At precisely the same time that explosions in Baghdad and Jerusalem blasted away the lives of scores of civilians, exhausted European hostages were making their way home from Africa after more than five months in captivity. A well-known Islamic extremist group based in Algeria had kidnapped the 14 tourists–one Dutch, nine German and four Swiss–earlier this year. The kidnapped tourists finally gained their freedom under mysterious and increasingly controversial circumstances.
The German government took the lead in obtaining the liberation of the hostages.
What is not clear is what exactly Germany gave in exchange for the release.
The hostages’ return promoted the expected rejoicing by their friends and relatives. But questions about what produced their release are overshadowing what might otherwise be a sunny ending to the travelers’ misadventure. If, as many believe, Germany paid ransom to the kidnappers, German authorities may just have sent a clarion call to terrorists and hostage-takers around the world that their nations’ treasure stands behind its citizens, ready to pay for their release no matter what the consequences.
The high-profile participation of top officials from a Western government has implications for non-Germans as well. Citizens of other developed countries may become more vulnerable if, as it appears, the terrorist group has escaped without punishment and, possibly, with a hefty reward for its deeds. Adding to the controversy is the question of how the Islamic extremist kidnappers would use any ransom money. The organization’s track record speaks for itself.
The GSPC, the initials for the Salafist Group for Prayer and Combat, has been extensively linked to Al Qaeda. An Algerian newspaper said that Osama bin Laden formed the group. The State Department describes GSPC as the most active terrorist organization operating in Algeria, a country wracked by a violent decade-long insurgency aimed at establishing a fundamentalist Muslim state.
The Salafists are a splinter of the Armed Islamic Group, which hijacked an Air France flight and tried to blow up the Eiffel Tower in the mid-1990s.
The hostages’ ordeal began earlier this year, when the Salafist Group for Prayer and Combat captured 32 tourists in a series of raids on adventurous Europeans four-wheeling in the Sahara.
Multinational rescue effort
The governments of Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands sent police and other search-and-rescue experts. Along with Algerian forces, they combed through the desert.
In May, Algerian commandos launched an operation that freed 17 of the captives. The GSPC took the remaining 15 hostages across the border to Mali.
Search and rescue eventually gave way to a new strategy: negotiating with the captors. The Dutch confirmed that Germany had taken the lead, as Deputy Foreign Minister Juergen Chrobog began a series of trips to Mali aimed at gaining the hostages’ freedom.
It is inhumane and unreasonable to ask a spouse, a child or a parent to stand on principle and refuse to negotiate for the release of a loved one. But when a government negotiates with hostage-takers, the message it sends is much more explicit than when a parent pays for the release of a child. That is why it is so surprising that Germany’s otherwise-commendable efforts to help its citizens were so transparent.
The Gadhafi International Foundation, an entity created by the Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, said that the captors initially demanded $50 million but that the foundation’s work helped bring the demand down to $5 million. The Libyans, who are eager to portray themselves as useful members of the international community, say a ransom was paid. Germany won’t comment on Libya’s participation.
Libya has a history of negotiating with Muslim kidnappers holding Western hostages. It is believed to have paid a multimillion-dollar ransom for European tourists held by the group Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines three years ago.
After a major German television network, ARD, reported that Germany paid $5 million for this week’s release, authorities refused to comment on the accusation. Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, who says the hostage-takers must be punished, provided no information on how they might have been rewarded.
“The government,” he said, “will not comment on questions of ransom with good reason.”
Earlier, his foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, described the country’s policy on dealing with terrorists: Germany does not pay ransom “as a rule.”
Then he coyly added, “You know what `as a rule’ means.”
Few people believe the hostage-takers released their captors without a substantial motivator. One theory is that the government of Mali paid the ransom and will be reimbursed with development aid from Germany.
After the hostages arrived in Germany aboard a military plane, politicians welcomed them with demands that they reimburse the government for expenses incurred in gaining their release, even if those expenses did not include ransom money. They argued that, when a vacation goes horribly wrong for an adventurer who undertakes a dangerous journey, the taxpayers should not have to cover the costs.
Where to drawn the line?
But the larger question, in an age when terrorism is an ever more visible danger, is what should a government’s response be in protecting its kidnapped citizens. If Germany did give in to terrorist blackmail and paid the ransom, it may have saved a handful of citizens at the expense of many more. It may have handed money to an organization that will undoubtedly use it to create more suffering.
Germany could go a long way in cleaning up the murky record it left in the wake of this hostage drama. Schroeder pointed the way when he said Germany security forces will find and punish the perpetrators.
