Pearl's Kidnappers Won't Win

THENS, Ohio -- Journalism can be a very dangerous profession. Daniel Pearl, after years of experience as a reporter for The Wall Street Journal, must have known that before his kidnapping in Pakistan last week, as I did before I was taken hostage in Lebanon 16 years ago while working as a reporter for The Associated Press.

It's not just the fact that journalists work in areas of armed conflict and have to run the risk of being shot, shelled or bombed like everyone else in those areas, soldier or civilian. The more insidious danger, and especially in the past few years, comes from the notion held by many of the militias and splinter factions in war zones that journalists make good targets.

We in the press thought we had disabused most of these people of the idea that kidnapping a journalist was a useful way to forward political goals or simply attract attention. My captors, from Islamic Jihad, told me on my release 10 years ago that they had concluded their spate of kidnappings in the 1980's had not been a "useful tactic." It had not brought them any rewards worth the effort, and the attention they gained was uniformly negative. They weren't, they said, going to do it anymore. And they didn't.

Nor did any of the other "terrorist" groups around the world take American journalists hostage for political purposes. Not, certainly, out of any sense of the wrongness and cruelty of this particular act. Groups that might contemplate taking hostages don't dwell much on right or wrong, unless it's the wrongs they perceive have been done them. The kidnappings stopped because they just weren't worthwhile.

The United States, like every other major government in the world, concluded after the taking of several American hostages in the 1980's that the very worst thing it could do was respond in any way to political demands of terrorists. Even France, which had flatly paid for the release of its kidnapped nationals in Lebanon, has firmly adopted the no-negotiation rule. A staunch refusal to make deals makes kidnappings pointless.

Unfortunately, the kidnappers in Pakistan seem to have forgotten the lesson. Those who are holding Mr. Pearl have made impossible demands, demands that Washington simply will not address. Unless these kidnappers are woefully ignorant or have a seriously warped view of how the world works, they know they will not get what they want. So what can they gain?

Publicity? The thought that kidnapping a journalist guarantees attention is a seductive and common one. A hostage journalist certainly does get attention. The problem for the kidnappers is that the international attention they get is not the kind they want.

Journalists in this dangerous world are very aware of our vulnerability. To cover the news, we have to be in the midst of it. To be neutral and fair means being willing to talk to all sides, to go into the streets and see what is happening, and to do so most of the time without bodyguards or protection. When one of our colleagues is deliberately lured into a trap, taken and threatened, how can we not respond with our only weapon — the spotlight of the media?

But all the news stories, all television coverage, focuses on the heinousness of the crime, the helplessness and pain of the family, the integrity and bravery of the journalist being held. No positive attention is given to the demands made, the issues supposedly prompting the kidnapping.

Has anyone even thought about whether the demands of the kidnappers of Daniel Pearl — for the release of Pakistanis held in Cuba and of a Taliban official in American custody — are just? Nope. Nor should they. It was the same for my kidnappers, who wanted freedom for terrorists jailed for blowing up the American and French embassies in Kuwait.

This kidnapping, like mine, was perpetrated by people who have little understanding of journalism or of America. It accomplishes nothing. It cannot possibly result in anything positive for the kidnappers, no matter what cause they claim to represent.

It is terrible to think that this lesson may have to be relearned. This kind of crime is not, as my kidnappers said, a useful tactic.

Terry Anderson is the author of "Den of Lions," an account of his seven years as a hostage of Shiite Muslim radicals in Lebanon.

I hope LOTS of people pay attention to this. It comes from a man who's been there, literally! He knows what these terrorists are, and the are NOT freedom fighters, they are THUGS!

The Paki fanatics are some of the dimist radicals on this planet. These are the folks that brought us hundreds of giant protest posters featuring Osama and his "evil sidekick" Bert from Seasame Street. And who could forget the idiot who tried to set a cheesy, handmade American flag on fire, but wound up bursting into flames himself. Many of their Afghanistan volunteers were the first to surrender or skidaddle back home once they realized that fighting against the US wasn't all that it was cracked up to be. Their spelling leaves something to be desired, too...

I feel sorry for Pearl and hope for the best. Maybe his idiot captors will botch the execution. Even if the evil morons do succeed in murdering Pearl, such a pathetic act will do little for their cause. Anyone with half a brain could see the outcome.

Update: There are now two stories circulating through the major media outlets. One states that an e-mail to CNN claims that Pearl has been killed. Another story says that a caller is demanding 2 Million dollars and the release of the Taliban's former ambassador in exchange for Pearl. Either way, it doesn't look hopeful. Prayers for him, his pregnant wife, family and friends...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.