Should we talk to them

To negotiate or not negotiate with terrorists is not the question. The real issue at stake is the degree of governments8217; hypocrisy...

To negotiate or not negotiate with terrorists is not the question. The real issue at stake is the degree of governments8217; hypocrisy and the double standards they uphold. Time and again, many governments have stated publicly that they would never allow themselves to be blackmailed nor surrender to terrorists8217; demands. Leaders have delivered passionate speeches about how they would stand firm. Their rhetoric was very high. Their actions, disappointing.

In reality and in practice, governments have done exactly the opposite of their preaching. President Ronald Reagan and his administration pledged publicly in the 19808217;s to fight terrorism. Secretly, his officials were talking to Hezbollah and eventually clinched the arms-for-hostage deals 8212; also known as Iran-Contra affair 8212; to release American hostages. This is only one example of US administrations8217; double standards. Of course, the US is not alone. The French, the British, the Italians, the Germans, the Japanese and, now, the South Koreans have followed suit in their dealings with either local or foreign terrorist groups. Governments paid in arms, in cash, in commercial benefits, in oil, in goods, and above all, in releasing terrorists from jails.

There is no better example than the behaviour of my own government. Israel is depicted worldwide as a country that refuses to bend to terrorist demands, and considered a role model in that regard. To a certain degree, Israel does deserve such credit. It is surrounded by hostile nations. It must confront terrorist groups that have not hesitated to use the most vicious, cruel and inhumane methods to inflict death and destruction against

Israeli civilians. In response, Israel has developed anti-terrorist weaponry and doctrines that are studied around the world. Israel has even sent commandos on daring operations to rescue hostages.

But at the same time, Israel has proved that its heart and mouth are not on equal footing. In several cases, Israeli governments have agreed to cave in. In 1985, Israel swapped more than 1100 Palestinian terrorists for three of its soldiers who had been captured by a Palestinian terrorist group. In 2004, Israel released dozens of Arab and Palestinian prisoners and terrorists in exchange for the bodies of three of its soldiers and a former colonel whom Hezbollah was holding in Lebanon.

The truth is that governments operate by a variation of the Prisoners8217; Dilemma, taken from game theory: they fear that if they don8217;t talk to the terrorists, they will lose out to someone else who will.

What really is needed is an international consensus, an international acceptance that no one talks to terrorists. This should be not a theoretical concept but a very practical decision, shared by all governments around the world. But apart from sounding utopian, this idea simply cannot be implemented as long as there are governments and states sponsoring and supporting terrorists. So my advice to governments is cut out the hypocrisy. To quote an immortal line from, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, an Italian western B-movie from the 708217;s, starring Clint Eastwood, 8220;If you come to kill, kill 8212; don8217;t talk.8221;

Story continues below this ad

Governments must do what they say they8217;ll do. If they are convinced that talking to terrorists would only increase terror, they should not negotiate with them, regardless of what might result. If they believe that negotiating with terrorists is inevitable because the public can8217;t bear the consequences of doing otherwise, so be it 8212; but they should say so, rather than pretend to do otherwise.

The writer is a senior commentator for the Israeli daily 8216;Haaretz8217;. He specialises in intelligence, security, terrorism and strategic issues Newsweek