After months in the making, through an unprecedented international collaboration, including secret and complex negotiations, Western nations and Russia conducted the largest prisoner exchange since the Cold War which took place in Turkiye, a third-party location that was kept confidential until the last moment. The scenes from the prisoner swap that captured international headlines would be familiar to anyone who has seen movies depicting Cold War-style prisoner exchanges. The choice of Ankara as the location for the swap operation was both politically and symbolically significant. During the Cold War, prisoner swaps typically occurred in Berlin, a city divided between East and West. The choice of Turkiye for the latest exchange similarly highlights its own geographic and political divisions between East and West, demonstrating its role as a bridge between two sides, rather than a wall dividing them. In an increasingly polarized international system, which resembles a new Cold War and involves competition among more than just two actors, very few states can maintain open dialogue channels with all parties: Turkiye is certainly one of those states. Turkiye’s geopolitical significance, its delicate relations with both Western nations and the Russia/China/Iran axis, and its history of mediation played a crucial role in facilitating the critical prisoner swap. Turkiye has often frustrated its NATO allies by not taking a hard stance against Russia, causing many to question whether Turkiye is aligned with Russia or the West. However, the answer for this question depends on how the West or Russia perceives Turkiye’s position. Turkiye’s balancing act has shifted over time, with periods of alignment with the West and other times of closer ties with Moscow. The core of Turkiye’s relationship with the Kremlin is energy, while NATO remains significant in terms of ties with the US. When dealing with both sides, Turkiye wants to remain strategically autonomous in its policies. Therefore, both the US and Russia have acknowledged Turkiye’s balancing act. Additionally, despite Western criticisms, Ankara’s delicate ties with Moscow have enabled its involvement in the latest exchange, once again highlighting its value as an ally to the West despite several countries arguing that it should not be part of NATO. While Turkiye may not — or may not be willing to — meet all the expectations of the West, whether the EU or NATO, it possesses significant military, economic, and diplomatic leverage over several countries that the West considers important allies. The White House said it negotiated the trade with Russia, Germany, Belarus, Norway, Poland and Slovenia; but Turkiye was the country that coordinated the exchange. Washington praised Turkiye’s role as “a vital partner and ally,” expressing gratitude for Ankara’s involvement in the swap deal. US Deputy National Security Adviser Jon Finer noted that despite the swap deal, Washington-Moscow relations remain “in a very difficult place,” and emphasized that “there was no trust involved in this relationship or negotiation,” as he told CNN. Turkiye’s role becomes particularly crucial here; although it may not be fully trusted by either the US or Russia, it is a country that both sides rely on thanks to its decades-long behind-closed-doors intelligence sharing and cooperation. Turkiye’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan praised the country’s National Intelligence Organization — which he formerly led — for its role in the prisoner swap, which appeared tense and highly complex. At one stage a European official reported a plane from Moscow to Ankara had turned back, raising fears that the deal might fall through. Fortunately, this turned out to be a false alarm. There were also reports that prisoners, who were handed over on Turkish tarmac, were impressed by the behavior of Turkish intelligence officers, describing them as “very professional.” One might assume that in this decade, states would move away from using prisoner swaps as a foreign policy tool. However, as noted, the world has entered a new phase reminiscent of the Cold War, where even though tactics and actors may have evolved, the fundamental nature of politics remains unchanged. In an era when hard-power tools often overshadow soft-power ones, Turkiye’s commitment to mediation and diplomacy underscores its significant role on the international stage. Turkiye previously oversaw a September 2022 exchange between Ukraine and Russia that led to the release of 215 Ukrainian prisoners of war and the return of besieged Ukrainian Azov Brigade commanders from Mariupol, acting as a largely neutral broker in this instance. Turkiye’s aspirations to be a diplomatic actor extend far beyond its neighborhood, as it is also working to mediate conflicts in Africa. Following the US-Russia prisoner swap, Fidan met with Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in Addis Ababa, where Turkiye is advocating for peace talks between Ethiopia and Somalia. Fidan then made a significant diplomatic trip to Egypt where he hinted at a possible negotiation over relations between Cairo and its southern neighbor. In the context of the most recent prisoner swap, Turkiye’s role as a mediator extends well beyond mere diplomacy. Ankara seemingly sought to kill two birds with one stone: to strengthen its ties with both sides while maintaining a neutral stance to foster trust, and to protect its political and economic interests, as exemplified by its relations with Russia. It remains to be seen how much Turkiye will gain from its efforts in Europe and Africa, but certainly its role as a mediator is making a strong case for Western nations, as well as Russia, to recognize its strategic importance and ability to manage complex negotiations. • Sinem Cengiz is a Turkish political analyst who specializes in Turkiye’s relations with the Middle East. X: @SinemCngz