Lesson 1: Make the passport a shield
Families offer insight on how Canada could change the way it deals with hostage takings
First you are taken hostage. Then you are taken swimming. And fed well. And given very good cigars. And sent home a few weeks later none the worse for wear.
Improbable as it sounds in the age of beheadings, that is precisely how the modern era of international kidnapping began in the summer of 1958 when Cuban revolutionaries Fidel and Raul Castro snatched 41 American and Canadian hostages. The late Harold Kristjanson of Geraldton, Ont., was among them. His family filled the Toronto Star in on this little-known chapter of Canadian kidnapping history, describing how “Uncle Harold came out smiling.”
It was front-page news: an audacious act of propaganda to put the brewing Castro revolution on everyone’s map. The hostages ultimately were set free, describing it as more vacation than abduction.
Similar tales would pop up in the decades leading to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In Yemen, a culture of hospitality dictated that kidnappers treat hostages as guests — even if they were unwilling ones. Captives were mere bargaining chips traded between tribes, and stories abound of hostages told they were free and not wanting to leave just quite yet.
There is, of course, nothing even remotely as benign today. As this Star series has shown, 21st-century kidnappings of Canadians abroad bring a world of hurt for the families back home. And Ottawa’s broken response all too often adds to the pain.
Each of the more than 50 people who shared their perspectives for this project was asked to articulate how Ottawa can better prepare for the next Canadian family to face this tragedy. Below are the lessons learned, distilled from interviews with hostages and families, private risk consultants and current and former security, intelligence and Canadian policy officials.
The points are arranged by degree of complexity, from the easy fixes to the heavy lifts — and there is ample room for debate. But the debate is long overdue. However else views differ, there is unanimity on the goal of ensuring the Canadian passport becomes the strongest of shields for all its holders, regardless of where we travel.
Canada’s hostage-response system is broken. It’s time for an overhaul.
Respect families of hostages by making them the priority, not the afterthought. Canada’s current protocols consistently leave relatives feeling left out, let down, underinformed and overburdened by Ottawa’s demand for their silence throughout the ordeal. Silence made more sense a generation ago. But it is a debatable strategy in the age of YouTube, now that kidnappers can so easily seize the narrative with terrifying instantly uploaded videos. Families are told they are in the driver’s seat and yet they are not given support or information to make crucial decisions. When the crisis ends, it is the families who bear the burden of the outcome.
Eliminate the empty threat of criminal prosecution by announcing Canada will not imprison families who try to pay ransom. In practice, this is the reality. Amanda Lindhout’s mother, Lorinda Stewart, was not prosecuted for paying $600,000 to the Somali kidnappers who held her daughter, nor should she be. But the prospect of a 10-year jail sentence looms during families’ attempts to raise funds, adding to their stress.
The U.S. alleviated this concern in June 2015 after acknowledging its policy on American captives abroad was badly broken.
The U.S. Department of Justice said in a statement the government “does not intend to add to families’ pain in such cases by suggesting that they could face criminal prosecution.”
Appoint a boss — with cabinetlevel clout — to the leaderless interdepartmental committee of good people with good intentions that comprises Canada’s current “wholeof-government” approach. End bureaucratic inertia and turf wars with a leader who will own the wins and the losses and inject the sense of urgency that Canadians in crisis desperately require. Canada could consider drawing another lesson from the U.S., where an envoy for hostage affairs now takes the lead.
Others suggest a Canadian solution would be a parliamentary secretary reporting directly to the Prime Minister’s Office. However we do it, it is critical a leader take charge to cut through — and not add to — the layers of bureaucracy.
Counsel the relatives. The stress experienced by families while their loved one is held captive is unique and requires specialized counselling. Relatives should be offered psychological help from the beginning. The RCMP, in comments to the Star, says they offer this therapy to their own personnel dealing with kidnappings. Why not extend this service to the families? Families are often dealing directly with the kidnappers — and certainly with a phalanx of government employees. Providing relatives better means to cope would only help both interactions. A phone number to a local crisis line is not enough.
There is only one gift that captivity brings — a new appreciation of freedom.
Go back 10 years when two kidnapped Canadians seized the headlines. The news then was joyous as Jim Loney and Harmeet Singh Sooden were reunited with their families after nearly four months of cap- tivity in Iraq.
Loney remembers waking early the first morning back in the Toronto home that he shared with his partner. It was still dark. He woke without chains: “Let’s get on our bikes and go watch the sunrise.” The freedom was intoxicating. All of the hostages who were released have memories of first glimpses of sky, deep breaths of fresh air. First hugs. First meals or showers.
Their families have their own reunion memories. There is gratitude for all those who worked hard to secure their freedom.
While the main storyline over the past eight days was the tragic murders of John Ridsdel and Robert Hall, interviews with more than a dozen former Canadian hostages and their relatives also inform this series.
Their experiences and recoveries are so unique that they seek solace or guidance in each others’ shared joys or pain.
Colin Rutherford has not talked publicly about the five years he spent in Taliban custody before his release this January. His family respects his privacy. But when it comes to fixing a system that an overwhelming majority of relatives of other hostages say is deeply flawed, his brother Brian is willing to participate.
“Anything I can do to help them I’m happy to do, especially if it does bring about positive change,” he says.
And now for the hard part: some fixes are obvious, others will require more work and political courage to implement.
Reconsider the lead role the RCMP plays in acting as chief investigators, negotiators and as Family Liaison Officers (FLOs), the first line of contact between the government and relatives. Families interviewed by the Star report a range of experiences with their assigned Mounties, some stellar, some awful. A statement from the RCMP in response seemed tone-deaf, suggesting that families were projecting their pain toward the nearest convenient target. Some security experts, both government and private sector, also questioned the RCMP’s capabilities, as a domestic agency, in the field of international kidnappings. They encouraged establishing a quick-acting “fusion cell” model, similar to what the U.S. has recently adopted, with heavy military and diplomatic involvement. Key to success is continuity, with committed members who will not rotate out every six months and force the team to lose experience.
Partner with the private sector. Families of hostages are often given an either/or scenario. Go with a private firm and the government will walk away. Lorinda Stewart faced this dilemma for more than a year and regrets waiting so long to hire a company that ultimately paid a ransom and freed her daughter, Amanda Lindhout. While our series focused on cases where the kidnappers are from designated terrorist groups, there are tens of thousands of kidnapping each year worldwide. Security companies that specialize in kidnapping negotiations resolve the majority of these cases, often quickly.
Not all companies are created equal and there are unscrupulous businesses that try to exploit the families of hostages. But there are skilled professionals — some willing to work at reduced rates for those without insurance — and there needs to be better co-operation so that companies can benefit from government intelligence.
Prepare for the possibility. Andy Ellis, who retired this year as assistant director of operations at the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, says any employer that demands that staff travel to dangerous areas has a duty to prep them for the possibility of kidnappings.
“Occupational safety regulations should hold employers to account. If a worker goes in a mine, it is inspected for safety. If Canadians travel abroad to locations where they could face risk, they should be provided with training and awareness to increase their preparedness and thus safety.”
Ellis now works as a security consultant and has helped families of Canadians detained abroad on a pro bono basis. He suggests insurance companies must also be held to better account if a hostage has what’s known as K&R insurance (kidnap and ransom).
“Payments need to be made available to victims’ families quickly and completely,” he says.
Engage with international friends and allies. Watch how they do it. Learn. Survey the reforms and evolving best practices in the U.S., U.K., Australia and beyond, all of which were triggered by the same problems we see in Canada — the need to do more for hostages and their families. Call it a dubious byproduct of the post 9/11 era, but hostage-crisis management is a rapidly growing field.
One important forum, the International Negotiator Working Group, regularly attracts delegates from 54 police forces around the world. Two sources told the Star they have never seen a Canadian at the table.
Debate honestly the issue of kidnappings. No one is suggesting the Canadian government should pay ransoms directly. But they do get paid.
In 2009, a secret cable made public by WikiLeaks shows an effort to have a clear policy on this and other complicated aspects of government involvement. Among the concerns were many of the points raised here, as well as what the government’s role should be in cases where the hostages are employees, such as diplomats Robert Fowler and Louis Guay, versus private citizens without insurance such as Colin Rutherford.
“The government of Canada has a duty-of-care obligation to a diplomat,” says Steve Day, the former head of Canada’s JTF2 special-operations task force, and now private consultant. “If you’re a private citizen and you choose to venture anywhere outside our borders without the appropriate insurance, does the government of Canada actually have a duty of care? Where does the duty of care lie?” These discussions are far overdue.
Admit to the families that the odds of Canadian military rescue are close to zero. The barriers to putting boots on the ground are real enough, ranging from political fear of rescue-gone-wrong to worries of violating another country’s sovereign territory or having to work alongside an ill-equipped military.
Add to that the logistical gaps: Canada simply doesn’t have the military capacity to instantly deploy anywhere, anytime, without at least a little help from its friends. One especially cruel chapter in this series involves how one family came to believe Canadian commandos would be green-lit to save the day. Yet the truth is Canada’s Joint Task Force 2 has never once been tasked with a real-life hostage rescue since the unit was created in 1993.
Is that likely to ever change? Should Canada raise its game, close the support gaps, put rescue on the table as a truly viable option?