The arrest of allegedly pro-Russian Ukrainian politician Viktor Medvedchuk by the Kiev regime has become subject of heated debate both in Russia and Ukraine. Both conflicting parties are vigorously commenting upon and interpreting Zelensky's proposal to exchange the ex-head of the OPZZh (Opposition Party – For Life) for Ukrainian prisoners of war. However, the West, being a stronghold of "liberalism" and "human rights", makes rather unexpected comments, if any.
In fact, even after earlier persecutions of the OPZZh, Medvedchuk personally and TV channels owned by him, the EU, USA and Britain issued low-key and restrained responses. It was 85% approval or justification, with varying degrees of frankness and reservations, with only 15% mild concern or reproof. But now the outright revival of political hostage-taking under the flag of exchanging a citizen of Ukraine for his fellow countrymen, should have caused at least somewhat more obvious displeasure of governments and structures that have for decades condemned and sanctioned, and sometimes intervened, "repressive dictatorships".
This only exists in theory, not in practice. Zelensky and others of his ilk are given a free hand for almost any moves.
Politicians are simply silent. The media adhere to a tone ranging from moderate understanding to obvious approval. For instance, The New York Times is only interested in one thing concerning the Medvedchuk case – whether he is going to be interrogated about engaging in the 2016 Trump election campaign via its head Paul Manafort. " For now, it’s unclear whether Mr. Medvedchuk will ever testify in court in Ukraine or be interviewed by investigators looking into Russian influence operations elsewhere," the outlet worries, while expressing satisfied confidence that Ukraine has no problems with the second option (American investigators are concerned, certainly). By the way, Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov states the same thing: "Zelensky is not independent, he gets orders from the Americans. And the latter deem it vital to work over everything they think Medvedchuk knows."
Outstanding is media coverage in Italy, a country considered less anti-Russian than many others in Western and particularly Eastern Europe. The key Italian news agency Ansa calls Medvedchuk "a Russian oligarch", while La Repubblica and Corriere della Sera talk about a "pro-Russian oligarch." The TV channel TGcom24 uses both. Corriere della Sera also considers him "Putin's friend", whose hostage situation "is crucial in the war." For the Roman newspaper Il Messaggero, Medvedchuk is "Putin's puppet."
Appeals by the hostage's wife Oksana Marchenko to the world leaders with a request to facilitate his release did not arouse interest or sympathy. The only political response to the situation was sneering, one might say: the next day after the video with detained and obviously tortured Medvedchuk appeared, the British authorities put him on the next sanctions list along with another 205 representatives of the Russian Federation and the Donbass republics.
Great Britain has a real stable interest in the Medvedchuk case – it is specific, delicate and directly opposite to the humanitarian and human rights aspects. Every barber knows that surrounded in Mariupol along with Ukrainian servicemen are numerous Western mercenaries, NATO instructors and various curators, including high-ranking ones.
The names of two British mercenaries, who have been already captured, are Sean Pinner and Aiden Aslin (Pinner's family claims he is not a mercenary but a "legal contract soldier of the Armed Forces of Ukraine"). Both appealed to their country’s Prime Minister Johnson to facilitate their exchange for Medvedchuk. Oksana Marchenko came up with a similar idea.
Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Brendan Lewis expressed a negative stance on the exchange, though he is not exactly a field-specific official. However, the fate of two ordinary mercenaries (no matter what their relatives call them) may be really of little concern to London and other Western capitals. Still, they might become subjects of some covert agreements in Ukraine. Chances are that for this very purpose Western curators offered Zelensky taking Medvedchuk hostage as a priority operation.
Certainly, narratives of this kind are thread-bare both for the West and its vassal-countries. Three and a half years ago America requested that Meng Wanzhou, a top Huawei manager and daughter of its founder Ren Zhengfei, be arrested in Canada. No one really concealed this was part of the trade and economic wars between Washington and Beijing. In response, China detained two Canadian citizens ˗ ex-diplomat, International Crisis Group employee Michael Kovrig and businessman Michael Spavor, the head of Paektu Cultural Exchange ˗ on charges of undermining national security. Meng Wanzhou spent almost three years under house arrest, and all the three returned home only after lengthy negotiations, political and legal transactions. So, right now we see just another contribution to the established "credit record", yet this time vivid and innovative, given the initial (at least official and public) offer to exchange one Ukrainian citizen for others.
