange conditions, and the safe execution of the process were technically facilitated through Türkiye. As part of this process, some prisoners of war were held in Istanbul under certain conditions and were later released.

There are several reasons behind Türkiye's prominent role in such prisoner exchange processes. Chief among them is its balanced diplomatic relations with conflicting parties. While cooperating with the Western bloc as a NATO member, Türkiye also maintains strategic relations with actors like Russia. This positioning has made Türkiye a relatively trustworthy and neutral actor in the eyes of both parties.