Discussion and Response: Topic Hostage Crisis

by Prakruti Gautam - Sunday, March 21, 2021, 12:35 AM

Even though there might be numerous strategies mentioned it is up to the sensitive situation that the negotiator, law enforcement agencies, and the government have to react to. It may also mean that no matter how much they try they might sometimes have to agree to some extent after successfully negotiating a lot with the terms of the terrorists in possession of hostages. When there are innocent lives at stakes government can not turn their back to put their life at risk for not releasing a terrorist because governments have tremendous resources in names of trained law enforcement personnel who can again put some effort and capture the same terrorist once more, but it is as simple as once a life lost, it can not be brought back (Vecchi et al., 2005). Law enforcement officers have always used various negotiating policies since they were first established in reaction to the crisis of hostage/barricade, abduction, or life stressors. There are few agreements in which it is so important to be quick and efficient than those dealing with hostages. It's a quite impossible challenge, conducted in an extraordinarily hostile environment with the most unusual negotiator, the terrorist. In view of the problems at stake – the safety of the captives and their lives most often – the negotiator must confront a myriad of difficulties (Hyatt, R., 2016). In accordance with the position against the bargaining with terrorism, UNSC resolution 2199 creates a global minimum principle by denouncing militants' capacity to achieve results through negotiations with terrorist countries. This does not stop states from involving in wider talks with militants, but rather stop them from allowing militants to achieve their desired negotiating results. It also shows, however, that countries are legally required to aggressively discourage other participants from helping terrorists accomplish their goals of kidnapping or political sacrifices (Vecchi et al., 2005). In any of the strategies studied or implemented, the first priority has always been to save the hostage's lives and then go for the trick or tactics to avoid actually releasing the ransomed terrorist. In most cases, governments do oblige to the capturer's demands to claim hostages back alive and once they are safe, law enforcement agencies try their best to not let the terrorists go away with their agenda and capture them before they go away (Hyatt, R., 2016).

References:

Hyatt, R. (2016). Granting concessions and paying ransoms to terrorists: A policy options analysis of the US policy on hostage recovery. NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY CA MONTEREY United States.

Vecchi, G. M., Van Hasselt, V. B., & Romano, S. J. (2005). Crisis (hostage) negotiation: Current strategies and issues in high-risk conflict resolution. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10(5), 533-551.