Channel Button

There are 16 articles on this title. You are reading the article ranked and rated #2 by Helium's members.

Politics, News & Issues   >

Terrorism

Get a Widget for this title

Should governments negotiate with terrorists?

When a person is abducted and held hostage for ransom, or when a building or entire region is threatened with destruction, it can be tempting for would-be heroes to negotiate with the terrorists and comply with their demands to ensure that their civilian targets remain unharmed. One wants, of course, to "talk down" an insane person from committing rash acts; this should be distinguished from serious negotiations, which are the subject here.

In the heat of the moment, saving the innocent at all costs may seem like the only moral thing to do. However, such heroism comes with a steep price. The payment conceded to one terrorist group may encourage others to extort similar concessions by the use of similar criminal acts.

Furthermore, where an individual might quickly cave into the demands of an oppressor, a government is expected to have sufficient military backing to remain standing. A government that quickly retreats from a standoff with a small group of people may be perceived by other nations as weak, insecure, or incompetent. This may harm its foreign relations and future negotiations of all kinds.

A government has no need to negotiate with significantly weaker, more vulnerable terrorists-for example, lone, crazed gunmen or isolated cults. More threatening terrorist groups, such as organized militia, might actually rival the government's power, but the government is still probably better off assuming an air of confidence and assuming that the militia will not call its bluff. However, if the government knows that its population is at the mercy of a terrorist group distinctly more powerful than itself-for example, a group with multiple nuclear weapons-and if the situation is unlikely ever to repeat itself, it might be more advantageous for the government and for the people it serves to engage in formal negotiations to deflect a major threat.

Learn more about this author, Tucker Lieberman.
Contact this writer Click here to send this author comments or questions.


Below are the top articles rated and ranked by Helium members on:

Should governments negotiate with terrorists?

  • 1 of 16

    by Gerard MP

    The majority of the world go to work and earn money to pay for their lifestyle, the week to most of us require getting up

    read more

  • 2 of 16

    by Tucker Lieberman

    When a person is abducted and held hostage for ransom, or when a building or entire region is threatened with destruction,

    read more

  • 3 of 16

    by Michael Austin

    There is a primary change in the definition of terrorists that has occurred over the last ten years. Prior the first Gulf

    read more

  • 4 of 16

    by Ted Sherman

    Of course you negotiate with terrorists. Their motives are to frighten, intimidate and too often, murder for a cause. If

    read more

  • 5 of 16

    by Michael Feek

    No government should negotiate with terrorists. Terrorists only see their own agenda so negotiations do little to resolve

    read more

View All Articles on:
Should governments negotiate with terrorists?

Add your voice

Know something about Should governments negotiate with terrorists??
We want to hear your view. Write_penWrite now!

87041

Featured Partner

Collegiate Society of America (CSAmerica)

The Collegiate Society of America (CSAmerica) has partnered with Helium, giving you the chance to write for a cause. ...more

What is Helium? | Buy Web Content | Contact Us | Privacy | User agreement | DMCA | User Tools | Help | Community | Helium’s Official Blog | Link to Helium

Helium, Inc.
200 Brickstone Square Andover, MA 01810 USA