In any event, these people should be considered a menace to both us and the people they are 'helping', and the question we should be asking is, when European 'humanitarian workers' go to war zones where they are known targets for hostage taking, should we risk lives, or pay huge ransoms, to 'save them'?
Are they not in fact just a little bit mentally unstable, or simply 'attention seekers', going to a place like Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan, knowing that the IS, or Taliban, or Al Queda (e.g. al-Nusra Front), want to capture them, parade them on propaganda video's, and then either get huge ransoms for their lives, or kill them?
If a person willingly puts themselves in harms way, then surely they should willingly accept the consequences of their action. After all, they are actually very selfishly putting their co-aid workers at greater risk of being killed, when the nasty men inevitably come a calling (a fact which apparently bothers them little, or not at all), and often their capture comes with a butchers bill of dead security men, and the other native helpers.
But instead of accepting that they are paying the price for their own stupidity, they come on TV and 'plead for their lives', demanding that 'someone do something', or spouting Islamist propaganda on behalf of their captors.
When and if a ransom is paid (and seemingly only the USA and UK regularly resist doing so ~ although prisoner swaps for soldiers by the US, have sullied that record), by the governments, such as those paid by France and Italy, who have done so on a number of occasions ... the money paid over is used to finance the killings of hundreds, or thousands, of locals. So any good the captives could remotely claim they did by going to the trouble spot, is far outweighed by the blood on their hands, created by their capture and eventual ransoming, or even troops killed in failed rescue attempts.
Are These 'Humanitarians' Or 'Selfish Egoists'? |
The latest of these selfish people, were *two Japanese hostages for whom an unprecedented $200m (£130m) was being demanded (Japan has paid $6m (£4m) to the Red Army Faction in the past), and two Italian women, Greta Ramelli, 20, and Vanessa Marzullo, 21, who were 'freed' by the al-Nusra Front after being held captive for 6 months in Syria. What were they doing risking their lives there? Why were they going to the IS captured province of Aleppo? .... Apparently its all covered by the term doing 'humanitarian projects' for the aid group 'Horryaty' (a small medical charity).
Yet as as non-Muslims, and Europeans to boot, they were obviously prime targets, so why go? Needless to say, they were captured and on Jihadi videos, faster than you can shout Allahu Akbar, and putting the pressure on the Italian government.
"We are in big danger and we could be killed," said one of the women, speaking in English. "The government and its militaries are responsible [for] our lives."
What about their responsibility? What about the lives of the local aid workers they risked by going? How many were killed when they were kidnapped? .... its not being reported, but you can bet there was a human blood price.
In the end they were mysteriously freed, but as usual there is a story that a ransom worth up to $15m (£9.9m) was paid via Qatari middlemen. How many bullets bombs and deaths will $15m buy? Well probably only the Syrians will know, but you can bet your live that it will be a lot more than two Italian 'do gooders' ever saved by doing doing 'humanitarian projects'.
The Italian government should at least charge the two women and their families for the full cost of negotiations, ransom and air fare of their release. Maybe that will finally bring home to the do gooders that that there is a price to pay for their reckless behaviours.
*Sadly, both the Japanese hostages were brutally murdered, because the Japanese don't pay ransoms ... unlike the French and Italians who do.
The BBC are reporting that the Japanese Government have taken the passport off a reporter who was planning to travel to Syria. They apparently have had enough of its nationals travelling there and putting themselves in harms way. Perhaps we will see other countries doing the same to cut down the hostage taking.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-31235403
Can you blame them? $200m (£130m) is a lot of money .... thanks for the comment.
DeleteThose who pay up, and those who don't: It not hard to work out which from BBC list.
ReplyDeleteProminent foreign IS hostages killed:
Sergey Gorbunov, a Russian engineer, thought to have been killed April 2014
James Foley, US journalist, killed August 2014
Steven Sotloff, US journalist, killed September 2014
David Haines, British aid worker, killed September 2014
Alan Henning, British aid worker, killed October 2014
Abdul-Rahman Kassig, US aid worker, killed November 2014
Moaz al-Kasasbeh, Jordanian pilot, killed January 2015
Haruna Yukawa, Japanese military contractor, killed January 2015
Kenji Goto, Japanese journalist, killed January 2015
Kayla Jean Mueller, US aid worker, killed February 2015, according to IS in coalition air strike
Foreign hostages released by IS:
Marc Marginedas, Javier Espinosa and Ricardo García Vilanova, Spanish journalists, released March 2014
Didier François, Edouard Elias, Nicolas Hénin and Pierre Torres, French journalists, released April 2014
Federico Motka, Italian aid worker, released May 2014
Five Doctors Without Borders workers (Swiss, Danish, Belgian, Swedish and Peruvian citizens) released April-May 2014
Daniel Rye Ottosen, Danish journalist, released June 2014
46 Turkish hostages and 3 Iraqis including employees of the Turkish consulate, their families and special forces police, released September 2014
Toni Neukirch, German citizen, also released
Which is the right way? Well I guess it depends upon whose point of view you take. I will agree that if they don't go to these places its does solve teh problem.
Hmm, the released are Spanish, French, Italian, German and Turkish (Muslim) .... kinda confirms what we all suspected. Thanks for comment.
Delete