This Era of Hostage Diplomacy Requires New Answers
Nov 9, 2023
auto_awesome
This podcast explores the rise of hostage-taking and hostage diplomacy, discussing the shift in methods and the emergence of autocratic states practicing it. It also delves into the measures taken in response to hostage situations, the UN Convention Against the Taking of Hostages, US policy on concessions to terrorists, and the motivations, patterns, and solutions related to hostage diplomacy.
Hostage-taking tactics have evolved over time, with armed groups now combining publicity-seeking tactics with the security of kidnapping.
The 'no concessions' policy followed by the U.S. government in hostage situations often relies on collective action and faces challenges in coordination among different countries and allies.
Deep dives
Historical Context of Hostage-Taking
Hostage-taking and hostage diplomacy have been practiced throughout history as a means to achieve political or diplomatic goals. The use of hostages has evolved over time, with armed groups in the 1970s frequently hijacking airplanes and holding embassies hostage. In the 1980s, armed groups shifted towards kidnapping individuals and taking them to unknown locations. In recent decades, portable internet devices have allowed armed groups to combine publicity-seeking tactics with the security of kidnapping. Hostage-taking has also shifted from surreptitious kidnapping to hostage diplomacy, where autocratic states hold foreigners hostage using their criminal justice system.
Measures to Address Hostage-Taking
In response to the wave of airplane hijackings in the past, increased airport security measures were implemented, such as metal detectors and baggage screenings. Additionally, the UN International Convention against the Taking of Hostages was established in 1979, defining hostage-taking as a war crime and outlining punishments for perpetrators. While a 'no concessions' policy has been touted by U.S. presidents, it applies only to specific cases involving armed groups designated as foreign terrorist organizations. In other cases, negotiations and concessions have been pursued, as evidenced by prisoner swaps and diplomatic deals. These measures, along with travel warnings and sanctions against hostage takers, aim to manage and prevent hostage situations.
U.S. Policy on Concessions and Negotiations
The 'no concessions' policy followed by the U.S. government applies only to cases involving armed groups designated as foreign terrorist organizations. This policy prohibits direct payment of monetary ransoms to such groups. However, it does not prevent other types of concessions or negotiations in hostage-taking scenarios. In fact, the U.S. government has pursued negotiations with hostage takers and made concessions in various cases, seeking to secure the release of hostages. The effectiveness of a strict 'no concessions' approach is questioned, as it often relies on collective action and faces challenges in coordination among different countries and allies.
Hostage Diplomacy and Wrongful Detention by States
The phenomenon of hostage diplomacy involves states using their criminal justice systems to hold foreigners hostage for leverage. It constitutes wrongful or unlawful detention, which goes against international law. Powerful states like Russia and China typically demand prisoner swaps, while other countries like Iran pursue broader economic and diplomatic concessions. Wrongful detention cases have been observed in countries such as Russia, Iran, China, Venezuela, North Korea, and Myanmar. Strategies to deter hostage diplomacy include travel warnings, sanctions, and intergovernmental coordination. However, ongoing initiatives seek to explore further ways to prevent and punish hostage-taking by states.
From Hamas to Russia to Iran, hostage-taking is on the rise once again and hostage diplomacy has entered that arsenal of foreign policy tools by countries around the world. This week, Northwestern University’s Dani Gilbert guides us through what is new, what has worked and failed in the past, and why countries need new ways to respond to hostage-taking today.