This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/19/world/middleeast/isis-hostages-us-reviews-policies.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Obama Orders Review of Hostage Policy Obama Orders Review of Hostage Policy
(about 5 hours later)
Confronting repeated beheadings of American captives by the Islamic State militant group, the Obama administration is reviewing how it seeks to secure the release of United States citizens taken hostage overseas. The Obama administration confirmed on Tuesday that it was reviewing its policy on securing the release of United States citizens taken hostage abroad, but that the ban on paying ransom had not changed.
The review, disclosed by an undersecretary of defense in a letter to a Republican lawmaker, includes how the administration deals with the family members of hostages, some of whom have complained about what they see as an unacceptable refusal by the administration to grant concessions to hostage takers, including ransom payments. Word of the review, disclosed by an under secretary of defense in a letter to a Republican lawmaker, came as the administration was grappling with a series of beheadings of American captives by the Islamic State militant group, which posted a video Sunday announcing the third such killing.
Unlike European governments, which have paid many millions of dollars in ransom to win the release of citizens held by the Islamic State and other militant groups, the United States has said it will never pay money to get its citizens back. It also has privately pressured the other governments not to pay. Some family members of hostages have criticized what they see as an unacceptable refusal by the administration to grant concessions to hostage-takers, including ransom payments.
News of the letter disclosing the policy review was first reported by The Daily Beast website on Monday, a day after the Islamic State publicized the beheading of Peter Kassig, 26, an aid worker and former soldier, who was the third American captive of the group to be killed. Unlike European governments, which have paid many millions of dollars in ransom to win the release of citizens held by the Islamic State or other militant groups, the United States has said it will never pay money to rescue its citizens. It has also privately pressed other governments not to pay.
The Islamic State is believed to hold one other American. It has also posted beheading videos of two Britons. Administration officials said on Tuesday that the policy review, first reported on Monday by The Daily Beast, was not a re-evaluation of the ransom prohibition.
It was unclear from the letter, written by the undersecretary of defense, Christine Wormuth, to Representative Duncan Hunter, a California Republican who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, whether the policy review specifically includes reconsideration of the ransom issue. “The United States government, as a matter of longstanding policy, does not grant concessions to hostage takers, for a very important reason — granting such concessions would put all American citizens overseas at greater risk for kidnapping,” Alistair Baskey, a spokesman for the National Security Council, wrote in an emailed statement. “Furthermore, paying ransoms would only sustain the very same terrorist organizations that we are working to destroy.”
It also was unclear when precisely the administration began the policy review. A copy of the letter posted on The Daily Beast’s website was stamped Nov. 11. Mr. Baskey said the administration’s goal “has always been to use every appropriate resource within the bounds of the law to assist families to bring their loved ones home.”
The letter was a response to an Aug. 20 letter written by Mr. Hunter seeking clarity on the administration’s position on rescuing American citizens held abroad. Josh Earnest, the White House spokesman, told reporters at a daily briefing that “the president continues to believe, as previous presidents have concluded, that it’s not the best interests of American citizens to pay ransom to any organization, let alone a terrorist organization, that’s holding an American hostage.”
Mr. Earnest did not specify precisely when the review had been undertaken or when it would conclude.
“This is something that the president ordered back in — over the summer,” he said. Because of “the extraordinary nature of some of the hostage-takings that we’d seen this year,” he continued, “the president felt it was warranted to direct the relevant departments and agencies who have traditionally been involved in assisting families as they try to recover the safe return of their family members” to review their policies.
Christine Wormuth, an under secretary of defense, disclosed the review in a letter to Representative Duncan Hunter, a California Republican who sits on the House Armed Services Committee. A copy of the letter posted on The Daily Beast website was stamped Nov. 11.
The letter was a response to an Aug. 20 letter from Mr. Hunter, seeking clarity on the administration’s position regarding American citizens held abroad.
“As a result of the increased frequency of hostage-taking of Americans overseas, and the recognition of the dynamic threat posed by specific terrorist groups,” Ms. Wormuth’s letter said, “the president recently directed a comprehensive review of the U.S. government policy on overseas terrorist-related hostage cases, with specific emphasis on examining family engagement, intelligence collection, and diplomatic engagement policies.”“As a result of the increased frequency of hostage-taking of Americans overseas, and the recognition of the dynamic threat posed by specific terrorist groups,” Ms. Wormuth’s letter said, “the president recently directed a comprehensive review of the U.S. government policy on overseas terrorist-related hostage cases, with specific emphasis on examining family engagement, intelligence collection, and diplomatic engagement policies.”
The Islamic State, which has seized parts of Syria and Iraq, first killed an American captive, James Foley, 40, in a beheading, a video of which was posted on Aug. 19. The second American beheaded was, Steven J. Sotloff, 31, and a video was posted on Sept. 2. Word of the review came after the Islamic State publicized the beheading of Peter Kassig, 26, an aid worker and former soldier, the third American captive the group has killed.
The group has called the killings part of its retaliation for an American-led bombing campaign aimed at Islamic State targets. But the group’s demands for ransoms had preceded the bombing, which President Obama first authorized in early August. The Islamic State is believed to hold one more American. It has also posted videos showing the beheading of two Britons.
After Mr. Foley’s death, his parents went public with their unhappiness over the treatment given them by American officials during the course of the effort to determine who had abducted him and whether his freedom could be negotiated. They and the relatives of other hostages said the administration had appeared to treat the abductions as unfortunate but routine cases of Americans caught by violent extremists. The Islamic State, which has seized parts of Syria and Iraq, first killed an American captive, James Foley, 40, in a beheading that was publicized in an Internet video posted on Aug. 19. A video of the second American beheaded, Steven J. Sotloff, 31, was posted on Sept. 2.
“Our government was very clear that no ransom was going to be paid,” Mr. Foley’s mother, Diane, said in an interview with The New York Times published in September. “It was horrible — and continues to be horrible. You are between a rock and a hard place.” The group has called the killings part of its retaliation for an American-led bombing campaign aimed at Islamic State targets. But the group demanded ransom for the captives before the bombing campaign, which President Obama first authorized in early August.
After Mr. Foley’s death, his parents went public with their unhappiness over the way American officials treated them while the government was trying to determine who had abducted Mr. Foley and whether his freedom could be negotiated. They and the relatives of other hostages said the administration seemed to regard the abductions as unfortunate but routine.
“Our government was very clear that no ransom was going to be paid,” Mr. Foley’s mother, Diane, said in an interview with The New York Times, published in September. “It was horrible — and continues to be horrible. You are between a rock and a hard place.”