I was stunned when I heard Thursday that Daniel Pearl had been killed.
Similarly, I was stunned when I read this weekend that the United States plans to pay ransom in some cases like Pearl’s.
Pearl was abducted on Jan. 23 while reportedly investigating Pakistani connections to “shoebomber” Richard Reid. The kidnappers, calling themselves the National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistan Sovereignty, demanded the United States improve its treatment of Pakistanis held at Camp X-Ray in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. They later demanded $2 million ransom. The United States refused to negotiate, as it has in many past kidnapping cases.
Now, the government is changing its policy. According to a report on CNN.com Feb. 22, President Bush has signed a new policy that says the United States will pay ransom to captors in some cases. In those cases, the policy says, the government will track down the captors after the victims are released to recover the ransom.
The old policy said the U.S. government “will not pay ransom, release prisoners, change its policies or agree to other acts that might encourage additional terrorism.” The new policy eliminates that clause, but adds that, “In the event a hostage-taking incident is resolved through concessions, U.S. policy remains steadfastly to pursue investigation leading to the apprehension and prosecution of hostage takers who victimize U.S. citizens.”
It seems like a good idea: We free the captives, nab the perpetrators and get our money back. But, in reality, it’s almost a blessing for terrorists.
Government officials have said the United States’ interest is still to prevent kidnappers from benefiting from abducting Americans, whether they be government officials, journalists or tourists. They back this up by saying they are capable of retrieving the ransom paid and add that government agents have been successful doing so in the past: After the companies of four oil workers paid millions in ransom for their release from captivity in Ecuador in October 2000, the United States and local authorities in Colombia and Ecuador got the money back.
But, who’s to say we’ll catch the kidnappers and get the money back every time? Guerilla fighters in the Philippines are still holding two American tourists and a Filipino nurse whom they kidnapped from a resort eight months ago. We haven’t negotiated with them. Instead, the Filipino army is hunting down the kidnappers — part of the Abu Sayyaf group, which is tied to al-Qaida. This method is far better than paying off the kidnappers and then chasing the loot.
When a group kidnaps someone, they are most often looking to send a message. For example, Abu Sayyaf opposes the Filipino government. If we pay the ransom — no matter if it’s retrieved or not — we validate the group’s motives. We tell them that if they continue to kidnap people, they’ll get more of what they want. And we’re trying to defeat the terrorists?
One good thing about the new kidnapping policy is the U.S. promise to be vigilant in all cases in which an American is held captive. The United States, in keeping with its mission in the War on Terrorism, must pursue international kidnappers as they pursue any other terrorists and similar criminals. Tracking down the kidnappers and punishing them sends a message that the kidnapping of Americans will not be tolerated and that kidnapping is not a viable means of advancing a group’s goals.
After reading new stories about Pearl every day for a month, I have realized that U.S. foreign policy should not change. The fact is, Pearl is one man. His story is tragic, given that he was an ambitious journalist with a child on the way. However, I can’t see his story as anything more than a crime against a single person, and I can’t see why the United States should make concessions and weaken itself in the eyes of the international community to prevent such crimes.
Unfortunately, Pearl ran out of time and U.S. and Pakistani forces came up short in their hunt for him and his abductors. It is tragic that he died. However, in the future, we should not treat groups like his kidnappers — who are clearly an unorganized group of killers — as groups with power and valid concerns. We should treat them as the common murderers they are.
[ Jason Halpin, a junior in the College of Communication, is the associate editor for The Daily Free Press. ]
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
