cross-posted from: https://scribe.disroot.org/post/8843134

Op-ed by Kylie Moore-Gilbert, Research Fellow, Security Studies at Macquarie University.

Archived version

Once primarily the domain of non-state actors, including terror groups, drug cartels and armed gangs, hostage-taking has become a lucrative bargaining chip in the hands of countries like Iran, Russia, China, North Korea and Venezuela. (I was imprisoned by Iran for more than two years on false charges of espionage.)

It has become an unorthodox yet highly effective means of forcing concessions, including prisoner swaps, financial payments and the removal of sanctions.

However, very little scholarly research has examined the phenomenon. The data we do have on cases is patchy. This is in part because the governments whose citizens have been taken hostage usually prefer to negotiate in the shadows. We only tend to hear about select cases that attract media coverage.

Treating state hostage-taking as a consular issue to be solved via traditional diplomacy hasn’t worked. Bad actors haven’t been deterred; rather the opposite. An innovative new approach is long overdue.

Some of the ideas put forward in our research include:

1) Expanded international legal approaches

This includes reframing state hostage-taking as a form of torture and, under certain conditions, even a war crime or crime against humanity.

UN torture rapporteur Alice Edwards argues this would help open avenues for victims seeking justice … Legal academic Carla Ferstman governments should look to existing models in the US and Canada and consider passing legislation to allow victims of state-sponsored terrorism to sue hostage-taking states in their domestic courts.

2) Stronger government-led responses to hostage-taking

Many countries don’t have a designated office or role within government to coordinate domestic and multilateral responses to hostage-taking.

These positions exist now in the US and Canada. This step was also proposed in a 2024 Australian Senate inquiry into the wrongful detention of Australian citizens overseas. The government has yet to respond to the inquiry.

3) Innovative models for multilateral rapid responses to hostage crises

Several contributors to the journal have proposed new ideas for how states can do this, including former Canadian Justice Minister and Attorney General Irwin Cotler (with international human rights lawyer Brandon Silver) and former hostage Michael Kovrig (with international security and diplomacy expert Vina Nadjibulla).

Their recommendations include:

  • developing rapid-response mechanisms to hostage-taking in pre-existing multilateral groupings, such as the G7 or NATO

  • strengthening the Declaration on Arbitrary Detention in State-to-State Relations (launched by Canada and now supported by more than 80 nations)

  • imposing multilateral sanctions and other tools of economic leverage against states that engage in hostage-taking.

4) Greater investment in post-detention recovery care for both victims and families

Proposals for taking better care of former detainees came from the NGO Hostage International, human rights lawyer Sarah Teich and an Israeli team involved in designing reintegration programs for Gaza hostages.

These proposals include:

  • passing legislation to mandate a “duty of care” by governments to former hostages

  • developing new strategies for helping former hostages overcome their psychological challenges, based on emerging research in the field.