In 2011 Brit Judith Tebbutt and her husband went to Kenya to enjoy a safari holiday. This turned into a nightmare when Judith was abducted and help captive for several months. Eventually a substantial ransom was paid to the kidnappers by her family, as outlined here. There have also been reports that some of the ransom was provided by the British Government.
Kidnapping creates a difficult dilemma. The chances are that if the ransom isn't paid the captured person will die. However if the ransom is paid, while the captive may well be freed, the kidnappers are possibly more likely to kidnap others.
While at the individual level payment seems the best and only option, thinking about the big picture, is paying the ransom really the best solution?
News reports from the New York Times claim that European governments are regularly paying out ransoms, despite publicly denying such actions and that often the ransom money comes from funds designated for development aid.
'While European governments deny paying ransoms, an investigation by The New York Times found that Al Qaeda and its direct affiliates have taken in at least $125 million in revenue from kidnappings since 2008, of which $66 million was paid just last year.
In news releases and statements, the United States Treasury Department has cited ransom amounts that, taken together, put the total at around $165 million over the same period.
These payments were made almost exclusively by European governments, who funneled the money through a network of proxies, sometimes masking it as development aid, according to interviews conducted for this article with former hostages, negotiators, diplomats and government officials in 10 countries in Europe, Africa and the Middle East. The inner workings of the kidnapping business were also revealed in thousands of pages of internal Qaeda documents found by this reporter while on assignment for The Associated Press in northern Mali last year.
In its early years, Al Qaeda received most of its money from deep-pocketed donors, but counterterrorism officials now believe the group finances the bulk of its recruitment, training and arms purchases from ransoms paid to free Europeans.'
How should governments react to ransom demands? Should individuals be allowed to pay demands? Would everyone have the means to pay?
If governments ignore demands and their citizens are killed they will face an enormous backlash for not doing everything to save the individual victim but in saving the one they are potentially putting more of their citizens at risk of future kidnapping instances - not to mention providing an almost bottomless pit of funds for the kidnappers to use as they wish.
What do you think?
Image source