08-22-2014, 12:59 PM
I don't think we should negotiate because there's proof that it only encourages future kidnappings and higher ransoms.
I saved a NY Times article about it from a few weeks back -- good detailed report.
Some extracts:
Since 2008
-$91.5 million has been paid to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb in exchange for the release of French, Swiss, Austrian, and Canadian tourists.
-$5.1 million has been paid to the Shabab for the return of Spanish tourists.
-$29.9 million has been paid to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula for the return of French, Finnish, Austrian, and Swiss tourists.
“Kidnapping for ransom has become today’s most significant source of terrorist financing,” said David S. Cohen, the Treasury Department’s under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, in a 2012 speech. “Each transaction encourages another transaction.”
And business is booming: While in 2003 the kidnappers received around $200,000 per hostage, now they are netting up to $10 million, money that the second in command of Al Qaeda’s central leadership recently described as accounting for as much as half of his operating revenue.
“Kidnapping hostages is an easy spoil,” wrote Nasser al-Wuhayshi, the leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, “which I may describe as a profitable trade and a precious treasure.”
The stream of income generated is so significant that internal documents show that as long as five years ago, Al Qaeda’s central command in Pakistan was overseeing negotiations for hostages grabbed as far afield as Africa. Moreover, the accounts of survivors held thousands of miles apart show that the three main affiliates of the terrorist group — Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, in northern Africa; Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, in Yemen; and the Shabab, in Somalia — are coordinating their efforts and abiding by a common kidnapping protocol.
According to the report, the governments of the United States and Britain do not pay ransoms to terrorists and advise other countries to refrain from doing so. That policy appears to work in terms of deterring terrorist groups from targeting American and English tourists -- the groups are well aware of which countries will and won't pay. However, it's not a popular policy with some of the loved ones of kidnapped tourists. In 2009 a British man, Edward Dyer, was kidnapped by Al Qaeda in Mali, along with a German woman and a Swiss couple. Ransom was paid for the other three hostage and they were freed. But, the British government refused to negotiate with terrorists for the release of Dyer and he was killed. Mr. Dyer’s grieving brother, Hans, said his brother’s citizenship had cost him his life. “A U.K. passport is essentially a death certificate,” he said.
Story: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/world/...t_now&_r=1
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't think the US government could stop a family or business from negotiating, but don't feel that the US government should engage in it (no matter how badly we would all like to save the hostages).
I'm all for Special Ops rescue attempts, though -- and those ain't cheap.
I saved a NY Times article about it from a few weeks back -- good detailed report.
Some extracts:
Since 2008
-$91.5 million has been paid to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb in exchange for the release of French, Swiss, Austrian, and Canadian tourists.
-$5.1 million has been paid to the Shabab for the return of Spanish tourists.
-$29.9 million has been paid to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula for the return of French, Finnish, Austrian, and Swiss tourists.
“Kidnapping for ransom has become today’s most significant source of terrorist financing,” said David S. Cohen, the Treasury Department’s under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, in a 2012 speech. “Each transaction encourages another transaction.”
And business is booming: While in 2003 the kidnappers received around $200,000 per hostage, now they are netting up to $10 million, money that the second in command of Al Qaeda’s central leadership recently described as accounting for as much as half of his operating revenue.
“Kidnapping hostages is an easy spoil,” wrote Nasser al-Wuhayshi, the leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, “which I may describe as a profitable trade and a precious treasure.”
The stream of income generated is so significant that internal documents show that as long as five years ago, Al Qaeda’s central command in Pakistan was overseeing negotiations for hostages grabbed as far afield as Africa. Moreover, the accounts of survivors held thousands of miles apart show that the three main affiliates of the terrorist group — Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, in northern Africa; Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, in Yemen; and the Shabab, in Somalia — are coordinating their efforts and abiding by a common kidnapping protocol.
According to the report, the governments of the United States and Britain do not pay ransoms to terrorists and advise other countries to refrain from doing so. That policy appears to work in terms of deterring terrorist groups from targeting American and English tourists -- the groups are well aware of which countries will and won't pay. However, it's not a popular policy with some of the loved ones of kidnapped tourists. In 2009 a British man, Edward Dyer, was kidnapped by Al Qaeda in Mali, along with a German woman and a Swiss couple. Ransom was paid for the other three hostage and they were freed. But, the British government refused to negotiate with terrorists for the release of Dyer and he was killed. Mr. Dyer’s grieving brother, Hans, said his brother’s citizenship had cost him his life. “A U.K. passport is essentially a death certificate,” he said.
Story: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/world/...t_now&_r=1
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't think the US government could stop a family or business from negotiating, but don't feel that the US government should engage in it (no matter how badly we would all like to save the hostages).
I'm all for Special Ops rescue attempts, though -- and those ain't cheap.