John Ridsdel execution: Why refusing to pay ransoms may not protect Canadians

The capture and subsequent beheadingof John Ridsdel, oneof two Canadians who werebeingheld hostageby anal-Qaeda-linkedgroupin thePhilippines, hasrenewed the debate overwhethergovernments should pay ransomsto secure the freedom of their citizens.

The Canadian government, like many other governments, hasan official policy not to pay ransoms for its citizens.Prime Minister Justin Trudeaureinforced this policy onTuesday, stating emphatically that"Canada does not and will not pay ransom to terrorists, directly or indirectly."

• Trudeau says Canada 'does not and will not pay ransom to terrorists'
• Justin Trudeau condemns killing of Canadian John Ridsdel
• Abu Sayyaf has 25-year record of kidnappings and bombings
• Philippines under pressure to find group that beheaded Canadian John Ridsdel

Ransoms fund terrorist organizationsand makeCanadians travelling abroad potentialtargets for more abductions, Trudeau warned.But some analysts say that governments need to be flexible when it comes to dealing with kidnappingof their citizens.

"If our mission is to preserve life, which it shouldbe, then governmentsshouldmove heaven and earth to try and get that hostageout by any means available," said Fred Burton, a former special agent with the U.S.State Department who worked on several hostage cases.

'A good sound bite'

"It's a good sound bite to say that wedon't [pay], but in reality, that's not going to reduce the risk to a Canadianor Americannational or aWesternnational in the eyes of the IslamicState or al-Qaeda," said Burton, currently the vice-president of intelligence for Stratfor."Meaning, it's one thing to say that, but it's not going to reduce the threat of kidnapping for political or criminal purposes."

There shouldbe ambiguityin the background with how you dealwith every individual case- AdamDolnik, specialistin hostagenegotiations

There have been indications that Canada may have, on occasion, shown some flexibility.In 2013, anal-Qaedaletter obtained by The Associated Press revealed thatmilitantshad been paid $1.1 million for the release of Canadian diplomatsRobertFowlerand LouisGuayin 2009. It's unclear what role, if any, the Canadian government played in their release, and Canadian officials at the time refused to comment on the report.

Many countriespubliclytake the stance that they won't give in toransom demands, yet arewidely known to have paid up. In 2014, the New York Times found that some European governments,despite their public denials,had secretlyfunnelled$125 million over a six-year periodthrough proxies to al-Qaeda and associatedgroups to free their citizens.

3rd parties do the negotiating

Quite often governments will employ the services of third-partycompanies that negotiate with the hostage takers.

"Some of those governments have rules about dealing with kidnappers so they want plausible deniability," said Derek Baldwin, director of worldwide operations for IBIS International, a company that deals with kidnap and ransom situations."So they call us orsomebodylike us."

Yet there are some countries, particularly the U.S. and the United Kingdom, known to be quite rigid, and to adhereto a tough"no concessions" stance when it comesto government officials negotiating or paying ransom with hostage-takers. (The U.S. has laws making ita criminal act for anyone, including family members or companies, to pay ransom, but there is no record of prosecutions of families or companies who do pay up.)

In 2012, inan often-cited "no concessions"speech, David S. Cohen, the current deputy director of the CIA, made the case against paying money, sayingthat "hostage-takers looking for ransoms distinguish between those governments that pay ransoms and those that do not and make a point of not taking hostages from those countries that do not pay ransoms."

He said that kidnapping for ransom trends suggested thathostage takers prefer not to take American or Britishhostages because theyunderstand that they will not receive ransoms.

ButBrian Michael Jenkins, an expert on terrorism who has studied kidnappings and ransomsfor over four decades, said there is no evidence to support that claim.

Comparing thenumber of kidnappings of U.S. and U.K. citizens,with kidnappings of Germansand French citizens, whose governmentshave reportedly secretly arranged ransom payments, reveals that "first and second place is occupied by the Americans and the British," he said.

'Terrorists are opportunists'

"That simply suggests that terroristsare opportunists and they kidnap foreigners who are available," said Jenkins, senior adviser to the president of the RAND Corp., adding thatU.S. and Britishnationals may spend longer times in captivityand are more likely to be killed.

Noneof this is an argument for a nationalpolicy forpaying ransom, he said, but he pointed out that themost powerful deterrent forkidnappings, accordingto the research, isapprehendingthe kidnappersand destroying groups engaged in kidnapping.

AdamDolnik, aspecialistin hostagenegotiationsand terrorism, said governments should have a declared policy that they won'tpay ransoms.But they should also havean undeclared policy in the background, "where things are done in secret that are not disclosed to the public but shouldbe a bit more flexible."

"Of course it shouldn'tbe a policy of 'we're paying ransom' because that's a really bad precedent to set, but there shouldbe ambiguityin the background with how you dealwith every individual case,"he said.

The basic policy should be to engage in negotiations and drive the ransom price down, hesaid. From the perspective of the hostage-taker, they have incurred expenses in keeping the hostage alive, andpeople in their network or in thewider community are expecting some kind of payment.

There may be cases where smaller payments are made that do notrewardkidnappers in any major way, he said. For example, he said, a couple years after the kidnapping, a payment could be madeto reimburse the captors' expenses, which will allow them to save face and willhelp get the hostage back.

"Expecting them to release the hostage for nothing is naive," Dolnik said.