How Do I Become a Hostage Negotiator?

Hostage negotiations refer to negotiations between negotiators and robbers in a kidnapping case, and the risks are high.

Hostage negotiations

One of the hijackers involved in the hostage-taking case at the 1972 Munich Olympics may have very different hostage-taking incidents because of the motive and specific circumstances of the incident. Nevertheless, all hostage-taking incidents have the following basic characteristics:

The hijackers had a plot. It may be simple requirements, such as money, personal safety or safe escape to another country, or it may involve some complex political purpose. The target of the hijacker is not the hostage itself, but a third party (a person, a company, or a government) who can meet the hijacker's requirements.

The hostage is nothing more than a bargaining chip. They may be of some symbolic significance (for example, the hostage event at the 1972 Munich Olympics was targeted by the Israeli government and hostages were Israeli athletes), but the hijackers may also hijack anyone as a hostage.

The hostage-taking incident went through several different stages:

Initial phase-This phase is full of violence and is short-lived. The abductors attack until the hostages are subdued. When the hijacker begins to make a request, it indicates that the phase has ended.

Negotiation phase-At this time, law enforcement officers rushed to the scene and may have been informed of the hijacker's request. This phase may last for hours, days, or months, and may also be referred to as a "confrontation phase". On the surface, no significant changes have occurred on the scene. The hostages are still being held in the hands of the hijackers. At this stage, however, the relationship between all involved has changed significantly. Ultimately, it is the negotiator's task to use these relationships to facilitate a peaceful resolution of the event.

The End Phase-The final phase is very short, and sometimes violent clashes occur between police and bandits. The results are as follows:

1 The abductor automatically renounces resistance and is arrested.

2 The police launched an attack on the kidnappers and killed or arrested them.

3 The requirements of the hijackers were met and fled.

The fate of the hostage does not necessarily depend on what happened in the end phase. Even if the abductors compromise, they may still have killed the hostages at the negotiation stage. During the fierce battle, the hostages may be killed by police by accident or deliberately killed by the abductees. In previous cases, even the kidnappers killed the hostages after demanding success.

There is also an "post hoc phase". That is, a series of follow-up effects brought about by the hijacking incident. Such effects may include changes in the status of responsible institutions, changes in relations between governments, and increased security precautions.

When the negotiator arrives at the scene, the first thing to do is learn as much as possible about the abductor. The most fundamental question is: why did this person take the hostages? Common reasons are:

Hostage takers may have emotional or psychological disturbances. The specific reasons for the hostage taking may be irrational, and the abductors may also have suicidal tendencies. In such hostage-taking incidents, there is usually a relationship between the hostage and the hijacker. Such incidents are usually unplanned.

Lieutenant Gary Schmitt, of the Cheektowaga Police Department in Cheektowaga, New York State, believes that this is the type of hostage-taking that has been the most common among police officers. "Most of the perpetrators were people involved in family disputes, and the hostages were their families." Some criminals used innocent bystanders as human shields to escape the police. Most of this happens when criminals are arrested. The criminal hijacked the hostage in panic, trying to escape under his cover. In rare cases, hostages are part of a professional offenders action plan to help them escape. But hostage-taking is usually not deliberate.

The most notorious hostage-taking incident in history was orchestrated by terrorists or radical political groups. Hostage hijackers have attempted to use hostages from the beginning to achieve their specific goals. These goals vary, from changing a country's policies to releasing criminals or repealing a particular law. For some purposes, terrorist organizations may even threaten hostages to attract attention.

Kidnapping is a form of hostage crisis, but it is different from the typical hostage incident, where the abductor is in the open. The kidnappers hide the hostages in a secret place, and the communication is often one-way-what the kidnappers instruct the authorities to do. Therefore, there is not much negotiation in this process.

Regardless of the motive of the hostage-takers, the basic elements of the negotiations are the same. "You have to work hard to establish a good relationship with the other party to promote a peaceful resolution of the incident. Whenever someone is hijacked, you must use this type of technique," said Lieutenant Schmitt.

At the scene, the main purpose of the negotiator is to:

Delay time.

The longer the hostage-taking incident drags on, the greater the possibility of a peaceful settlement. Strategies to delay time include: seeking advice from superiors, delaying deadlines, and diverting the hijackers' attention to minor details, such as what type of aircraft they need. In addition, some open-ended questions should be asked when asking questions. The so-called open-ended questions refer to questions that cannot be answered with only "yes" or "no". For example, ask: what type of aircraft do you need? Don't ask: Do you need a plane?

Guarantee the safety of the hostages.

Ways to ensure the safety of hostages include: persuading the hijackers to agree to heal or release injured or sick hostages, negotiating with the hijackers about food and water delivery issues, and releasing as many hostages as possible through negotiations. Rescue the hostages from the hijacking scene can not only ensure their safety, but also ease the complex situation at the scene when a force attack must be launched. In addition, the rescued hostages can also provide some valuable information, including the location and habits of the abductor, and the status of other hostages.

keep cool.

From the initial hostage-taking to the negotiation that lasted for several hours, the mood of the abductors fluctuated greatly during this period. They are often angry at what they feel is unfair and that led them to take hostages. Not only that, they will be in a state of excitement after the hostage-taking. An angry, agitated thug with a machine gun is quite dangerous for the hostages. Negotiators must not quarrel with the hijackers or say "no" to their demands. Instead, they should adopt delay tactics or bargain with them. Most importantly, negotiators must maintain a positive and optimistic attitude to convince the hijackers that eventually everything can be resolved peacefully.

To ease the relationship between negotiators and hijackers, hijackers and hostages.

Negotiators must gain the trust of the hijackers. In other words, negotiators must behave very well in understanding the reasons for the hijacker's behavior, but still have a hard impression on them-they cannot just please the hijacker. In addition, negotiators can facilitate cooperation and interaction between hijackers and hostages, such as transporting large quantities of semi-finished food or medical supplies for reprocessing. When the abductors begin to understand the hostages and treat them as living people, it is difficult for them to kill the hostages. During a hostage crisis on a Dutch train in 1975, a hostage named Robert DeGrott was saved. He prayed for his wife and children before being executed, and the abductor let him go. Some hijackers were moved to tears, and two of them agreed not to shoot him but instead pushed him off the train. The hostage tumbled down the roadbed, but was unhurt and escaped after being strangled for a while (Barker, p. 33). In order to prevent emotional instability, terrorists often make quick decisions when taking hostages, and no one is allowed to pray.

Stockholm Syndrome

Spending hours, days, and months together not only made the abductors have feelings for the hostages. Hostages also tend to be secretive to abductors. This is the so-called Stockholm Syndrome, which takes its name from a bank robbery in Sweden, where the gangster's mishandle led to a six-day standoff. Gradually, the hostages began to think that the police outside were their common enemy, and eventually became the accomplice of the robber, sent him a whistle, and provided advice. One of the hostages even married him while he was in prison.

There are complex psychological reasons for the formation of Stockholm syndrome. This is partly due to a defensive mechanism that enables people to stay at peace without being able to tolerate external interference. It is also related to power-the abductor has the power to execute the hostage. If he does not exercise this power, the hostage will have a feeling of relief, which may be transformed into a sense of gratitude and eventually develop compassion. In addition, the fear that the police broke into the scene and could accidentally kill the hostages during the crossfire could also put the hostages in opposition to the police.

The initial request of the hijacker is often unreasonable. They may demand a huge sum or demand the release of thousands of terrorists from prison. Of course, negotiators cannot just meet any of their demands, even if it is about the safety of the hostages. The negotiator can explain that he cannot meet all the requirements of the hijacker through the following aspects, including: the national policy involved, the ability to actually meet the requirements, and the need to seek instructions from the on-site commander and superiors. Moreover, if anyone takes the hostages, their requirements can be met immediately, and the hostage crisis will probably endlessly happen in the world.

However, negotiators can make small concessions to ease the atmosphere of the negotiations, such as providing food and water, and committing to transportation and media coverage. In exchange, hostage-takers can release part of the hostages, surrender part of their weapons, or agree to lower the requirements. As this process continues, negotiators can gradually shake the position of hostage-takers.

Most countries have official policies for negotiating with terrorists. However, these policies change over time and are flexibly implemented based on the site conditions. If the hostage is a child or a politician, even the toughest governments may make an exception. In many cases, the two sides conduct secret trades, and the government accepts the conditions to save the hostages, while still maintaining a tough stance in front of the public that does not bow to the terrorists.

Israel, the United States, and Russia are all known for strict uncompromising policies. However, there are exceptions to every policy. One example is the 1985 hijacking of Universal Airlines Flight 847. Hezbollah hijackers demand the release of 700 Shiites in Israeli prisons. All hostages were freed after a long period of torture (except for an American hostage killed by an abductee), and Israel released all 766 prisoners.

1972 Munich Olympics

</ strong> Olympic village attacks at the 1972 Munich Summer Olympics stemmed from a negligence: Olympic officials received two letters stating that Palestinian athletes should be allowed to participate in the Olympics. Both letters were rejected. On September 5, a group of terrorists calling themselves "Black September" hijacked nine Israeli hostages and killed several Israeli athletes and coaches during the hijacking.

Negotiations lasted less than 24 hours, and finally the abductors offered to release hundreds of Palestinian prisoners from prisons in Europe and the Middle East. Negotiators repeatedly postponed the deadline until 10pm. West German officials realized they could not meet the demands of the terrorists. At the request of the hijackers, the Germans sent a bus to take them to two helicopters. Helicopter to the airport. The hijackers will set sail at the airport. The German side understood that their only chance to successfully target criminals was at the airport. (Aston, p. 80).

As soon as the helicopter landed at the airport, the two sides started using guns and grenades to exchange fire. All the hostages were spared, while a police officer and a pilot were killed. Five terrorists were killed and three others were arrested.

Although refusing to negotiate with terrorists is a common political belief (no one wants to compromise with terrorists after all), it can be disastrous. Even if the government does not agree with the demands of the terrorists, the negotiation process itself still plays a vital role in the peaceful settlement of the problem. Of the two most terrifying hostage incidents in history, the main reason for the tragic ending was the Russian government's refusal to negotiate with Muslim Chechen separatists.

In October 2002, armed terrorists occupied a theater in Russia and threatened to raz the theater to the ground if the Russian army had not withdrawn from the Chechen area before the deadline. The Russian side waited a few days before sending representatives to negotiate, and then decided to abandon further negotiations and use "narcotic gas" to attack the theater. Eventually, 129 hostages were killed and almost all died of poison gas. Although people blame the large number of deaths on poor planning and lack of proper treatment, further negotiations may be able to reduce the number of casualties.

Unfortunately, history repeated itself in 2004, when Chechen separatists with ammunition hijacked a primary school in Beslan. Russia once again resorted to force to resolve the conflict and led to a tragic ending. The hostage-takers blew up the stadium with the most hostages. More than 300 hostages were killed, more than half of whom were children. In contrast, in the 1970s and 1980s, France was known for its willingness to negotiate with terrorists. As a result, France has become the main target of terrorist attacks, and terrorist organizations that have reached an agreement with the French government frequently default.

Become a featured project for law enforcement agencies. The path to becoming a professional hostage negotiator can be very tortuous. Although there are some related training courses and certificates, experience is also important. Some newly graduated college students cannot get a job as a negotiator even after completing all the negotiator training courses. The basic requirement for a negotiator's career is to have several years of experience working in law enforcement (police, FBI or other law enforcement agencies) or the military, and have accumulated long-term experience in dealing with crisis events. Learning and training are equally important. There are many courses to help police officers, FBI (FBI) agents, soldiers and others learn how to negotiate in a hostage incident. The Public Agency Training Council (PATC) is a private company that specializes in providing training courses for law enforcement agencies. Courses include how to deal with people with emotional instability, specific strategies in negotiation, and a complete negotiator course (see PATC : Hostage Course). The International Association of Hostage Negotiators will also organize related lectures and training courses. The training of hostage negotiators has never stopped. The FBI and other agencies often provide a variety of training and lectures. The Cheektowaga Police Department's crisis negotiators have also formed an association with other law enforcement agencies in the region to meet several times a year to provide negotiators with comments, advice and support.