Saving Lives
On Tuesday, Jan. 27, the terrorist organization ISIS released a video. The video displayed Kenji Goto and Haruna Yukawa, two Japanese hostages, wearing the orange suits that previous ISIS hostages used to wear. The two men were shown kneeling on the ground left and right of a masked man. The video was filmed in an outdoor desert setting—the same place as in past videos. In exchange for the men’s lives, ISIS demanded a $200 million ransom from the Japanese government by Friday.
The two men were shown kneeling on the ground left and right of a masked man.
On Saturday, Feb. 1, another video was released. This time, Goto was holding a picture of Yukawa’s dead body in a still screen and the audio recording of Goto came out from the speakers. Goto seemed to blame the death of Yukawa on the Japanese government for being hesitant in humanitarian negotiations. This is somewhat different from the previous live-action shots. It is also the first time both hostages have not been killed within the designated timeframe.
Many questioned the authenticity of these two videos claiming that ISIS had filmed these videos indoors using computer graphics instead of filming them outside like they used to. Both governments of the United States and Japan hesitated to pay ransom, instead taking a hardcore stance of non-negotiation with terrorists. However, the authenticity of a simple video cannot outweigh the universal value of human life.
Many governments around the world, including the Japanese government, adhere to the “We don’t negotiate with terrorists” policy. But negotiation is necessary and can be beneficial in desperate situations—and desperate situations call for desperate measures. If the government does not dare to be responsible for the hostages’ lives, then who will take responsibility? A press release stressing “Please return all the hostages safely at once,” will put absolutely no pressure on the terrorists. They have a clear goal; they know what they want, and they have nothing to lose until they get it.
ISIS’s goals have not changed—they have nothing to lose until they achieve them. When the Japanese government was hesitant to take a stance and pay the ransom, ISIS terrorists killed Yukawa. This fact has been confirmed both by the U.S. government and the Japanese government.
Governments should remember that negotiating with terrorists is different from negotiating with other countries for diplomatic relations or economic benefits. In terrorist negotiations, the country’s benefit should be the upmost priority. However, negotiating with terrorists is working in a whole new dimension. Whatever it takes, the life and safety of the hostages should be the government’s priority—even if it means paying a huge ransom. No one will blame the government for spending money on those matters. Negotiating with terrorists is risky. They can never be expected to deliver their side of the bargain. However, the negatives cannot be a barrier for making the attempt to save a human life. This is what the Japanese government should have done, instead of incessantly trying to figure out whether the video was real or not.
All terrorist groups have a clear goal in mind. The process in which they try to achieve this goal may change along the way, but the goal remains clear. When fighting terrorists, governments can either listen to some of the demands of the terrorists, or undertake military action. When nations fight back, the terrorist response is usually just as extreme. Terrorists do not pack up and go home. Instead, they only persist stubbornly so that the governments would give into their demands. The best way to prevent this cycle is to negotiate, even if it means going nowhere and simply buying time. I believe that it is important to give a signal to the terrorists that their demands are being taken into account.
The $200 million the terrorists demanded in exchange for Yukawa and Goto was the same amount that the Japanese government pledged to pay to governments that were fighting against ISIS. This announcement was made in Cairo, on Jan. 17. The whole speech sounded like a threat, and that is perhaps the reason why ISIS released the video only after a short period of time after Shinzo Abe announced that he will support countries that fight ISIS. Instead of giving $200 million to other countries, Shinzo Abe could have used the resources wisely and paid the ransom. Even if he had to pay an extra $200 million, it was a price that he should have paid.
The Japanese government’s intentions cannot be so pure in taking such a firm stance. Japan’s prime minister, Shinzo Abe, has made continuous efforts to change the article of Japan’s constitution which states that Japan forever renounces war. He also made it clear since December, after his party’s election victory, that he wants to restore the pre-war Imperial Constitution. Abe seems to be pushing his idea of “collective-self defense,” which would allow Japan to fight in wars alongside its allies. Now that he has a hostage taken by ISIS, this can be a good excuse for him to assert his military policies.
Regardless of Abe’s true intentions behind his stance, it is right to say that the Japanese government was irresponsible in handling this case. That is why my stance is firm—the whole topic of discussion has been unintentionally swifted from this occurrence. Instead of focusing on how to save peoples’ lives, the media and governments of each country were busy analyzing the video and finding evidence to prove that the video was not real. Who cares if that video was filmed indoors or outdoors; saving lives is far more important. ♥