Replies

Thanks. This one is long, so I've snipped portions, but the entire article is relevant.

Iraq held hostage to terror
By Sudha Ramachandran

BANGALORE - While the US, Britain and Italy, whose citizens have been taken hostage, have refused to concede demands of hostage-takers, militant groups have sent out clear signals that they, too, mean business. (snipped)

Hostage-taking has emerged as a powerful "smart weapon" in the Iraqi insurgents' arsenal. However, it does seem that its indiscriminate use could alienate Muslim opinion. This is evident from the response of the Arab world to the abduction in the last week of August of two French journalists, Georges Malbrunot and Christian Chesnot.

The Islamic Army of Iraq that abducted them demanded that France lift a ban on Islamic headscarves in state schools. This is the first time since the kidnapping of foreigners started in Iraq in April that hostage-takers have laid down conditions external to Iraq.

Muslim religious and political leaders who have hitherto maintained silence on the issue of hostage-taking responded sharply to the kidnapping of Malbrunot and Chesnot. Lebanon's senior-most Shi'ite Muslim cleric, Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, described the abduction as "a brutal operation on the human level, a bad one on the Islamic level, and a losing one on the political level". The abductions and their link to the headscarf ban "provokes the ire of Muslim scholars and intellectuals worldwide", Fadlallah said.

Among those who have criticized the abduction of the French journalists are Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, the Palestinian militant group Hamas, Egypt's outlawed Islamist militant group the Muslim Brotherhood, and Syria's Grand Mufti Ahmad Kuftaro.

France was at the forefront of the international opposition to the US invasion and occupation of Iraq. It is seen as a friend of the Arab world. The kidnapping of other Westerners working in Iraq has failed to evoke such a response from the Arab world and this has to do with the fact that their governments are part of the US-led coalition.

While gruesome decapitations of foreign hostages and the hosting of videos of the beheading have generated considerable revulsion among Muslims, especially moderate opinion, denunciations have not been as vociferous as in the case of the French hostages. The general feeling is that the West is outraged over a few executions and gives endless footage to hostages in the media, while the killing of thousands of Iraqis and Palestinians goes by largely ignored. (snipped)

The kidnapping of foreign workers began in April when the al-Saraya Mujahideen (Mujahideen Brigades) took three Japanese and four Italians, one of whom was subsequently killed. The beheading of hostages began a month later. A 26-year-old American, Nick Berg, was abducted and then decapitated. Al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Unity and Holy War), an Islamist group led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and with links to al-Qaeda, claimed responsibility for the beheading.

Since then, al-Tawhid wal-Jihad has claimed responsibility for at least seven other executions of hostages, including Korean translator Kim Sun-il, Bulgarian truck drivers Georgi Lazov and Ivaylo Kepov, and the American contractors, Hensley and Armstrong.

The Islamic Army in Iraq's record on kidnappings is almost as fearsome. It abducted Angelo de la Cruz, the now-freed Filipino hostage; killed an Italian hostage and is now holding two French journalists hostage.

Another group that has been active in the hostage-taking business is Ansar al-Sunna (Followers of the Tradition). It claimed to have murdered an Arab holding US citizenship and captured a US marine of Lebanese origin. It kidnapped 12 Nepalese workers and then executed them. Others include the Holders of the Black Banners, which kidnapped seven truck drivers and then freed them, and the Islamic Movement for Iraq's Mujahideen, which freed a Lebanese hostage in recognition of "his country's resistance against Israel".

The most common condition for release put forward by these groups is that countries to which their hostages belong pull out troops stationed in Iraq, that the companies they work for stop doing business in Iraq or provide services that will result in the stabilization of the US occupation. The groups that are engaged in hostage-taking might all be opposed to the presence of the US-led occupation forces in Iraq, but not all of them are in the kidnapping business for political reasons. Some are mere criminal gangs who have seen the immense possible prospects of profit that hostage-taking holds out. These abduct foreign workers in Iraq, cloaking conditions for their release with political issues. It is money finally that secures the release of the hostages.

The Black Banners demanded that India pull out its troops from Iraq - when India has no troops in Iraq. They then demanded that the employer of the three Indian hostages, Kuwait and Gulf Link Transport Company (KGL), halt operations in Iraq. The negotiations to secure the release of the hostages were protracted, not because the issues being discussed were intractable political ones but because of hard wrangling over money. Ultimately, US$500,000 paid by KGL to the kidnappers did the trick and the hostages were released.

It appears that local criminal gangs do the actual kidnapping. The hostages are then sold up the chain to larger militant outfits, which use the hostages as pawns and bargaining chips. Foreign hostages apparently carry a higher price tag.

Many of the abductions in Iraq have been attributed to al-Zarqawi or to "groups with links to al-Zarqawi". This could be because a large number of gangs might be supplying his group with hostages - hence the many groups with "links to al-Zarqawi".

But a more plausible explanation lies in the way Islamist militant groups are evolving post-September 11, 2001. Just as al-Qaeda has groups with links to it, so also al-Zarqawi's al-Tawhid wal-Jihad with outfits in Iraq. Terrorist cells and outfits with links to al-Qaeda have proliferated across the world. What links these groups is a similar outlook and ideology. The al-Qaeda-linked groups act under different names and carry out attacks on their own.

Dia'a Rashwan, an Egyptian expert on militant groups, likens this phenomenon to "McDonald's giving out franchises ... All they have to do is follow the company's manual. They don't consult with headquarters every time they want to produce a meal."

It is possible that the various groups engaged in the kidnapping of foreigners in Iraq are "franchises" of al-Zarqawi's al-Tawhid wal-Jihad. A similar ideology and opposition to the US and its allies bond them. They might even supply one another with hostages. But they act under different names - sometimes very similar names - contributing to the coalition's confusion over the identity of the groups that are taking their citizens hostage. (snipped)

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FI25Ak01.html