The Hostage Question

The Nigerian-British raid on a house in northern Nigeria which led to the murder of a British and an Italian hostage this week, has caused friction between Italy and Britain and has again raised the fundamental question - how to handle hostage situations.
First, it must be recognized that hostages are taken either for ransom (in the Philippines and in North Africa) or as political pawns (anywhere al-Qaida or other terrorist groups are active).
The difference is important because it will lead to different treatments of the situation by the government responsible for its citizen-hostages. For-ransom hostage takers are not generally anxious to kill or harm their hostages, since this would lead to the value of their hostages in general being reduced because the hostage takers could not be trusted to act "reasonably".
Political hostages are taken for media and recruitment/group bonding purposes and their lives are always in danger for they depend on the changing situations of the hostage takers.
But, in either case, there are two broad avenues of approach for the government. It can pay a ransom and "save" the hostages or it can negotiate and refuse to pay a ransom, thereby raising the threat of death. But, paying will inevitably lead to more citizens of that country being seized because the seizures turn into money-making enterprises. However, if the hostage takers are political fanatics, even paying a ransom cannot guarantee the release of the hostages because money is not the hostage takers' goal so much as the embarrassment of the country and public recognition that the hostage takers and their organization are "stronger" than the legitimate government trying to deal with them.
What to do?
Do what the British did this week - try to free the hostages by military intervention. But, this often backfires and hostages are killed in the attack. The political fallout at home is often severe, but also short-lived. It is only the hostages who make the ultimate payment.
There are no easy answers to this age-old and almost unanswerable question. But paying a ransom is sure to result in more hostage taking. So, negotiation or military intervention, even when it ends badly as it did this week, seems preferable.
Just for the record, (1) tourists are routinely warned about where not to go. They should always heed the advice; (2) humanitarian workers are aware of their vulnerability and are usually protected as best possible, but they should also follow basic precautionary measures for their own safety; and (3) commercial and technical workers often take the decision to enter into harm's way for monetary rewards, knowing that they are in danger, and their employers have a duty to protect them as best possible.
Are we our bother's keeper? It is a difficult question when hostages are concerned.