Rewarding Hostage-taking

Great post from Ireland's Freedom Institute on policy towards hostage-taking with this useful reminder:

For a start, it should be more widely accepted that terrorists in Iraq engaged in hostage taking do not see their victims as bargaining chips to be used to extract concessions. Western governments make a serious mistake if they presume this to be the logic of their actions. On the contrary, the terrorists act firstly out of the belief that they are under a religious obligation to engage in jihad and to put ‘infidels’ to death. We would be well advised to take them at their word on this.

And, while suggesting that the abduction of Irish-born Margaret Hassan is a consequence of the unseemly rush to grant Ken Bigley an Irish passport, counsels the government to stand firm:

Margaret Hassan is a lady of exemplary standing in Iraq who has demonstrated over three difficult decades her commitment to the welfare of the Iraqi people. Even under the most debased notions of a ‘legitimate target’ she is beyond reproach. Let us not pretend that her hostage-takers are people with whom it is possible to reason and let the Irish government now state clearly that she must be released immediately and that no concessions whatsoever are on the table, nor will they ever be when dealing with terrorists.

Comments

[Michael Turley]

What about the Italian hostages who were released?

[Brian]

Totally aside from the ethics of negotiating with hostage takens, I do have one serious question. If the hostage taking is motivated by religious hysteria rather than greed, then wouldn't negotiating with them necessarily fail since there's no basis for exchange?

[Peter Nolan]

"What about the Italian hostages who were released?"

Or contrariwise, what about the two French journalists who haven't been, in spite of all the pleading on their behalf by government and religious figures?

[Frank McGahon]

Brian, you are quite correct that that is a consideration, it is easy to fall into the assumption that the hostages are simply bargaining chips for the purpose of achieving an objective - in many cases the objective is to simply kill the hostage.

Michael, the case of the two Simonas doesn't pass the smell test - I'd be strongly skeptical they were abducted at all and certainly not by a group similar to those who murdered Bigley. I'd also be very skeptical that the Italian government had anything to do with negotiating their release: Both women thanked many people upon their release, (including their captors!) but ostentatiously omitted to mention Berlusconi.

[Brian]

"in many cases the objective is to simply kill the hostage."

But why then would they show the hostages on TV and make it into a long, drawn out affair? That has nothing to do with said objective.

[Frank McGahon]

Prolonging the agony isn't inconsistent with an objective to kill the infidels. If you can instill fear in the other infidels all the better. What would be inconsistent would be to release the hostage

[Michael Mac Guinness]

As Freedom Institute writes, Ireland is not neutral.

Despite the deluded aspirations of the peace at any price crowd, the essential prerequisite for neutrality is the consent and cooperation of ALL combatants. That consent has not been given, therefore regardless of our desires, we cannot be neutral.

The next question is what to do about it.

The Gov. says it's doing everything it can. Is it?

One option which exists but does not seem to be on the table would be to send a team of Arabic speaking Army Rangers (presumably there are a few left after so many years in Lebanon) to participate in search and rescue operations.
If they want to preserve the illusion of neutrality, get an invitation from the Iraqi Gov., call it a law enforcement operation and send a Garda Chief Supt in nominal command.

[Frank McGahon]

One option [...] would be to send a team of Arabic speaking Army Rangers (presumably there are a few left after so many years in Lebanon) to participate in search and rescue operations.

Now there's a great idea for a screenplay!

[Jon Ihle]

I'm going to lay down a marker: Margaret Hassan gets released unharmed. None of the kidnapped humanitarian workers has been killed.

[Peter Nolan]

No doubt, she'll be treated just like the staff at the UN and Red Cross buildings.

[Frank McGahon]

None of the kidnapped humanitarian workers has been killed

How many "humanitarian workers" have been kidnapped? Surely you don't include the two Simonas in this categories? They are "humanitarian workers" only by a very loose definition which embraces political activists and there is good reason to be skeptical that they were ever kidnapped in the first place.

[Jon Ihle]

I agree with everything you said, Frank. I even considered putting "humanitarian workers" in scare quotes, but thought it would distract from the content of the comment. I made the prediction after reading about some fishy kidnappings of Australian activists and then learning that Hassan worked for CARE Australia, which employs mostly local staff and is probably infiltrated.