Kidnap and Ransom Crisis Response Manual

K&R CRISIS RESPONSE GUIDE
DAN SOMMER &

ANNA JEMIOLEK
Kidnap & Ransom Guide | Manual for Crisis Relief
www.4CrisisRelief.org
Confidential Manual ©Dan Sommer – 2008
DISCLAIMER: This Kidnap & Ransom – Crisis Response Guide is provided for
informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as stand-alone security
advice or recommendations on how to respond to a kidnap for ransom incident. This
is not a comprehensive kidnap and ransom crisis management plan but primarily a
preventive and informative manual aimed at guidance only. Each kidnap for ransom
case is as unique as the individuals involved on both side of the negotiations and
common sense must be applied in all cases. The information in this manual is not
intended to substitute seeking the advice and professional services from qualified
insurance specialists, security consultants and reputable crisis response consultancies.
Neither Dan Sommer nor Anna E. Jemiolek, their associates as well as Global Executive
Outreach and 4CrisisRelief.org make any representations or warranties regarding the
accuracy or completeness of any of the information and recommendations contained
in this manual. No person or organisational body should act or rely on any information
in this manual in place of seeking the advice of a security professional. The use of any
information contained in this Guide shall be solely at the readers’ own risk. Nothing
contained in this manual creates a business relationship of any kind whatsoever
between the reader or recipients and Dan Sommer.
Copyright © 2011-20 by Dan Sommer and Anna E. Jemiolek. All rights reserved. This
publication, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without prior
permission in writing from Dan Sommer (dan@geo-ops.com and www.geo-ops.com or
Tel: +354 770-2949).
Research
Report Respond
Recover
©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 2

PLAN TO PREVAIL
4CRISISRELIEF.ORG’S KIDNAP & RANSOM CRISIS RESPONSE MANUAL
Objectives of this Manual

To explain in detail the key aspects of 4CrisisRelief.org’s 4CR strategy for
setting an effective crisis response plan for kidnap for ransom incidents.
4CR is a systematic and proven response strategy to Kidnap & Ransom
Incidents; the acronym 4CR means “For Crisis Relief” and the “4 Parties
involved” as well as the four “R’s” of a successful recovery:
The 4 Parties Involved:

1. Victim – The person (people) that has been kidnapped or abducted
2. Perpetrators – The person (people) or group responsible for the kidnapping
incident
3. Relations – The family or company associated with the kidnapped victim/s
4. Consultant – The 4R Consultant/s assigned to consult on the K&R incident
The four R’s of a Successful Recovery:

Research – The threat and modus operandi of past K&R incidents
Respond – Brief the family & CMT, obtain a POL and direct the negotiations
Recover – The social and business “life” of the victim/s and the company
Report – To the CMT, insurance company, “authorities” and 4CR Database
Final Objectives
To provide 4CR Kidnap Crisis Response Consultants with Response Strategies in:
✓ Reducing 4CR’s client’s vulnerability to kidnapping, abduction and hostage-
taking
✓ Increasing 4CR’s client’s preparedness for kidnapping, abduction and hostage-
taking incidents
✓ Researching K&R incident/s and the modus operandi of the currently known
national and international perpetrators
✓ Advising 4CR’s client’s Crisis Management Team/s and the victim’s family on
the best strategy for a safe recovery
✓ Coaching the primary negotiator/s on the “Do's and Do-not’s” in safe K&R
negotiation methods
✓ Directing the ransom negotiations and guide the CMT in strategy decisions as
well as providing counselling to the victim’s family
✓ Ensuring the safest release possible and the best and speediest recovery of the
victim/s and their family/ies
✓ Preparing a Conclusive K&R Incident Report with important lessons learned and
advice on how to prevent and handle future incidents

Contents
PLAN TO PREVAIL ................................................................................................................... 3
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 5
THE GLOBAL KIDNAP RISK ...................................................................................................... 10
VICTIMS OF KIDNAP FOR RANSOM........................................................................................... 17
THE KIDNAP PLANNING PROCESS ............................................................................................ 24
REDUCE THE VULNERABILITY .................................................................................................. 38
THE NEED FOR K&R INSURANCE............................................................................................. 39
K&R INSURANCE COVERAGE ................................................................................................ 40
HOW 4R’S STRATEGY CAN HELP YOU ................................................................................... 41
RESEARCH AND BRIEFING THE CMT ........................................................................................ 44
THE K&R NEGOTIATION PROCESS ........................................................................................ 49
THE 4R RECOVERY PROCESS PLAN ........................................................................................ 58
FINAL BRIEFING AND REPORT ............................................................................................... 64
CASE STUDIES .................................................................................................................... 66
COUNTRY ASSESSMENTS ...................................................................................................... 68
K&R INSURANCE ................................................................................................................ 73
K&R RESPONSE CONSULTANTS ............................................................................................ 80
REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 85

INTRODUCTION
“I have written this 4CR Crisis Response Guide because kidnap for ransom, abductions
and hostage-taking have become a serious threat to both rich and poor. No longer
does the crime of kidnapping, abduction and hostage-taking only target the wealthy
and powerful who have direct access to both professional assistance and financial
assets. This guide is written for those who do not have such direct access to assistance
and assets and haven’t purchased special insurances to cover such crises as a
kidnapping or abduction for ransom.”
Dan Sommer – Counter Terrorism & Crisis Management Consultant 1999-2011.

Currently a full-time Pastor and counsellor at Postulakirkjan in Reykjavik, Iceland. He
still regularly assists and/or consults on security & crisis related incidents.
Historically, kidnapping has been a part of both war and

family feuds since the start of the civilization. Many people
have been abducted to settle family feuds or gain an edge
in negotiations. Since the establishment of clans and
armies Prisoners of War (POW) have been bargaining chips
used to gain concessions from the enemy often for political
purposes but just as often for mere profit.
Thus, it is clear that kidnapping has been used throughout

the history of humanity as a political weapon for the
procurement of ransom in the form of money, land,
merchandise or favours. Often among the motives were revenge for a real or
perceived offence, the rehabilitation of defiled honour or bringing about a political
change.
The necessity of liberating prisoners of war after conflicts

has always been a bargain, where prisoners were traded
for their perceived value and status. During the medieval
ages, a captured knight would have brought a hefty
ransom to his captors; such knights were often treated
lavishly and dined and drank with their captors until an
acceptable ransom fee had been negotiated. There are
references regarding kidnapping described in Genesis, in
the Old Testament, albeit then the term “captive” was
used, however, it is simply what we today call kidnapping,
abduction or hostage taking.
One of the most famous historical cases of kidnap for ransom occurred in 78 BC when
pirates in the Aegean Sea commandeered a ship carrying the 22-year-old Julius Caesar.
The pirates demanded a huge ransom of 50 talents, twice the normal rate and equal to
1000 kg of silver, which took Caesar’s friends a full month to collect. Once paid, the
pirates promptly released Julius Caesar and embarked on a drunken orgy to celebrate
their fortune. Young Caesar, however, wasted no time after his release and
immediately borrowed 4 warships and with 500 soldiers set off in pursuit of the

pirates. Caesar and his naval army swiftly located the pirates and raided the drunken
celebration orgy. During the raid 350 pirates and their guests were captured and
“questioned” for the whereabouts and retrieval of the ransom fee. As soon as the
ransom was retrieved, Julius Caesar ordered the prisoners to be executed by
crucifixion. However, since the pirates had treated him well during his abduction,
Caesar displayed an act of “compassion” and decided to show mercy, thus ordered
their throats cut before hoisting them up. Consequently, their deaths occurred within
minutes and it saved the pirates from immense agony, as death by crucifixion usually
took from several hours up to two days to occur.
Kidnapping, abduction and hostage-taking have always been a heinous crime seen
from the victim’s side but a “just and necessary” action by the kidnapper’s side. Thus,
the society’s view of kidnappings has always depended on the historical, political and
cultural circumstances of the act. In Antiquity, abduction or to be taken “captive” was
a commonly accepted way to trade other “nationalities” as slaves following the
conquest of territory. This was used as a method of repaying the soldiers and the Lords
who supplied the ruler’s armies.
In Medieval times, it was a common practice during wars

and crusades, that knights and those of noble birth who
had been captured were held for ransom. One of the most
famous cases is the capture of Richard “Lionheart” King of
England, who was “captured” in 1192 by Leopold the V of
Austria. He was then transferred to the custody of Henry
the VI, the Holy Roman Emperor. Henry the VI held Richard
hostage in Germany and demanded a ransom of 150,000
marks. At that time, it was a huge amount, as it was equal
to twice the annual income of the Kingdom of England.
Richards’s brother Prince John refused to meet the ransom
demand and instead stalled the release. King Richard was finally released in 1194 after
his mother Eleanor of Aquitaine had negotiated a lower ransom and managed to raise
100,000 marks for the “negotiated” ransom payment.
The Spanish Conquistadors later carried the Old-Worlds

“tradition” of kidnap for ransom into the New World. In
1532 AD, the Spanish Conquistador Francisco Pizarro
arrived at Cajamarca city in Peru, which was the
stronghold of the Inca King Atahualpa. By deceit, Pizarro
lured King Atahualpa outside the city walls for talks, where
Pissarro’s army attacked and after a short but gruesome
battle took Atahualpa captive. Through negotiations, a
ransom was decided, which consisted of a storehouse, 22
feet long by 17 feet wide, to be filled to a height of 8 feet
once with gold and twice with silver. The ransom is
estimated to equal $65,000,000 in today’s value. It took the Inca Kingdom a full month,
to bring enough gold and silver for the ransom and it took the Spanish another month
to melt it down for transport. However, once the ransom was fully paid and ready for
transport, Pizarro had another deceitful surprise planned and had King Atahualpa
sentenced to death by strangulation.

As we can see from these historic cases, kidnap for ransom is clearly not a “new”
threat but in fact, an age-old crime that continues to resurface around the world. In
today’s world, a staggering 25% of countries worldwide are “affected” by the terror of
kidnappings. In January 2006, there were 106 incidents reported worldwide. As
reported incidents are “assessed” to be less than 10% of actual cases, then this
indicates that more than 1000 persons were kidnapped worldwide in just that month.
According to Elaine Davis, Ph.D. at St. Cloud State University; the K&R industry has
seen an annual growth of 15% to 20% during the last few years. This is further
supported by Mac McLachland, a Hostage Negotiations Coordinator at SAPS (South
African Police Service) who has stated that worldwide K&R incidents increased by 70%
from 1998 to 2005. Kidnapping for ransom is clearly an escalating crime and is very
likely to continue to escalate worldwide. Despite the heinous character of the crime, it
is, unfortunately, the crime in which the fewest criminals worldwide are ever arrested
and convicted.
Research indicates that only 2-5% of worldwide kidnap victims are “covered” by K&R
insurance. Thus, a staggering 95-98% of kidnap victims and their families do not have
immediate access to crisis negotiators or easy access to ransom funds. This means that
there is a tremendous need for the provision of K&R crisis response services to the
uninsured victims’ families and companies. When this percentage is applied to the
kidnap incident statistics, then there is theoretically a dire “need” for crisis services by
averagely 998 victims per month. Furthermore, this need is very likely to show a
continuous annual growth of 10-20% in the next decade.
4R Consultants are committed to assisting and aiding those families and businesses
who are the unfortunate victims of a kidnapping incident and do not have K&R
insurance. Thus, 4R Consultants are not just offering a commercial service for the sake
of financial gain; our aim is to provide both a humanitarian and professional
assistance, which is aimed at ensuring a timely recovery of the victim in a safe and
sound manner.
As 4R Consultants, our aim is always only the timely and safe recovery of the victim/s,
and not the capture and prosecution of the perpetrators. As a rule, we know from
experience, that the best way to ensure a speedy but safe release of the victim is to
negotiate directly with the kidnappers. Negotiations should preferably be without the
direct involvement of any Government agencies. This is first of all to avoid a conflict of
interest but also due to wide-spread corruption of law enforcement forces in many
kidnap-prone countries. Therefore, it is often our advice that kidnapping incidents are
not reported to any local or regional authorities before the victim has been released
and returned to safety.
Kidnap victim, Neisha Seetaram, is hugged by her
mother and father outside her aunt’s home in
Tabaquite. Seetaram was found in a Claxton Bay
cemetery where her kidnappers had abandoned
her after they collected a small ransom. Two
suspects were later arrested in Couva, Trinidad.

The primary clients of 4CR kidnap for ransom consulting are either executives or
western expatriates; as Neisha’s case proves, the criminals who engage in kidnap for
ransom show neither mercy nor compassion in their choice of victims. Therefore, 4R
Consultants K&R services are not just another modern business service but rather a
humanitarian necessity. Each kidnap for ransom case is an individual and unique case
as the victim, families, organizations and perpetrators vary significantly and the local
and international aspects will vary case by case. Therefore there can never be a one-
suits-all cases strategy for dealing with a K&R incident or one method of negotiation.
Whereas, most kidnap for ransom cases ends with the safe release of the victim
following a ransom payment, there are also cases that do not end well; cases in which
the victim sustain permanent injuries and disabilities due to abuse or from severe
illnesses. A few cases result in the death of the victim either from the hands of the
kidnappers or due to a failed rescue attempt by authorities. Regardless of the outcome
of a kidnap case it is often the most difficult and demanding crisis that both families
and organizations can experience. The long term affects can be felt among individuals
and organizational structures for years and have devastating effects on mental health
and even organizational reputation.
As a 4CR Crisis Management Consultant, my sole aim is to help the victim and the
victim’s family, as well as companies, to recover from the traumatic experience as
painlessly as possible.
Dan Sommer
dan@geo-ops.com - +3547702949
Diffusing Crisis, Easing Suffering, Bringing Hope

No case is too far away and no voice is too quiet to be heard!
4CrisisRelief.org

Facts
Kidnapping is a
problem in 25% of
the world's
countries
Anyone, rich or
poor can become a
kidnap victim
More than 1000

people are held for
ransom every
month
Less than 5% of
kidnap victims
have kidnap
insurance cover
At least 95% of
victims do not
have access to
professional help
4CR Consultants
can provide advice
and assistance to
anyone, anywhere

THE GLOBAL KIDNAP RISK
Kidnapping of unarmed, defenceless civilians does not only affect the victim but also
affects the psychological and economic framework of the victim’s family, friends,
colleagues and even society as a whole. In addition, the kidnapping incidents also
create moral conflicts among the individuals, companies and governments, as paying
high ransoms can be view quite contrarily by different parties involved. From a
humanitarian point of view paying a ransom to secure the release of a kidnap victim
seems to be the easiest and fastest way to reduce the trauma felt by the victim and
the family, and perhaps even the only way to save the life of the victim. It is hard for
even the toughest CEO, politician or law enforcement officer not to feel compassion
for the plight of the victim and the suffering of the victim’s family.
From a political and legal point of view, the payment of a ransom fee is often viewed
as rewarding the criminals for their crime and thereby contributing to a continuity of
the crime. Payments of ransom fees have proven to be an encouragement for
kidnappers to repeat their crime, and both Media coverage and criminals-spread
rumours of the collection of high ransom fees also act as a temptation for other
criminals to venture into the crime of kidnapping. In those cases where the
perpetrators are a terrorist group or a guerrilla movement, the collection of a ransom
fee directly adds to the funding of continued terrorist or insurgency activities. For this
very reason countries such as Colombia, Mexico and Italy have imposed various
restrictions on both the conduct of kidnap negotiations and the payment of ransoms in
kidnap incidents.
The conflict of interests between the “compassionate view” and the “political/legal
view” has resulted in tri-partition of the groups involved or affected by a kidnapping
incident. Today, the world of kidnapping consists of three groups who all have their
own and almost egocentric agenda, these groups are: the Kidnappers, the Victims and
the Law Enforcers. The winners so far are first and foremost the Kidnappers who reap
the rewards of their crime; but there is also a subgroup of Victims who also benefits
financially from the crime, namely the Kidnap Consultants.
The Kidnappers consist of highly diversified subgroups of criminals who range from the
“lone psychopath” and small time “opportunity crooks” to highly “organized crime
syndicates”, “terroristic groups” and “guerrilla movements”. Whereas, each subgroup
has its unique characteristics and modus operandi, they all have one thing in common:
the lack of respect for human rights. They may justify their kidnappings with various
reasons, such as social injustice, political causes and even a religious ideology.
However, none of them see any “moral” wrongdoing with the social, political and
religious injustice they inflict upon their victims and their families. Yet, it is their utter
lack of compassion and respect for human rights that has proven so successful for
them and the crime of kidnapping as the fear caused by their aggressive abduction of
the victim and their implicit and explicit demands, and threats are the cause of the
conflict between the Victims and Law Enforcers.

Countries of medium to high risk can be found on all continents excluding Australia
and Antarctica. However, the primary regions of risk are Latin America (comprising
Central- and South America and the Caribbean), Africa, the Middle East, Asia and the
CIS countries (former the Soviet Union). The table below is based on insurance
companies’ reports and 4R’s own K&R response consultants’ experience.
Insurance Companies' K&R Report
75%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 14%
6%
10% 3% 2%
0%
Latin America Asia & Pacific East & West Africa & N-America &
Europe Middle East Caribbean
However, if research of kidnap cases worldwide is based on those reported in the

international news rather than on the experience by insurance companies, then the
results are very different, indeed. This is due to the fact that an estimated 90% of all
kidnap for ransom cases go unreported, as negotiators for various safety reasons
choose not to complicate the ransom negotiation by reporting the incident to the
media or authorities. As the majority of the victims covered by K&R insurance are
kidnapped in Latin America those cases are rarely reported to Media or authorities.
Thus, the two sources of statistics differ significantly -it can be clearly seen in the table
below: “Kidnapping Incidents Jan-Dec 2005”.
4R’s crisis consultants are often involved with the recovery of “non-insured” kidnap for
ransom victims, and it is therefore highly important that clients are briefed on the
difference between the perceived threat in the Medias and the actual threat based on
information gained from K&R response consultants.

Kidnapping Incidents Jan-Dec 2005
Africa
60,0% 55,5% Asia & Pacific
50,0% Europe
40,0%
Middle East
30,0%
21,8%
20,0% North America
10,0% 4,9% 7,3%

3,6% 3,2% 3,6% Latin America &
Caribbean
0,0%
Regional Percentage Russia & CIS
An in-depth research of kidnap cases reported by the Medias from January to June
2006 indicates that there are no significant statistical differences between the years of
2005 and 2006. Therefore, we can safely assume that for the next few years at least,
the trend will likely remain the same and thus Latin America will remain the region of
highest risk, followed by Asia and the Pacific while third place goes to the Middle East.
Kidnapping Incidents Jan-Jun 2006 Africa
Asia & Pacific

60,0% 54,3%
50,0% Europe
40,0%
Middle East
30,0%
20,2% North America
20,0%
5,0% 7,4% 5,7%

10,0% 4,8% 2,7% Latin America &
Caribbean
0,0%
Regional Percentage Russia & CIS
In 1998 the international “kidnap for ransom industry” was estimated to be

$500,000,000 (500 million US dollars) business, in 2005 a conservative estimate was
already well over $1,000,000,000 (one billion US dollars). Thus, it is clear that the
“kidnap business” has doubled in the years between 1998 and 2005; one can therefore
safely presume that the risk of being kidnapped has also doubled. Since 2006 kidnap
for ransom incidents have significantly increased in El Salvador, Mexico, Nepal,
Pakistan and Panama; and Venezuela suffered an increase of 40% between 2006 and
2007. However, kidnapping incidents decreased in Colombia, Ecuador, Philippines and
Trinidad & Tobago.
Therefore, as a 4R’s consultant I strenuously advise all clients to revise and update
their previous crisis responses’ measures in accordance with the current risk.

The current countries of significant risk include:
Afghanistan, Angola, Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Bulgaria, Check Republic, China,
Colombia, Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Georgia, Guatemala, India, Iran, Iraq, Italy,
Mexico, Indonesia, Nicaragua, Malaysia, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Russia
and the CIS states (especially in the northern Caucasus and Tajikistan), Sierra Leone,
Somalia, Spain, Turkey, Venezuela and Yemen. Other country with a known kidnapping
risk is for example the UK, where targeted kidnappings (“Tiger Kidnappings”) are high.
First place (or rather “worst place”) goes to China where the kidnappings of rich and
influential Chinese have become daily occurrences. In 2005 the kidnappings in China
reached unprecedented levels of more than 4,000 cases a year. In February 2005,
China's Ministry of Public Security warned its people about a growing risk of
kidnapping for ransom of the country's new rich class. In a public statement, the
Ministry explained that nearly 4,000 people had been kidnapped in 2004. Most of
these incidents were in the fast developing east coast region. The Ministry further
informed that entrepreneurs, celebrities and students of rich families were most at risk
of being kidnapped. By 2009 the figure was estimated to be above 6,000 cases a year,
which means the risk, had increased by 50% in just four years; in other words, on
average a kidnapping incident in China in 2009 had occurred sixteen times a day.
However, Central and South America along with the Caribbean’s remains the
geographical region with far the largest threat ratio. Countries such as Mexico and
Venezuela come in as the world’s second and third worst places for kidnapping;
Mexico has almost 4,000 kidnappings a year meaning there are averagely eleven
incidents a day. Fourth place goes to Brazil; in Rio de Janeiro alone there is a
kidnapping incident every second day, this does not include “Kidnap Express” cases.
Ecuador is becoming a country of risk as the kidnap cases have increased significantly
during the last three years; however, “Kidnap Express” continues to be the
predominant threat in Ecuador.
Other countries with high kidnapping rates are: Haiti, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan,
Philippines and Colombia (once, it used to be the worst country for kidnappings but
today is off the highest-risk list). In Africa, the five countries with the highest risk are:
Somalia, Nigeria, South Africa, Sierra Leone and Angola. Nigeria is unique as the cases
occur both as standard kidnap for ransom cases and as piracy cases; in 2009 the
number of kidnappings was estimated to be 1,000+ cases. In Somalia, the kidnap
incidents are predominantly related to acts of piracy in the Gulf of Aden where such
incidents have increased alarmingly since the second half of 2007 and are growin
annually ever since. Today, more than six hundred sailors are held captive aboard
hijacked vessels while the ransom is being negotiated, which can take from 6 to 14
months.
In Europe, Russia and the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) are the regions
with the highest risk. Yet, other Eastern European countries such as the Czech Republic
and Bulgaria are also experiencing an increase in kidnap incidents and are becoming
countries of moderate risk. In Western and Southern Europe countries such as Greece,
Italy and Spain remain regions with a moderate risk. However, in the last two years,
even countries such as Sweden and Germany have suffered high-profile K&R cases. In
2010 a Greek shipping owner was ransomed for €30,000,000 (30 million Euros).
The Top Ten Countries

Worldwide more than 50,000 people get victimized by kidnapping for ransom every
year. Although so many countries are today listed as “countries of risk”, it is
nevertheless a fact that 90% of all kidnappings occur in the “Top-Ten” list of countries
of risk. The “Top-Ten” list as of 2016 currently includes the following countries:
1. Mexico
2. Pakistan
3. Venezuela
4. India
5. Brazil
6. Syria
7. Nigeria
8. Iraq
9. Haiti
10. Libya
Socio-Political Risk Assessment

As can be seen from the above statistics the crime of kidnap for ransom is growing at
an alarming rate worldwide and there are more and more countries on the risk list.
The potential risk of an individual or a company to become victims of a K&R incident is
primarily determined by the country of domicile, operations or travel. Thus, the first
step in determining the risk towards an individual or a company is to complete country
risk assessments for the relevant country. Albeit, this may initially appear to be a
daunting task, the fact is that a country’s risk assessment in relation to kidnap for
ransom can be relatively quickly established by systematically assessing its socio-
political status through an assessment of four social and political indicators. Countries
that provide ideal conditions for kidnappings are:
1. Countries mired in conflicts, ranging from frequent demonstrations up to civil

war.
2. Countries where the Government authority is weak due to the presence of
revolutionaries, terror groups, guerrillas, and where significant areas of the
country are generally lawless or ruled by crime syndicates or warlords.
3. Countries where the police is largely ineffective, often due to a poor economy
that leads to corruption and insufficient funds for both the law enforcement
agencies and the judicial system.
4. Countries that in the last two decades have experienced violent conflicts such
as civil war or a full-declared war. Once peace or armistice has been reached,
one would assume that safety is finally at hand. However, the country is still
filled with weapons and explosives, along with large numbers of unemployed
combat veterans.
Insurance companies generally consider countries which have all four indicators
present as being in Risk Category 4 or 5. With 5 being the highest risk level possible.

In the past nearly the entire category 4 and 5 countries were “political playgrounds”
for the super-powers during the cold war. Thus, at the end of the cold war, both the
funds and the assistance from the super-powers became almost non-existent within a
few years. This “new-world political development” suddenly left tens of thousands of
former guerrillas, terrorists, soldiers and police officers in a “vacuum” without any
immediate alternative means of income available.
Most of these people had limited, if indeed any, education or skills besides those that
were related to warfare and crime. Therefore, most of them had nothing to fall back
on and most of them were both unwanted and unwelcomed by most societies. Thus,
many of these battle trained individuals or groups decided to keep their weapons and
simply adapted their hard learned skills to crimes such as poaching, robbery, extortion
and smuggling as their new “career” and means of income. However, such “trades” are
risky at the least, and deadly at the worst as armed guards protect the most valuable
“targets”. Soon, these criminal elements discovered that the wealthy and important
people are both softer targets and also far easier to manage than other high yielding
crimes such as robbing a bank with armed guards or smuggling contraband across
protected borders. Thus, as it is simply far easier, safer and more profitable for
criminals to kidnap prominent individuals and demand a ransom in return for their
“safe” release, then many such elements resorted to kidnappings in favour of engaging
in other riskier criminal activities.
Bolstered by, from their successful experience from extortion and kidnappings of the
prominent local persons, many groups turned their attention to expatriates and
quickly realised that both kidnapping and extortion of foreign corporations and their
“expatriate” personnel was a far more lucrative “business” than the locals. When the
international Media reported the kidnap cases in which high ransoms were paid other
“fringe elements” joined in the new trend of kidnapping for ransom. Soon, established
political guerrilla groups as well as religious terrorist groups quickly adopted kidnap for
ransom as a means to finance their various “just causes”. “These groups have been
forced to find new ways of financing their cause and for many economic reasons
kidnapping has provided an answer.”i
The primary advantage of kidnapping expatriates and extorting foreign companies was
and still is economic one. Simply because they can and will pay far higher ransoms and
also have access to the ransom amounts much faster than the locals. Western citizens
are also much more sensitive to news of kidnappings of their fellow citizens in foreign
countries, and public opinion quickly calls for campaigns demanding quick solutions
from the government and/or the “responsible” company. Furthermore, the guerrilla
and terrorist groups have more feasible “explanation” for resorting to crime: the
kidnapping of foreigners is rhetorically defended by using anti-capitalism or
nationalism as an excuse.

VICTIMS OF KIDNAP FOR RANSOM
It is highly important to realise that the threat of kidnapping, abduction and hostage
incidents are not only affecting the wealthy and the famous but it includes all social
groups, especially within the countries of significant to high risk. Today’s middle-class
citizens and expatriates who live in countries of risk face the highest risk of being
kidnapped. As a general rule, expatriates face the highest risk of being kidnapped in
Latin America. However, it is highly important to realise that 64% of kidnappings of
expatriates actually occur outside of Latin America. Thus, expatriates should take
security precautions in all countries and regions.
Kidnappings of Expatriates
40% Latin America

36%
35% Africa & Middle East
30%
25% 22% 22% Asia & Pacific
20% 17%
East & West Europe
15%
10% N-America & Caribbean
4%
5%
0%
1
Region
Traditionally, Europeans and US citizens have been the preferred target of kidnappers
worldwide due to their perceived political and financial value. However, in 2007, South
Korea’s businesses and citizens suddenly found themselves in the forefront of the
international kidnap news, as hardly a month went by where a South Koreans were not
in the hands of kidnappers somewhere in the world. At the end of 2007 there had
been 12 kidnapping incidents of 48 South Korean citizens in 7 countries and across 3
continents. South Korea was thus faced with the financial and political burden of
having to negotiate the release of their 48 citizens and an additional 35 foreign
employees of South Korean companies. These incidents occurred in such diverse
countries as Afghanistan, Australia, India, Mexico, Nigeria, Philippines and Somalia.
With ransom demands ranging from $50,000 to $1.5 million and negotiations lasting
up to 173 days, South Korea bravely faced a year of crisis and, in spite of their best
efforts, suffered the tragedy of two dead victims.
Individuals at risk in today’s “kidnap for ransom industry” include:
✓ Middle-class citizens living in countries of medium to high risk

✓ Business employees and representatives
✓ NGO workers and representatives
✓ Journalists and News reporters

✓ Expatriates and their families
✓ Business Executives
✓ Wealthy people and members of their families
✓ Diplomats and Dignitaries
✓ Celebrities and their families
Global marketing networks and the removal of trade and immigration barriers have
increased foreign business and personal travel, thus, foreign crime has become
everyone's business and personal problem. Traditionally the “ruling classes”, the
wealthy and the celebrities have been regular victims of K&R. However, today private
people, business executives and NGO staff are kidnapped when travelling the world for
various reasons such as tourism, promotions or sale of products and services.
Nowadays, it is a necessity for all private individuals, who either live in or travel to
countries of risk, to be aware of the dangers that may lie ahead from K&R, and to
receive realistic and professional training incident prevention and responses.
✓ Middle-class citizens living in countries of risk – Case Study:

Philippines – June 2007: A senior police official told reporters that three Chinese
nationals, a father and his two sons, who had been abducted by alleged
immigration and police officials from their grocery store in Sta. Cruz, Laguna, on
3rd June, were released unharmed by their abductors in front of their store. The
official stated that he could not provide other details regarding their release as
the victims and their relatives refused to talk to police investigators, adding that
it is still unclear if they paid ransom or if they had reached an arrangement with
their kidnappers.
✓ Business employees and representatives – Case Study:

India – May 2007: Activists, who contend that a South Korean steel company’s
plan to build a plant in eastern India would displace thousands of people, took
three Indian executives of this company hostage. The officials had travelled to
the village of Gobindapur, in eastern Orissa State, to meet with farmers about
acquiring land when they were kidnapped. The activist group fighting the
company’s project told local reporters that the hostages would not be released
until the company pledged not to develop the site. However, the hostages were
released the day after when the villagers received assurances from the company
that they would not enter their village. One of the officials, a woman, was
released later the same day and the other two the day after. The company’s
steel plant, which would have been the largest single foreign investment in India,
was approved by the Indian government last year as a special economic zone,
making it eligible for tax breaks and exempt from some government duties.
✓ NGO workers and representatives – Case Study:

Afghanistan – July 2007: Taliban militants kidnapped 23 Korean nationals on the
road from Kandahar to Kabul. The Koreans, members of a South Korean church,
were in Afghanistan to conduct short-term evangelizing and aid work. On 22nd
July, the Taliban fighters issued a statement saying they would kill the 23 South
Korean hostages if Afghan authorities fail to release 23 Taliban prisoners before
7 p.m. The Talibans also demanded the withdrawal of 200 South Korean troops

from Afghanistan. On 30th July 2007, Afghan authorities recovered the body of
one of two South Korean hostages who were shot dead by the kidnappers after
accusing their government of ignoring their demands to release prisoners. On
13th August, two female hostages were released by the Taliban militants holding
the group, because they were ill. On the 3rd of September, after 173 days, the
remaining 19 hostages were released.
✓ Journalist & News reporters – Case Study:

Somalia – December 2007: French journalist Gwen Le
Gouil was kidnapped on the 16th of December 2007, in
the port city of Bossaso, in Puntland region, in northeast
Somalia. Le Gouil was in Somalia to report on Somali
migrants being smuggled to Yemen by sea. With no
security detail and only a driver as an aide, he had made
contact with a group involved in the smuggling; however,
instead of getting an interview he was pulled from his
vehicle and taken captive by three gunmen wielding AK-47
rifles. The kidnappers responded to French calls for his
immediate release by demanding US $70,000 in ransom
for his release. Le Gouil who had been held in the mountainous village of
Mareero, 19 miles east of Putland's Bosasso port, was released after only eight
days in captivity; the kidnappers handed Gwen Le Gouil over to French diplomats
at a hotel in Bosasso on the 24th of December. He stayed the night in the hotel
undergoing a debrief and departed the day after on an airplane bound for France
on the 25th and arrived safely in the embrace of his family in Paris on the 26th.
According to Addi Muse, the president of Somalia's semi-autonomous Puntland
region, the total ransom paid for Le Gouil’s release was close to $100,000.
✓ Expatriates and their families – Case Study:

Haiti – October 2006: Rev. Pritchard Adams III, a US
citizen, who has lived in Haiti for 24 years, was kidnapped
by criminals when he was leaving his church in Cap-
Haitien. Four men grabbed Adams, his wife and a Haitian
groundskeeper. The kidnappers drove the three to a
secluded area, released Adams' wife and the
groundskeeper and sped off with Adams. The kidnappers
were “cop-killers” on the run and, reportedly, needed the
ransom to facilitate their escape from Haiti. The
kidnappers contacted the Reverend’s wife by phone and demanded $80,000 for
his release; they later lowered the demand to $5,000. Reverend Pritchard Adams
was released two days later, when his wife paid the ransom at a meeting outside
the town of Limbe; during the handover armed gang members were hiding in the
bushes.
✓ Business executives – Case Study:

Philippines – June 2006: five unidentified gunmen kidnapped Augusto Lisan, a
62-year old executive, outside of his house in Barangay Navotas East. According
to witnesses the kidnappers swiftly approached Augusto as he was going for a
ride on his motorcycle. One of the abductors pistol-whipped Augusto and then

forced him into a car waiting nearby; the vehicle, a white Mitsubishi Adventurer,
was last seen speeding towards Letre Road. The abductors have not yet
contacted the victim’s family.
✓ Wealthy people and their families – Case Study:

Austria – October 2006: A Romanian criminal gang
planned to kidnap Fiona Swarovski, the heir to the world-
renowned Swarovski Crystal producer and wife of Karl-
Heinz Grasser, the Austrian Minister of Finance. The plans
were thwarted when the police for unrelated reasons
arrested a Romanian man involved in the plans. During
questioning, the Romanian gave up information about the
kidnap for ransom plans. The kidnappers plan was already
in “Phase Five”, extensive surveillance had been carried
out, which included mapping out the alarm system at the couples’ residence, and
the plan was to enter the residence for the abduction. Fiona Swarovski and Karl-
Heinz were immediately placed under heavy protection by Austria’s elite unit,
the Cobra task force.
✓ Diplomats and dignitaries – Case Study:

Bulgaria – November 2007: News about the kidnapping of a former Minister of
Transport son has emerged despite the efforts of the tight-lipped family and
police. The news broke just days after the victim’s release. After initial denials, a
state attorney confirmed media reports of the kidnapping. The official stated
that “the payment was made to save the victim’s life” adding that it was better
not to “unnecessarily discuss these cases.” The 30-year-old victim was abducted
in late October and kept hostage for nearly a month. The kidnappers initially
demanded 1.2 million Euro (US $1.77 million) ransom for his release. He was set
free after 29 days in captivity when his father, now a high-ranking official of a
Russian petrol giant, paid 300,000 Euros.
✓ Celebrities and families – Case Study:

Norway – Autumn 2000: A Norwegian criminal gang
planned to kidnap Norwegian Crown Prince Haakon. The
gang’s plan was to kidnap the Crown Prince and use him
as a bargaining chip to free a jailed gang member. To
facilitate the security measures needed after the
discovery of the plans, the Crown Prince was advised to
move together with his fiancé (a much controversial
matter at that time), now wife and Crown Princess,
Mette-Marit. So far the proactive security measures taken
have proven effective and no kidnapping attempts have
been made.
The Official Response to Kidnappings

Most governments and a few corporations have official anti-terrorist policies that say
“no concession to terrorist!” That is usually a good policy, aimed at preventing and
deterring kidnapping incidents, but it does not help the individual victim or make their
family feel any better. It is highly important to realise that political incidents are often

the longest to solve. Thus, incidents involving diplomats, dignitaries and government-
employed personnel are likely to be long-term incidents. In such cases, the victim’s
family is often able to ensure a more speedy release by undertaking direct confidential
negotiations, without involving the government directly. Therefore, all businesses
should ensure that they have a K&R crisis management plan ready so that the
company or the victim’s family can use it to plan their negotiation strategy and receive
professional help to negotiate with the kidnappers.
✓ Negotiations are by far the best way to ensure a speedy and safe release of
K&R victims.
The age of kidnap victims is highly diversified and ranges from toddlers to ninety-year-
olds. Guerrilla groups such as the Colombian FARC and organized crime groups, as well
as common criminals, have always known that kidnapping of minors is a quicker and
safer (for them) way to extort a ransom. Parents are naturally terrified at the prospect
of their child/children being kidnapped; it is not only the physical threat they are afraid
of, but also, and even more, the psychological effect of the abduction.
Thus, parents are quick to negotiate and are willing to pay large ransoms in order to
prevent their children from suffering. Parents are also very reluctant to report the
kidnapping to the authorities because of retaliatory threats made by the kidnappers. In
addition to being fearful, parents also want to protect their children from the probing
by police investigators and invasion of privacy by news reporters and journalists
seeking a good-selling story.
In the last decade, ransom demands have gone up from around $1,000,000 to an
average of more than $10,000,000, however, actual ransoms paid are usually only 10-
20% of the initial ransom demand. For the past few years there have often been
ransom demands exceeding $20,000,000, with Asian kidnappings reaching even
higher. In one Chinese case a $20,000,000 ransom was paid, followed by another
$40,000,000 for the same individual, however, the victim was killed anyway due to
kidnappers’ fear of recognition. According to unofficial sources, a prominent Chinese
businessman in Hong Kong was ransomed for $70,000,000 in January 2002.
✓ A Greek shipping magnate was ransomed for $44,000,000 in January 2010
Ongoing research of known international incidents, and the author’s personal K&R
experience, have found that although ransoms can vary greatly from case to case,
there is usually a set “Going Rate” for each country. The “Going Rate” is commonly
determined by the victim’s nationality, thus, the “Going Rate” for a foreign national is
often up to ten times the “Going Rate” of a local national.

The research of International incidents during the last decade shows that the settled
ransom payments for foreign nationals is approximately:
✓ ~ 25% $0 - $50,000
✓ ~ 10% $50,000 - $100,000
✓ ~ 40% $100,000 - $500,000
✓ ~ 10% $500,000 - $1,000,000
✓ ~ 15% $1,000,000 - $5,000,000
✓ < 0.3% $5,000,000 +
From these figures, we can clearly see that 75% of ransoms worldwide are below
$500,000 and 35% are below $100,000. However, we also see a pattern that is
strikingly similar to price settings in other business sectors; the ransoms seem to follow
the psychological figures of being below “5 and 10” as is well known in retail. Although
the claimed “noble” motives behind kidnapping incidents are as various as the agenda
of the groups and the perpetrators’ personalities, the primary reason of motivation
behind organised kidnappings is eventually proved to be criminal.
However, many kidnappings are “inspired” by political and religious rhetoric, and on
rare occasions this proves to be true, yet in the vast majority of incidents the reason
for the kidnapping is purely financial, and today a large number of terrorist and
guerrilla groups are using kidnappings as a deliberate method of funding their “cause”.
This fact is apparent from the chart below which shows the different types of demands
upheld by the kidnappers upon completion of the ransom negotiations.
Motivations for Kidnappings
100% 92% Kidnap for Ransom
80% Kidnap for Propaganda
60%
Release of Prisoners
40%
Welfare & other Needs
20%
2% 2% 4%
0%
Motivations

So even when “noble cause” terms are initially “claimed” then it is apparent that in
65% of incidents the families or companies end up paying the ransom price in cash.
Only in 15% of incidents an offer of political or other form of compensation is
accepted. In 10% of kidnap incidents the victims are either executed due to failed
negotiations, as a political statement, or die during an escape or rescue attempt.
However, on the brighter side, 7 % of victims are released without any type of ransom
payment, and 3 % of victims manage to escape or are rescued.
Solutions to K&R Incidents
Ransom Paid
7% 3%
10% Settlement
Death
15%
65% Released
Escape

THE KIDNAP PLANNING PROCESS
The “Wheel of Terror” is the term that Dan Sommer coined to describe the terrorists’
planning process. Now, the term “terrorists” (instead of “kidnappers”) may surprise
some readers, however, the reasoning behind using this term is following: kidnapping,
whether for political or criminal motives, is a ruthless method of getting gain through
“terrorizing” the victim, the victim’s family, the victim’s employer, and society in
general, into complying with the kidnappers’ demands, thus, it is an act of terror.
The kidnap planning process is an ever-turning wheel that spreads terror within the
innocent citizens’ population all over the world, unless it is stopped during its initial
phases. The purpose of this chapter is to enable 4R Crisis Responders to understand
the kidnap planning process, and thanks to that knowledge, to be able to analyse the
potential threats, to both individuals and companies exposed to risk. The ultimate
security goal of any person living in a country of risk should always be the same,
whether the person is there on his own terms or on behalf of a company, that is to
stop the kidnappers before they can carry out their abduction.
The “Wheel of Terror” consists of eight phases which are individual phases, equally
important to ensure the kidnappers success. This planning process is considered by
some “agencies” to consist of four or six phases, but these four or six phases include all
of the eight phases explained in this chapter. Therefore, to ensure a thorough
understanding of the subject, Dan Sommer uses the eight phase planning process.
Investigations into criminal and terrorist incidents by law enforcement agencies have
proven that the planning cycle is the same in all incidents. Whether the incidents were
of economic cause or of political cause, the planning process is almost always the
same.
Phase 1; The Cause

Phase 2; Initial Surveillance
Phase 3; Target Selection
The Wheel of Phase 4; Pre-Attack Surveillance
Terror
Phase 5; Planning
Phase 6; Rehearsal
Phase 7; Execution
Phase 8; Escape & Exploitation
PHASE 1: THE CAUSE

1. The first question one should ask when either researching or dealing with a
known or unknown kidnap group is; what is the aim of the group and why?
▪ Is it a financial aim, a religious aim, an ideological aim, a political aim, a national

aim, a single issue aim or is it a purely criminal/economical aim? Legally, is
there anything you or your organization can do to help them achieve that aim,
if it is a just aim, without the criminal/terrorist resorting to kidnapping,
abductions or other forms of criminal activities? If the answer to that question
is yes, then you or your organisation can, most likely, stop that group from

targeting those individuals and organizations, which could help them achieve
their aims. Thus, the criminals/terrorists could likely be encouraged to change
their aggressive methods to more peaceful methods.
2. The second question one should ask when either researching or dealing with a
known or unknown kidnap group is: what sets them off?
▪ Why did this person or group of people, start their criminal path or terrorist
war? Was there any significant event that ignited the situation and caused the
start of their campaign? If there was such an event, can it be changed, undone
or can amendments be made? If it can be changed then the criminal/terrorist
campaign can, most likely, be stopped before the situation and kidnapping
incidents escalates.
3. The third question one should ask when either researching or dealing with a known
or unknown kidnap group is: whom do they conceive as being their main target?
▪ If there is a specific enemy, then there is usually a key element to be found in

relation to the first and second question, and there is a window of opportunity
to negotiate. The animosity could be caused by nationalistic reasons,
ideological reasons, political reasons, religious reasons or purely economic
reasons. The vast majority of cases are due to financial reasons, which usually
are an acute need for finances to sustain living or to support a specific cause,
but the majority of causes are caused by a purely criminal intent to relatively
easy extort a high ransom payment. In such cases, the family or company is the
best qualified party to staff the crisis management team, with the help and
advice from an experienced K&R consultant. However, when the cause is
nationalistic, ideological, political or religious, the preliminary negotiations
often have to involve a third party such as a Non-Government Organisation, a
religious entity, a “neutral” country or the UN, etc.
4. The fourth question one should ask is: whom do the criminals conceive as being
supporters of their main enemy?
▪ If their main enemy is receiving ideological, political, financial or military

support from an outside party, then that party will most likely become the
secondary target of the terrorist group, this could include citizens, company
personnel and their families. Without the support of that secondary party the
main enemy would, more likely, be willing to negotiate with the terrorists or at
least consider their aims. This fact have proven itself true in cases worldwide,
examples are: Kashmir - where tourists have been kidnapped to gain
concessions, releases from India, or in Nigeria - where harassment and
kidnappings of foreigners employed in the oil industry used to affect the
Nigerian government’s revenue from the oil export.

Conclusion
The answers to the above four questions can determine the target selection of the
terrorists’ abduction groups; once their potential targets have been profiled, it is far
easier for the security managers and 4R K&R Consultants to design and implement the
procedures necessary to provide an acceptable level of protection for the profiled
targets.
It is very important to realize that in the “real world” terrorist and criminal groups that
carry out kidnappings are, “in large”, not restrained by sensitive, sensible or humane
considerations when choosing their targets. Thus, it is highly important for everyone
who lives, works or travels to areas of risk, to be thoroughly prepared for the
possibility of being affected by a K&R incident.
This is not just a concern for the wealthy and influential but it also includes many
groups and organisations that often live in the illusion that they are not a target. They
think that because they are there to help, relive, provide aid or generally “do a good
deed” for society and the world they are excluded from the criminals’ attack. However,
these people and organisations are, just as often as the rich and famous, the actual
targets of kidnappings!
“Aid workers can get abducted for political or ideological motives. This may be because
of the international political position of the home country of the aid agency or the
particular staff member. It may also be because of the perceived bias and partiality of
the aid agency in a conflict. The abduction then can become a hostage situation,
whereby the perpetrators seek certain concessions from the aid agency, the agency's
government of origin or its staff member in return for the release of the latter.
Abduction, especially that of international staff members, can also be a way of seeking
international publicity and attention for one's cause or of drawing attention to the
existence and apparent strength and seriousness of a particular group. In some cases
the abduction may be committed by a terrorist group, which might be prepared to kill
the hostage to maximize its own threat.
Some well-known examples are the abductions of Westerners by the "Hezbollah" in

Lebanon, hijackings of airplanes by radical Palestinian groups or the occupation of the
Japanese embassy in Lima, Peru, by a guerrilla group. Another less well-known example
is the abduction, torture and assassination of NGO staff and social activists by right
wing death squads in Central America.”1
Another common illusion is that kidnappings, as well as other criminal and terrorist
acts, are motivated by either poverty or ignorance or both, which in turn are
influenced by socio-political perceptions or a general lack of education. However, this
is a serious misconception and has no basis in “actual cases” and investigations; this is
a fact that has repeatedly been proven through both criminal investigations and by
empirical researches.
1
Abduction and Hostage Taking; By Koenraad van Brabant; Overseas Development Institute

“Terrorism usually results from multiple causal factors - not only psychological but also
economic, political, religious, and sociological factors, among others. There is even a
hypothesis that it is caused by physiological factors. Because terrorism is a multi-causal
phenomenon, it would be simplistic and erroneous to explain an act of terrorism by a
single cause, such as the psychological need of the terrorist to perpetrate an act of
violence.”2
The abductors make list of targets, which could include one or more of these:
▪ Individuals
▪ Relatives
▪ Corporations
▪ Governments
▪ Ethnic Groups
▪ Social Groups
▪ Non -Governmental Organizations
If the target is a Government, then again, there could be many reasons or causes for
the kidnapping incidents such as: Independence cause such as the Basque, Tamil's or
Colombian narco-political conflict; Ethnic cause such as the Kashmir and Achene’s
conflicts; Political cause such as the conflict with the Red Brigade in Italy or the former
Rote Arme Fraction in Germany; Human cause such as the former conflict with the
ANC in South Africa; Religious cause such as the conflicts in Sudan, Iraq or Indonesia,
Environmental cause such as the recent conflict in Mexico due to airport extension
plans; Animal welfare cause such as the conflict with the ALF in the US and the UK;
Foreign policy or Military alliances, etc. such as the conflict between Israel and
Palestine, Lebanon and Hezbollah or the former Bosnia conflict, where Serb forces
abducted Danish soldiers and used them for shields to avert NATO bombings, or the
kidnapping of Indian UN soldiers in Sierra Leone in 2000.
If the target is a Corporation, then again, there could be many reasons or causes for
the kidnapping incidents such as: Economic causes such as the kidnap for ransom
cases, due to the immense wealth these corporations often show off in areas where
poverty is common; Political causes such as the conflict in Columbia, where oil
companies are targeted because their presence accumulates resources used by the
local government in their fight against the narco-guerillas; Humanitarian causes such
as in Nigeria, where for the sake of exploitation of natural resources indigenous
populations have been forced to move; Religious causes such as the targeting of
foreign companies in Saudi Arabia and tourism in both Yemen and Indonesia;
Environmental causes such as when single-issue groups “Spiking Trees” in Alaska and
Canada abduct or assault people related to their cause or vandalize construction
equipment due to highway planning in the UK, etc.; Foreign Policy such as when NGOs
and construction workers are kidnapped in Iraq because they are seen as cooperating
with the “US instated regime” in Iraq.
2
The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who becomes a terrorist and why, the Federal Research Division,
Library of Congress, September 1999

If the target is an Individual, then again, there could be many reasons or causes for the
criminal/terrorist activities such as: Financial gain as is the most common from;
Personal grievances as is common in the US (work place violence and the kidnappings
of former superiors and CEOs); Ethnic causes such as in the racist attacks against
Turkish communities in Germany or between Sunni Iraqis and the Kurds in Iraq,
Political causes such as the kidnapping of the British Ambassador in Uruguay in 1971
by the Tupamaros Guerrillas; Human rights causes such as the numerous abductions in
Nigeria, where the abductors living in poverty seek a part of the oil-riches exploited
from their land; Religious causes such as between the Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq;
Foreign policy or Military alliance such as the abductions and executions of US and
NATO troops and civilian contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Cause of Kidnapping of Foreign Nationals
For Ransom
92%
100%
Political Publicity
80%
60% Prisoner Release /

Exchange
40% Welfare & Other
Reasons
20% 4%
2% 2%
0%
Causes - Source CRG 2004
If the target is a facility, then again there could be many reasons or causes for the
terrorist activities such as: Financial cause, Environmental cause, Political cause,
Human cause etc. If the target is an Ethnic or Social group there also could be many
reasons or causes for the terrorist activities such as: Hate crimes, Independence cause,
Human cause, Religious cause, Ethnic cause etc. If the target is a Business associate
there again could be many reasons or causes for the terrorist activities and, since it is
not a direct attack, it offers extensive options for attacks. If it is followed up by threats
and media exploitation it effectively harms the business of the primary target and its
business/political relations.
Economic and political “influences” are the primary causes for kidnapping incidents
whether there are carried out by small criminal groups or large guerrilla and/or
terrorist organisations. Therefore, because of their economic status, “foreign” citizens
or tourists and international corporations’ staff are far more likely to be kidnapped
than national individuals. That is also why expatriate staff in countries of risk is at a
much higher risk of being kidnapped than the local staff. This includes foreign staff
belonging to NGOs and Aid Agencies as well as corporations. The kidnappings of aid-
workers are perpetrated for the same economic or political motives as the corporate
staff; such causes often stem from grievances in regards to aid programs, local politics
and just plain “general” crime and terrorist causes. Thus, each K&R incident must be
treated and approached differently and individually by the K&R Negotiator as dictated
by the events and the perpetrators.

Worldwide Kidnap Victims 2000 - 2004 Dependants
Business Professionals
30%
27%
Non-professional
25% 23% Employees
Government Officials &
20% Security Forces
14% 15% Professionals /
15%
Journalists
10% 8% Ranchers
6%
5% 4% 3%
Project Workers /
Egngineers
0% Others
Victim Classification
During “The Cause” phase the abductors/kidnappers will often gather information
about potential targets from available open-sources such as: Newspapers, TV News
Channels, Internet Sources and Intelligence Sources like corrupt police and military
officers or through “Sponsor Governments”. It is important to realise that a lot of the
actual planning and in-depth information gathering performed by the kidnappers can
be done through easily-accessible open sources:
▪ Newspaper archives can be searched for articles related to a specific person or
facility providing background information, addresses, names and photos;
▪ TV News Channels often sell their editions or special coverage of specific news
stories etc. These video tapes can save a potential kidnapper the camera trip to
a facility where he would be exposed to scrutiny by security forces. Video tapes
can be watched frame by frame and the terrorists can assess in that way the
building structure, alarm systems, position of video cameras, doors or window
entrances, etc.
Kidnappings caused by political reasons are usually to gain a “High Profile” media
attention, such as the kidnapping of US Journalist Jill Carroll in Iraq. Whereas
kidnappings caused by financial reasons are usually to gain “the highest ransom” such
as the kidnapping of Chinese multimillionaires in Hong Kong. The specific objectives of
each “kidnap group” and their capabilities determine which type of “Target” that
group chooses to abduct and hold for a specific type of ransom.
PHASE 2: INITIAL SURVEILLANCE

The amount of preliminary targets are only limited by the capabilities of the specific
“Criminal/Terrorist Group” but all attacks require intelligence about the targets
available in order to select the best attack method and time of abduction. This
intelligence is initially gathered from the open sources and through local knowledge
from localized cells or sympathizers. Nevertheless, before an actual attack can take
place the intelligence has to be confirmed by performing surveillance of the target, this
surveillance is conducted over time to gather the initial information needed.

The initial surveillance is used to gather information about the targets such as:
▪ Routes between home and office with stops
▪ Routines such as time of arrival or departure
▪ Procedures such as single vehicle or convoy, etc.
▪ Means of transportation: does the person drive a small vehicle versus a large
SUV?, does the person use public transportation or staff shuttle?, etc.
▪ Security Measures such as drivers, bodyguards, security guards, patrols, dogs,
alarm systems, armoured vehicles, counter surveillance, etc.
▪ Residences such as private homes, summer houses, diplomatic staff housing
complexes or Facilities such as Embassies, etc.
Everything of relevance to the kidnapping needs to be observed and reported to other

members of the kidnap group. It is during this intelligence gathering by visual
surveillance that the kidnappers are most vulnerable. “Professional” criminals and
terrorist groups are aware of this and are commonly using amateurs from the
grassroots or new members of the groups. These amateurs and new members are not
“professionals” and therefore they make more mistakes, which can be detected by the
target’s security forces and personnel with surveillance awareness training. Whenever
surveillance is performed the terrorists are vulnerable; if they can observe their target
or the protective security team, they can be observed as well!
The type of surveillance depends on the specific target and his/her associated activities
and protective methods used. The techniques used for surveillance include:
▪ Static positions - such as observing from cafes, restaurants, benches, parks, bus
stops or parking lots, etc.
▪ Mobile - either by following a person or passing by a facility by vehicles,
motorbikes or on bicycles, etc.
▪ Pedestrian walking – it is one of the most common methods as this method
gets the terrorist up close with the person of interest or facilities and therefore
offers more dependable confirmation of either the individual’s or the facilities’
security apparatus. It is also the preferred way to enter a facility for a seemingly
“innocent” purpose and thus inspect the normal security procedures and the
whereabouts of the specific target.
▪ Electronic surveillance - can be performed by using cameras with large lenses
or directed microphones; it can easily be done by placing a video camera in a
box with a hole for the lens in the window of a car and then park it nearby with
a view of the target facility, etc.
The specific signs to look for when attempting to detect hostile surveillance are:
✓ Location, Correlation and Mistakes3
In addition, all criminal and terrorist groups have three significant weaknesses:
✓ Size, Accessibility and Time4
3
Study chapter 5 in the “Surveillance Detection Specialist” by Dan Sommer, ISBN: 0557415588, for full
explanations on these points. The manual is available to 4R clients free of charge.
4
Refer to the same manual and chapter for further information
PHASE 3: TARGET SELECTION
After completion of preliminary options the kidnap group will make a final choice
based on the information they have obtained, through the open sources and
confirmed, and updated by the “Initial Surveillance” carried out during Phase 2. This
final choice will determine the next steps in the “Wheel of Terror”:
▪ If a Political cause they will choose a target with maximum political statement
versus risk, usually designed for high profile media coverage which usually affects
a much larger audience and gives more political clout than the specific target
itself provides. In such cases the perpetrators will provide the Medias with
further information and propaganda and often offer “proof of life” pictures to
gain further coverage of the incident.
▪ If it is a financial cause they will choose the target that offers the highest award
versus risk, it may or may not be a High Profile target. Such attacks usually only
affects the direct target and family/company. Many international terrorist groups
carry out kidnaps for ransom to fund their political terrorist activities. This is a
tactic commonly used by FARC and ELN in Colombia, the Abu Sayef in Indonesia
and the Basque ETA in Spain. ETA even had such K&R groups operating in Mexico,
in order to “fund” their Basque independence campaign.
The kidnap group will choose either one or more of the preliminary targets, which
offers the highest probable success rate; this can be either one or several individuals.
The preliminary targets could have been chosen from local targets by a small criminal
or terrorist group, or could include international targets region-wide by a large well-
funded criminal/terrorist organization like FARC etc. As can be clearly seen from the
following chart then kidnap incidents are often directly linked to guerrilla and terrorist
activity than crime, and thus the majority of incidents occur in countries where such
groups operate and in which the general rule of law and order are lacking.
Kidnappings of Foreign Nationals
Central & South Americ

40,0% 35,5%
35,0% Africa & Middle East
30,0%
25,0% 22,0%22,0% Asia & Pacific
20,0% 17,0%
West-East Europe & the
15,0%
CIS
10,0%
3,5% North America &
5,0% Caribbean
0,0%
Region - Source CRG 2004
The key to avoid being a target is simply not to be a “soft target”, which means that all
persons living in areas of risk should have basic awareness training in detecting hostile
surveillance and utilize both counter surveillance methods and surveillance detection

during travel between home and office etc. To deflect the criminals and terrorists, the
residences and facilities need (armed) security guards, alarm- and CCTV systems and
other physical target-hardening measures, combined with proactive measures; such as
a surveillance detection program and preferably Law Enforcement participation etc.
PHASE 4: PRE-ATTACK SURVEILLANCE

This is the phase where the kidnappers verify the information they have gathered
through the previous three phases. They are verifying the information to see which of
the selected targets, best suit the aim of the criminal/terrorist group and offer the
highest level of success. This is done with several different abduction methods and
attack sites in mind. During this phase they also double-check to see if they have
missed anything important related to the targets habits or routines. They also verify to
ensure that the person’s security situation has not changed significantly. The
surveillance conducted during this phase is used to gather verified information about
their specific target such as:
▪ Route options between home and office and any regular stops or access and
excess routes from facilities
▪ Targets habits like arrival and departure times, regular walking or jogging etc,
are there more security at certain times of day or does security diminished
during lunch hours or during nights etc
▪ Accessibility to the target, how vulnerable is the target? If an individual target,
does that individual walk or drive a vehicle and what type of vehicle. Does the
individual have a security escort etc. if the abduction site is a facility does it
offer easy access, or do fences or walls restrict it; are there video cameras or
security guards and are the guards armed. Does the facility offers access with
vehicles close to the structure in order to swiftly control the victim or is there a
separate parking area etc.
Surveillance detection is a method of looking for immediate indicators of hostile

surveillance. The majority of victim specific kidnappings are thoroughly planned and
therefore the perpetrators will necessarily have to survey the movements and routines
of their target for a period long enough to be familiar with the targets habits.
Surveillance detection skills are in ”essence” simply to be alert and aware of one’s
immediate environment.
One of the key indicators of hostile surveillance is persons or vehicles, which indicate
suspicious “behaviours”, and or is spending excessive time in ones immediate
neighbourhood without any apparent or obvious reason for being there. Persons that
do not appear to interact on the same friendly or social manner, which locals normally
interact in the neighbourhood, should raise suspicion. Thus, a good knowledge of the
immediate neighbourhood as well as good contacts with neighbours, local
shopkeepers and street vendors are essential to awareness of and detection of such
behaviours. Furthermore, then such friendly relationships will greatly increase the
chance that locals will volunteer information about suspicious activity that they have
observed, as well as any persons who have been asking questions or made inquires
about you.
Unfamiliar and unknown persons with whom you come into to close contact or vision
of should also be noted mentally and local inquiries made, and followed up by
completing a report to the security department. Feelings or suspicions of being
followed should not be ignored but instead acted upon by informing security
departments and local security forces and by changing habits, timings and route
choices. If possible then utilize covert surveillance detection units and or increase
visible security measures such as armed guards and implement target hardening.
Al-Qaeda targeting studies and training materials captured during the “War on
Terror” have revealed that large parts of terrorists' advance planning, involve
careful, patient, and meticulous preparation both before and after a specific target is
chosen.
The type of surveillance conducted depends on the target and the security restrictions
imposed by the targets security measures. Again the terrorists will be vulnerable
during the surveillance period, because if they can see the target, the target’s security
officers can also see them. However, the terrorists performing the surveillance during
this phase are usually “better trained” in conducting surveillance or are professional
terrorists with prior experience.
However, there will still be the three significant signs to look for: Location, Correlation
and Mistakes and the 3 weaknesses of a terrorist group will still be present: Size,
Accessibility and Time.
PHASE 5: PLANNING
This is where the information gathered through the first four phases is combined and a
real plan of execution is designed, this is done carefully as the price for a mistake can
be too high to bear for the individual terrorist; although the group itself may have
fewer scruples when it comes to the safety of its members. During this phase the
terrorists needs to:
✓ Assess the gathered information and compare the information from different
sources to detect gaps
✓ Complete security surveys of all target facilities and vehicles etc
✓ Pre-plan the logistics of the mission, how many terrorists are needed for this
mission, how many vehicles are needed, what type of weapons, hideouts etc
✓ Recruit the skilled terrorists if the mission requires special skills such as bomb
construction, drivers for heavy vehicles or special weapons knowledge etc, Set-
up safe-houses for use during the planning phase and for hideouts after the
mission
✓ Plan evasion and escape routes with different options in case of unexpected
traffic or roadblocks or engine failure
✓ Finalize the method of attack, during the planning phase there often appears
gaps in the original plan and such gaps must be addressed and the attack

method may have to be changed.
In order for the terrorists to ensure a tactical advantage during the attack, the
terrorists will need to:
✓ Surprise and shock the target and its defences, if the target has detected the
planning process the terrorists will be attacking a target that is ready, which
will likely cause the attack to fail
✓ Have open fields of fire to ensure that the terrorist have enough time to aim
and hit and to ensure that the target has been neutralized. If a terrorist shooter
is positioned in a side street waiting for his target to appear at the main street,
he has to choose between concealment by moving down the side-street or
open fields of fire by moving closer to the main street. The further down the
side street he is, the less reaction time he will have and a very narrow field of
fire. The closer he moves to the main street he opens up his fields of fire and
extend his reaction time but he also become exposed to detection and the
targets defensive firepower
✓ Location, time and specific conditions of the attack has to be as planned, in
order to plan an attack at 12 o’clock on a Wednesday the terrorist has to
observe how the conditions are on a Wednesday at 12 o’clock. The terrorists
need to ensure that the target will be at the chosen location at the time and
day planned
✓ Diversions and secondary attacks or options etc. in case the plan goes wrong or
conditions have changed at the attack site or the target defences has been
increased unknowingly to the terrorists
✓ Have support positions in case of improvisation of the plan, unexpected
roadwork or engine failure or casualty’s among the terrorist group etc.
The terrorists will also need to complete their logistics planning such as:
✓ Vehicles types and numbers, how are they to be acquired, without leaving a
paper trail and if stolen how can they be kept safe from police detection until
the time of attack
✓ Money preferable cash as the use of cards can be traced and even falsified
cards expose the terrorists to scrutiny and possible witnesses in banks etc.
✓ Identifications that can withstand scrutiny for all members of the terrorists
group involved in the attack, visas and travel permits etc.
✓ Weapons and explosives, where does the group acquire these items, are they
manufactured or smuggled in to the location or acquired locally through
criminal connections. This can be a dangerous option, especially after a
terrorist attack as no normal criminal will have any involvement in such serious
an offence and would likely leak info to the police.
✓ Tools are any special tools required for the specific mission for either
construction of weapons or explosives or for gaining access to a facility etc.
✓ Disguises such as uniforms or any role play that offers the terrorists a cover
that the security forces will not suspect of foul play, are specific disguises
needed for the specific mission like dressing as construction workers or security
forces etc.

PHASE 6: REHEARSAL
At this stage, the terrorists need to rehearse the attack-plan to fine-tune it to
perfection, they will check:
✓ Relevant information, is it still accurate or has the situation changed, has the
plan been discovered or has outside influences caused a change in the targets
habits, plans or security measures etc.
✓ Test their equipment, does it work, does the relevant terrorists know how to
use the equipment, does it need modification or alteration, has weapons been
test fired and are all explosives, detonators and timers functional and safe etc.
✓ Instruct the personnel in all matters related to their specific functions, are the
exact timings and roles of everyone understood including emergency
procedures etc.
✓ Confirm target activities, is the target still likely to be at the attack site at the
planned time and are the habits and security measures still the same as those
planned for
✓ Test the security forces, this can be done by simple visits to a facility or
approaching the individual target and ask for the time or direction, security can
also be tested by using persons unrelated to the terrorists group and without
their knowledge. Examples could be: terrorists asking a taxi driver to stop and
park at a no parking zone in order to test the security guards response time and
procedures can be part of such tests. Sending a package with DHL or another
similar freight or postal service and observe how the security guards responds
to the arrival, the same goes with sanitation services and regular mail or
grocery delivering etc.
✓ Test their escape routes, the terrorist’s needs to inspect if the escape routes
are still clear or whether they have been changed by roadwork or traffic
diversion etc.
Upon completion of the rehearsal, the terrorist group will verify that they still have
target approval; this is common if they belong to a larger organization, which might
have planned other incidents, which could conflict with the terrorists current plans etc.
They will finally make last improvements of the plan and set up contingencies. The
terrorists will then practice the mobile part of the mission such as the Infiltration and
Exfiltration phase of their assigned positions and finally ask themselves the final and
most important question; is it all set and likely to succeed?
“With this, Shivarasan was ready to stage the dry-runs ordered by Prabhakaran. The
first dry-run took place on April 21 at the favourite spot for political rallies - Marina
Beach in Madras. Marina Beach was the venue for Rajiv Gandhi's first campaign
meeting in Tamil Nadu which was also addressed by the AIADMK leader Jayalalitha.
The meeting was photographed by Ravi Shankaran while Shubha Sundaram's agency
took a video recording. However, the potential assassins did not attempt to get too
close to the two leaders. Incidentally, Haribabu, who was present at the trial run along
with Ravi Shankaran, had his first inkling that the target was going to be a politician.
The next dry-run was executed on May 12 at a meeting featuring V.P. Singh and
Karunanidhi at Thiruvallur in Arkonam, 40 km away from Madras. This time, the

exercise was more fruitful as Dhanu was able to touch the feet of V.P. Singh in much
the same manner as she would do with Rajiv Gandhi on the fateful night of May 21.
This session was also shot on video by the Shubha Photo Agency. The video film is now
in possession of the investigation team.”5
PHASE 7: EXECUTION
This is the phase where the terrorists deploy their attack team by infiltrating their
chosen locations, positions and enter their cover stories if that has not already
happened during the planning phase, they will set-up their support positions, check
communications and finally wait for the target to appear at the X spot! When the
target appear at the X spot as planned if a mobile target, if a static target like a facility
the X spot will be a specific section or entry which perhaps are only vulnerable during a
specific time or due to a specific task or security measure etc.
Once these criteria’s has been met, the terrorist group has one last decision to make:
✓ Should they go ahead and complete the attack as planned or abort?
✓ Does there suddenly appear a change that was unforeseen?
✓ Has the attack been compromised?
✓ Are the escape route suddenly blocked?
✓ Should they evade and escape or hold their positions?
✓ Should they wait while the unforeseen situation changes back to normal!
If the terrorist group get as far as the execution phase, then they are most likely going
to succeed with their planned attack. This is because they have already planned for the
most likely scenarios that could unfold, and so it is of no relevance whether it is an:
✓ Specific victim kidnapping
✓ A non victim specific kidnapping
✓ A group kidnapping
✓ An extortion threat of kidnapping
✓ A short-term detainment with extortion
✓ A large scale attack with kidnapping or capture of “valuable targets”
✓ A hostage and barricade of a facility or residence
✓ A hijacking of an airplane, vehicle, train or sea-vessel etc
However, one thing is always certain and that is, that whatever the cause, whatever
the reason, whatever the method, inevitably innocent people will suffer!
PHASE 8: ESCAPE & EXPLOITATION

Almost all terrorists want to escape. However, there is of course the exception such as
the religious fanatic; but even fanatic groups will still want to use the media coverage
5
Excerpts from the Rajiv Ghandi assassination trial, presented before the court by the Special
Investigation Unit, “SIT”. On the 21st of May 1991 at 22 o’clock Rajiv Ghandi was assassinated by the
LTTE “Tamil Tigers” during the Indian Presidential campaign, the case study provides a good
understanding of a terrorist groups “modus operandi” covering all of the 8 phases of the Wheel of
Terror.

gained by the terrorist operation for political purposes if it is a political attack. If it is a
financial operation, they will want to obtain and use the ransom they have acquired
and therefore they will need to ensure their escape, these escape plans will be well
planned and prepared with assistance from other group members, pre-planned etc.
Once the terrorists have been successful in carrying out a planned operation against
their main enemy or his supporters, the attack will bring far more media attention
than a failed attack. Thus, the success and media coverage brings the terrorist both
notoriety and ransom money; this in turn encourages the terrorists to do it all over
again and that sets of another “Wheel of Terror”
The 8 Phases of the “Wheel of Terror”

1. The Cause
2. Initial Surveillance
3. Target Selection
4. Pre-Attack Surveillance
5. Planning
6. Rehearsal
7. Execution
8. Escape and Exploitation
A summary of the lessons that can be learned from the "Wheel of Terror" is that first
of all, you must understand the terrorists and their means of operation; it literally
takes a thief to catch a thief, so to catch a terrorist you have to become one mentally.
This will help you in planning your defences so you know where, when and against
whom terrorists are likely to strike, this way you will be prepared and will deter them
before they can reach the Execution phase. A few hard-learned words of wisdom:
“If a man comes to kill you, wake up early and kill him first”
-Jewish proverb-
As a K&R consultant, this literally means that you will have to go out and assess the
vulnerabilities, harden the defences and actively try to detect the perpetrators during
the surveillance phases, before they detect weaknesses in their targets defences, and
there will always be at least one weak link in those defences. Flush them out, detect
them and stop the; before they complete their plans and carry out kidnapping acts

REDUCE THE VULNERABILITY
There are unfortunately still conflicting executive views, about the degree to which
staff members deployed in volatile areas and even danger zones, should be prepared
for a potential kidnap or hostage situation. Organizational managers may worry about
investment problems and not being able to attract qualified applicants for operations
in countries and regions considered either volatile or dangerous areas.
Personnel and field managers may also worry that too explicit preparation will instil
unnecessary fear and stress in their staff. However, both for reasons of ethics and
operational safety and security, companies that operate in developing countries or
remote regions of the world as well as in or close to conflict zones, must face the fact
that they work in violent environments. Thus, it is essential to overall business success
that their staffs are made clearly aware of the threats and instructed in how to
minimize those threats and how to react in the event such a threat should unfold.
Victims of wrongful detainments, abductions and kidnappings, do generally all agree

that advance preparation either was or would have been a great help in overcoming
the initial shock and the following depression of the unknown duration and survival
potential of the containment. Having been briefed and instructed in how to safely
interact with the kidnappers and being prepared with incident related knowledge is
key to ensure the victims safety during the detainment.
The victims confident knowledge that they will not be forgotten, and that the company
has a crisis plan ready for responding to such an incident in order to ensure their safe
and speedy release; is a major mental and moral support during their darkest hours.
However, there are of course several physical actions anyone can take to reduce the
risk of being targeted, such as:
✓ Lower your profile, dress in local fashion if possible
✓ Do not wear any excessive jewellery or watches
✓ Do not wear company marked clothing or display a company ID tag
✓ Install alarm system and cctv at your residence and place of work
✓ Close your windows and lock the doors when driving
✓ Pay close attention to the traffic around you and behind you
✓ Vary your travel routes often and change your timings
In the post-9/11 world, where security threats have become a major concern for
corporations operating in a global environment, all businesses are faced with more
challenging threats than ever before and must comprehend the range of potential
threats, their vulnerability and the ultimate consequences and implications on the
safety and security of their assets. Dan Sommer and 4CrisisRelief.org are there for you.
4R integrate the totality of our professional knowledge with quality services; and
provide the best value-added security service solutions to each and every one of our
clients that will minimize the threats and ensure the continuity of your business -
anywhere in the world.
Contact Dan Sommer for further information at +354 663 0552

THE NEED FOR K&R INSURANCE
Why Insure? Because the costs associated with the kidnapping such as negotiators,
translators, bribes, awards and travel expenses, can run up to one $ million US, as
some negotiations have taken years to settle successfully! It is therefore far more
practical for a company to pay a known premium, than to suddenly have to assume
the entire cost associated with a kidnapping incident
Many Kidnap and Ransom insurance’s include the threat against property and product
contamination, and the costs associated with these threats. The insurance can also
include the cost of evacuating a region or country, both for personnel and families as
well as to compensate for property left behind. This can be due to a direct threat or an
indirect threat such as imminent war in the region
There are also a risk of kidnapping due to information the victim might hold about the
company’s future business plans and designs. Kidnappings due to access the victim
have to assets; this could include bypassing electronic security systems. This is referred
to as a “Targeted Kidnapping” or “Tiger Kidnappings”. In which the victim could be
forced to give up information or assist the criminals in their cause, or assist with
acquiring the information or assets they are after.
Kidnappings done by ordinary criminals/bandits are often of a smaller scale and not as
well planned as those done by terrorists, guerrillas and organized crime organizations
Ransom demands are usually around $100,000 to $five million in these small-scale
cases. Warning: small-scale kidnappings are more prone to violence and death.
Solving a K&R case can take from one day to more than a year, which make it highly
important to have access to immediate professional assistance and liquid assets for the
ransom and incident related expenses. Companies that do business in the world's
trouble spots are increasingly turning to special insurance policies to help them
counter the growing threat of kidnap and ransom.
✓ At GEO/4R we recommend the Chesterfield Group in London for War,

Terrorism and Kidnap for Ransom insurances.

K&R INSURANCE COVERAGE
K&R Insurance is as all other insurances a plan you fall back on, once you have had a
loss. Please be aware that you cannot insure a criminal act! You can only insure the
losses and damages that are the results of the criminal act. This means you cannot
claim compensation from the K&R insurance, before the ransom has been paid, nor
receive full compensation before the case has been settled!
Kidnap insurance should cover:

✓ Reimbursement of the ransom fee, victims wages and costs associated with
paying the ransom
✓ Reimbursement of the loss of income for the corporation, due to the
kidnapping incident or an evacuation and the cost for professional negotiators
✓ The cost of additional temporary security such as guards, alarms and
bodyguard’s etc
✓ Kidnap insurance could also cover: the cost of rescuing the hostage by
paramilitary means, if possible…this should be a last resort when all else has
failed!
The Real Life Facts

Extortion insurance could cover compensation for product loss due to threats of
product contamination and associated costs, such as withdrawing the product from
the market including advertisement costs and loss of income due to a targeted
computer virus.
What does it cost?

These are examples, not binding prices! The insurance usually have two limits of
liability either pr occurrence or as an aggregate amount. The premiums for Kidnap and
Ransom / Extortion are between 0.25% to 1.5% of the total insurance sum, depending
on the extent of coverage and the region of operation. Premiums covering high-risk
countries can be significantly higher!
Make sure you understand your insurance terms fully, because you need to know if
your coverage for $1,000,000 is an all inclusive figure or the extent of ransom fee
coverage. If it is all inclusive and the K&R consultant’s salary and expense are $250,000
then you only have $750,000 left to pay your ransom and rehabilitation.
The insurance sum for individuals should generally be between $1 to 3 million US, this
would make a premium of $2.500 to $45.000 annually, whereas, the total insurance
sum for corporations should generally be between $5 to 50 million US, this would
make a premium of $12.500 to $750.000 annually.
✓ In addition, there will often be a commission fee for the Security Consultant
who maintains the contract with the insurer.

HOW 4R’S STRATEGY CAN HELP YOU
A kidnap for ransom negotiation strategy must be based on in-depth research of
previous incidents and a thorough knowledge of the “known” perpetrators modus
operandi and the current regional and local “going rate”. The strategy must focus only
on the safe return of the victim; as such 4CR K&R consultants seeks to stabilize the
situation, establish rapport and create a climate of problem solving through
compromise.
The legalities of negotiating the ransom with the kidnappers are as varied as the 170
countries that exist in the world. However, it is important to realise that whereas many
countries have bylaws, which compel citizens to report a crime. Then some countries,
such as Colombia or Chechnya, have made it unlawful not only to commit kidnapping
and hostage taking, but also to make any contact with kidnappers/hostage takers. In
Italy the government may freeze the assets of kidnap victims, their immediate families
as well as corporate assets in order to prevent the payment of ransoms to criminals.
✓ Yet other countries such as Mexico have enforced laws that prevent
professional crisis response agents, from negotiating directly with the
kidnappers and in some countries, it is unlawful to advise a kidnap victim’s
family not to report the crime to the police.
Thus, there is a quack mire of legalities that should be carefully considered and
researched before any response is taken and a negotiation strategy is devised. As time
is of key essence in ensuring the safety of the victim and the continued operations of
mission critical tasks and facilities, such knowledge must be instantly available and an
incident “guide” ready for implementation by the crisis management team.
This is where 4R’s K&R services are literally a “life saver” as our consultants is well
versed in the legalities and methods of solving kidnap crises in a manner that is safe for
the victim.
✓ The 4R strategy will minimize the losses and ensure the continuous
operations of the company involved.
HOW THE 4R STRATEGY HELP FAMILIES AND COMPANIES

✓ Assist with CMT planning, incident assessment and response strategy
✓ Crisis response with deployment to theatre to support the victim’s family
✓ Provide temporary security to company employees and facilities
✓ Advice on reporting and liaising with the authorities
✓ Reduce the element of risk during negotiations
✓ Preparing a country profile and risk assessment for business continuity
✓ Prepare new personnel and provide security training to families and employees
✓ Help with procuring K&R insurance to cover possible future incidents
✓ Give advice for caring of the victim and the family during and after the incident

IMPORTANT POINTS FOR KIDNAP VICTIMS
▪ Do not lose hope and avoid any open displays of despair; this will likely only
increase the likelihood of abuse and harassment by the kidnappers.
Negotiations will regrettably in certain cases take substantial time, although
the majority are settled relatively quickly and safely in a matter of days or
weeks. Rest assured that you are important to a great many persons and they
will be doing their upmost to ensure your safe return.
▪ Be obedient and if necessary try to calm the kidnappers; the real element of
danger is during the abduction phase and the following transport phase.
Although it may be wise to try to resist or escape from the kidnappers once you
have realised a kidnapping incident is taking place, you should never try to
wrestle or fight armed kidnappers. Once the initial abduction has taken place
you should accept the fact quickly and ensure that your actions and body
language are aimed at calming the kidnappers. Your focus should be on safe
and secure survival and that is best accomplished through obedience and
displaying proper levels of humility.
▪ Avoid making suggestions or appear threatening; initially do not speak unless

spoken to and do exactly as you are told. Be polite and friendly at all times and
try to remain poised and uphold your human dignity without antagonising the
kidnappers.
▪ Try to rest and sleep when you can but remain facing your kidnappers; this is
particularly important if you are held in the same room as the kidnappers
occupy, it is mentally far easier for a kidnapper to harass and assault a victim
whose back is turned towards the kidnapper, this offer emotional distance
from the crime. As the negotiation process, can be prolonged and the situation
will seem increasing bleak during the darkness and solitude of night, then it is
important to make up for sleepless nights, by catching naps during the day.
▪ Do not argue or engage in debates or discussions; whether about politics,

religion or the morality of kidnapping for ransom. Because such arguments are
likely to cause increased resentment towards you by the kidnappers, which can
significantly increase the likelihood of threats or spontaneous acts of abuse,
violence and even execution.
▪ Be observant of details and descriptions; but do it without attracting

attention. The information can be highly useful for the K&R negotiators and/or
law enforcement agencies after you have been released. However, the danger
and risk associated with obtaining information should be carefully considered
and such actions should always be secondary to the issues of personal safety
and security.
▪ Sudden loud noises, bangs and lights; could indicate that a rescue attempt is
underway. However, such rescue attempts are rarely executed, as they are
likely to increase the temporary hazards to the kidnap victims. Once and if you
suspect that a rescue attempt is underway, hit the floor and move to a corner
or out of immediate sight and stay there. Curl up; place your hands over your
head, with the elbows in front of face for protection from scuffles and to show
that you are not a threat to anyone. Keep quiet while focusing on minimising
your appearance to avoid being used as a human shield, or being injured or
killed by the kidnappers in an act of frustration. Expect to be handled roughly
by the rescuers and be obedient as they will initially be unsure of your identity.
According to David Lattin, a former CRG K&R consultant: then 50% of

kidnap victims are either wounded or killed purposely by the
kidnappers or by accidental fire, during a forced rescue attempt!

RESEARCH AND BRIEFING THE CMT
A kidnap or abduction of a family member or company employee call for an immediate
controlled response and the implementation of a strategy aimed at recovering the
victim in a speedy but safe manner. Before any specific strategy is planned it is
essential to obtain reliable information concerning:
1. Who has been kidnapped?
2. Where did the abduction take place?
3. Specific location - street/road, residence/office, area/city, region, country
4. When did the abduction take place?
5. How was the abduction carried out?
6. Why was it carried out?
7. Who planned and executed the abduction?
8. Have the authorities been informed?
9. Are the authorities aware of the situation?
10. What (if any) communications have been received?
Once the above questions have been answered in as much detail as possible and each
answer to a question have been researched; the family and/or company can devise its
strategy for the recovery of the victim. The recovery strategy must consider various
factors including:
1. Are the immediate family and/or company aware of the incident?

If not then inform them immediately. A family may not initially
need to inform or involve the victim’s company/employer, but a
company must immediately inform and involve the victim’s
family! It is highly important that a close interaction with the
family of the victim is established and that a relationship of trust
and mutual support sustained during the entire negotiation
process. An open and honest dialogue with the immediately
family may also be the only way to provide answers to the vital
questions related to the physical and mental health of the victim.
2. What is the mental/physical health of the victim, medicines needed etc

One of first and foremost matter the CMT needs to assert is; the
physical and mental needs of the victim, does the victim suffer
from any illnesses, does the victim need any special treatment or
medicines on a daily or regular basis. Can the kidnappers obtain
such medicine without a prescription? If not could the family or
CMT get hold of the medicine and can it be delivered to the
kidnappers through neutral intermediaries? Does the victim
normally carry medicine on his/her person, and if so how many
doses etc. What was the physical and mental status of the victim
prior to the kidnapping and in relation to that condition, how will
the victim likely cope with the stress and strains of the
abduction. These matters needs to be brought to the attention
of the kidnappers immediately upon initial contact, or if
necessary through media coverage.

3. Whether or not to report the incident to the authorities
This depends entirely on the country where the kidnapping took
place and the countries involved. Because, the legalities in the
countries involved may restrict the CMT’s hand in solving the
crisis effectively and quickly. The country may also have highly
corrupt law enforcement agencies that may be suspect of having
involvement in the matter or will get involved in a corrupt
manner if informed of the crisis. Reporting to the authorities
during an incident is not initially advised by 4CR, however 4CR
advice that most incidents be reported to the authorities after
successful closure of the crisis incident. The involvement of
governments and diplomatic core have often caused more
problems than it has solved; informing the authorities and using
their reach can often be a two-edged sword.
4. The course of past incidents in the country and the modus operandi of the
kidnappers if a known group
This information is highly important as it tells at lot about the
expected outcome of the kidnap incident and the negotiations
process. It also gives a fair estimate of the expected final ransom
payment versus the initial ransom demand, also referred to in
K&R as the “going rate”. By researching past incidents or having
knowledge of such incidents and their solutions will give crucial
information for the Crisis Management Team that can guide the
CMT in the right direction, and help with briefing the family and
company management. Knowing the modus operandi of the
kidnappers or their group if a known group will give the CMT
clear guidance of what to expect in form or communications,
seriousness of threats, proof of life, duration and final ransom
amount etc.
5. The legal and cultural situation regarding K&R negotiation in the country
This depends entirely on the country where the kidnapping took
place and the countries involved. Because, the legalities in the
countries involved may restrict the CMT’s hand in solving the
crisis effectively and quickly. Countries such as Mexico, Colombia
and Italy have laws that restrict the negotiations process and the
payment of ransoms in kidnap for ransom incidents. In Italy a
court may freeze assets of a family or company that have been
victim of a kidnap for ransom incident to prevent the payment of
a major ransom. 4R recommends that legal advice be sought
immediately a kidnap for ransom incident has occurred. There
may also be certain cultural aspects involved in how a kidnap for
ransom incident is solved in the specific country and this may
dictate how the kidnappers will respond to the negotiation
strategy by the family or company. Thus, such cultural aspects
should be researched as well in the initial stages of the incident.

6. Who should negotiate; family, co-worker, response consultant or the police
This depends on the local situation and legal environment as well as the
quality of law enforcement services. In a functioning country with a reliable
and well trained non-corrupted police force, law enforcement would be the
first choice for negotiation management. Unfortunately few K&R cases
takes place in such countries. Thus management should preferably be in the
hands of experienced in-house crisis managers or with a professional K&R
Agency. In emergency cases where in-house managers are not available and
funds or insurance for professional K&R agencies does not exist, then a
suitable co-worker should be placed in charge of the negotiations. Only as a
last means and in case of emergency should the victim’s family be allowed
to handle the negotiations. This is due to the fact that the emotional factors
will likely over ride all logic within the family negotiator. The stress level of
having to take what appears as life and death decisions on behalf of a
family member will most often cause immense frustration, which often
leads to anxiety attacks and agreement to unsustainable financial ransoms.
7. The care and security of the victim’s family

It is important that the organisation responsible for the victims being in the
country or employer etc. takes care of the victim’s family’s immediate
security. A panic situation will likely have occurred and the family will feel
scared, unsafe and in fear. It is therefore important that their security is
temporarily heightened with visible security present and a partial or full
evacuation of the family should be considered. However, often it will suffice
to hold a crisis response meeting with the family and the crisis response
manager and explain to them how K&R incidents are solved. Stress
management and Grief Counselling should be considered for all members
of the family.
8. The security of co-workers if the victim is a company employee

It is important that the organisation responsible for operations in the
country takes immediate visible steps to improve personnel security. Often
a panic situation will occur and the victim’s co-workers and their families
will be frightened and angry. It is therefore important that their security is
at least temporarily heightened and a partial or full evacuation should be
considered. However, often it will suffice to hold a crisis response meeting
with the co-workers and then follow up with a security seminar covering
such threats as K&R. It is important that the co-workers receive regular
updates about the work being done by the crisis response managers in
solution to the incident. However, keep in mind that confidentiality is a key
aspect in K&R cases and the “need to know” about exact details does not
include anyone outside the CMT.
9. Informing the Media, public relations and press releases

An active press strategy is better than a passive one or none. Intensive
press coverage that appeals to the humanity of the kidnappers can be
useful under certain circumstances. However, in far the majority of cases
an initial strategy of discreteness and confidentiality are the best way to
proceed. Extensive press coverage tends to inflate the ransom demands.

Pre-Incident Prevention & Preparedness
One can never overstate the importance of crisis management planning and crisis
response preparedness. All organizations should have a set and practiced crisis
management plan (CMP). The CMP should include information about who the Decision
Making Authority is (DMA), the DMA accepts and set the strategy and financial levels
as well as other key crisis management policies. The CMP should preferably also state
who the members of the Crisis Management Team (CMT) are, as well as their
respective roles within the CMT. The CMT manager briefs the DMA on key events and
the progress as well as any changes that may affect the crisis management policies. In
international incidents an organization may also need to establish a local on-site
Incident Management Team (IMT) that deals with direct negotiations, information
gathering and local liaisons. In country, international agencies could contact the
national police and the Ministry of Interior to obtain information. During such
contacts, one may also inquire about specialized national security forces that deal with
kidnapping/hostage situations and about national legislation. Western Embassies tend
to monitor the security situation, not only for aid workers but also for business. The
embassies will often have their own advice on procedures, albeit their advice may be
more political than practical and the Embassies agenda may not be compatible with
the victims.
✓ 4R’s clients have access to regularly updated country specific risk and
situation reports
✓ 4R’s clients have direct access to consultants with mission specific knowledge
on how to resolve potential crises in the country
Crisis Management Team

A small Crisis Management Team (CMT) capable and authorised to take effective
decision making and action over a considerable period of time must be established
immediately if not already in place. Most kidnappings are brief in nature, but can also
take from weeks to years to solve safely, thus it is important that the CMT members
are persons that can and will stay in country for the duration of the incident.
Incident crisis management policies and a negotiation strategy must be agreed upon as
well as an approximate ransom amount the DMA are willing and/or able to pay; this
should be completed ASAP, and takes presence over any other decision making that
the CMT needs to deal with. The details of both the strategy and “acceptable” ransom
amount must be kept highly confidential and only discussed within the CMT and with
the DMA. All K&R crisis plans should have a planned psychological response to an
incident with health care workers having clear responsibilities agreed in advance. The
plan should cover the victim, the immediate family and co-workers etc.
Business continuity and future deployments

When a company wish to operate or set up business in a country or environment of
medium to high risk, there are certain questions that should be answered immediately
such as:
✓ Do we need to be there at all?
✓ Could we get the same products/materials or market expansion elsewhere?
✓ Can we acquire a local company and run it as a daughter firm?

In order to lower the risk from operating in that risk environment/country could we
effectively:
✓ Hire and train locals to provide the services or work that we would normally do
ourselves?
✓ Can we lower our profile by using a local name/brand/logo?
✓ Can we improve our reputation, social standing and get friendly with the local
population by; building or re-building, schools, hospitals, clinics or sponsor
sport events or improve social life etc. In short, how do we best play the game
of “Heart & Minds”?
Crisis Management Team Briefing - Example

“Organisation ABC has established a Crisis Management Team to guide the response to
crises that pose a threat to health, life, and property. The standing Crisis Management
Team includes individuals from the areas of personnel affairs, facilities planning and
management, public safety, marketing and communications, risk management, IT
services, and regional management. In the event of a crisis, this standing team could
be expanded to include other members of the community as well as outside
consultants as deemed appropriate based on the nature of the crisis.
In accordance with Organisation ABC’s Crisis Management Protocol, the team is

responsible for gathering and reviewing details of the crisis, determining crisis
management and response activities, specifying communication procedures with
internal and external audiences, and briefing senior staff. In a crisis, the Organisation
ABC’s president or designated DMA has the ultimate decision-making authority. The
regional management will act in the president’s absence.
The Crisis Management Team is also responsible for providing education regarding
crisis management to the organisations community and for establishing positive
working relationships with community law enforcement and emergency management
personnel.
Conclusion
For the Crisis Management Team, rule one is that – Time is on Your Side.
• Show that you understand the kidnappers’ needs.
• Reduce the number of negotiating forces
• Narrow your agendas
• Decide a negotiation strategy
• Decide a PR strategy
• Decide “acceptable” resolutions

THE K&R NEGOTIATION PROCESS
The Crisis Management Team
The negotiations should follow the strategy and guidelines set by the CMT (Crisis
Management Team), this is essential to ensure a speedy, safe and orderly return of the
kidnap victim. However, the direct negotiator must be given some level of flexibility
within the frames of the CMT's strategy in order to respond to claims, statements and
threats by the kidnappers.
Deciding who should do the direct negotiations is often a difficult task that the CMT
will have to decide upon, however the general rule is that whomever the kidnappers
first contacted will be the negotiator. If the kidnappers have not contacted a specific
person or demanded a specific negotiator, then the CMT will have to decide upon the
person or agency most suitable to do the negotiations. Various “actors” such as a
family member, a company colleague, a charity organisation, an NGO, local people well
known to the family or company, the local authorities, or a local or home country law
enforcement “negotiation unit” could fill the direct negotiation position.
Each choice will present its specific strengths and weaknesses and the choice will have
to be evaluated carefully within the CMT. In the rare event that the CMT are not able
to decide upon a negotiator, in which they have confidence
✓ Then a 4CrisisRelief.org/GEO consultant could fill the position
If decided to use a non-family/company negotiator, then the CMT should first have
concluded that the chosen person is the best-suited negotiator that the situation
offers. However, the CMT should remain closely involved and informed in the
negotiations conducted by the chosen third party, because the CMT retains the
ultimate responsibility for the safety and well-being of the victim. This is to ensure that
the safe and speedy return of the kidnap victim; is and remains the primary goal and
that no other motives are influencing the negotiations strategy.
It must be stressed, that it is highly important to the safety of the kidnap victim and
the recovery process that conflicting strategies by different actors be avoided.
Kidnappings of an expatriate or a tourist for that matter, will often lead to several
actors trying to influence the negotiation process. For example in the case of a foreign
tourist being kidnapped in a country of high risk, various actors working in accordance
with their own agenda could quickly complicate the negotiation process.
✓ In such cases, the local government will get involved to try to save itself from
the political embarrassment and the economical losses stemmed from the
kidnapping of an expatriate or tourist. The local government will often be
under pressure to show that they have the situation under control and will thus
often be acting in ill planned haste, and have other socio-political agendas than
just the safe return of the victim. They will often be tempted to place undue
political and law enforcement / military pressure on the kidnappers, which will
increase the level of danger to the victim.

✓ The diplomatic corps from the foreign office or embassy/consulate of the
tourist's home country and their law enforcement agencies, will likely also step
in and place pressure on the local government for a speedy release of the
victim. Thus, another force of stress is placed on the local government who
may now be more prone to react with haste. The diplomatic corps may also
have their own foreign policy agenda and will likely make media statements
that will in many cases not help the situation or ensure the safety of the victim.
✓ The travel agency responsible for planning the victim's vacation might also get
involved at least on the media side of the matter and through its local
representatives.
✓ The victim's family, friends, colleagues, church or other organisations are also
likely to step in with media appearances and direct attempts at negotiating
with the kidnappers.
As can be imagined from the above example, then the task of ensuring a safe and
speedy return of the victim can be easily complicated by the different actors, who may
willingly or unwillingly, cause a prolonged kidnapping incident or even cause the death
of the victim. Now consider the complications that may arise if the there is more than
one tourist involved and that the kidnap victims are from different countries and
regions!
Thus, it is crucial that the CMT take swift command of the negotiation process, and
decide upon the best strategy of recovery and at all costs avoid conflicting channels of
communication with the kidnappers and conflicting messages reaching the kidnappers.
The CMT should from the start inform any intermediaries, who are acting as a channel
of communication for the CMT, that they do not have the authority to commit the
CMT to any action, without prior and explicit approval of the CMT.
However, it is also clear that the CMT’s strategy cannot be set in stone for obvious
reasons, as it is after all the kidnappers who hold the best hand. As with all plans one
will be wise in keeping General Helmuth Von Moltke’s famous quote in mind “No plan
survives contact with the enemy). Moltke was and still is considered one of the world’s
greatest strategists and his point is as true today as it was on the 19 th century’s
battlefields. However, well your CMT’s plan of strategy is, the enemy (the kidnappers)
will never consistently act in accordance with the CMT’s plans, simply because they are
adapting their strategy to the negotiators perceived strategy. Thus, as it has also been
discovered it the world of risk and crisis management training, then generic plans are
only of real world use if they can be flexible enough to adapt to the operational needs
of the involved parties (Borodzicz, 2004).
“Despite this amorphous context to crisis management, trainers still tend to favour
highly structured (militaristic) simulation models, argued here to be totally
inappropriate for crisis training (Borodzicz and Van Haperen, 2002, 2003).”ii
In the 1980’s there were several incidents in Lebanon in which the victim was held
hostage for more than five years! However, the vast majority of kidnap for ransom
cases is resolved in less than ten days and with limited bodily harm to the victim.

Duration of Kidnappings
67% 1 to 10 Days
70%
60%
11 to 50 Days
50%
40% 50 to 100 Days
30%
16%
20% 12% More than 100 Days
5%
10%
0%
Duration
The Negotiator
If the CMT have the "choice" of choosing the negotiator, then the best choice is a
person who is of the same cultural and ethnic background as the kidnappers (if known)
or have extensive experience from living and working within the cultural and ethnic
society. This is highly important, as the negotiator will therefore better understand the
thought pattern of the kidnappers, as well as be able to assess their threat language
and detect their overall modus operandi. In most cases, the ideological, cultural and
ethnic background of the kidnappers will be known relatively quickly after the direct
negotiations have begun. This is based on the knowledge of the area where the victim
was kidnapped, the method of kidnapping, the ransom demands, and all other
statements, comments, and demands made by the kidnappers.
The Sociology Factor

If the CMT does not know the ideological, cultural and ethnic background of the
kidnappers, then the CMT should ensure that a person who is 100% fluent in the
language used by the kidnappers is chosen to be the negotiator. Because, the language
fluency will allow the negotiator to better evaluate and recognise the different levels
of emotion in the kidnapper's voice, as well as identifying the geographical, cultural or
ethnic origin of peculiar words or phrases used by the kidnappers.
This is a highly important aspect of the negotiations as it has direct affect on the speed
and flow of the negotiations. An in-depth understanding of both the language spoken
and the cultural use and meaning of words and phrases are crucial to ensure that a
mutual understanding of each other’s demands and needs exists between the
negotiating parties. It is a well known and established fact within the academic fields
of translators and interpreters, that both verbal and non-verbal communications and
utterances are always “open” to interpretation (Baktin 1986)iii. It is also an established
fact that “utterances” include both retroactive and proactive properties and may
therefore be open to “interpretation” by the receiver (Markova 1990: 1-22).
In addition to the potential misunderstandings that are likely to arise between the
negotiator and the kidnappers, then there will near always also be uncertainties and
discrepancies in the negotiators perception of the set “Negotiation Strategy” versus
the CMT’s perception of the strategy. In many cases the negotiator will essentially

assume the role of being a “Dialogue Interpreter” between the CMT and the
kidnappers. Because of the differences that often exist in the cultural and linguistic
backgrounds of the CMT and the kidnappers, then in addition to being a direct
translator the negotiator will also have to assume the roles of being an interpreter of
the kidnapper’s statements, demands and claims. In the role as a dialogue interpreter
the negotiator assumes both the roles of being a translator/interpreter by having to
question both the CMT and the kidnappers for further clarification of the opposing
parties’ position. The negotiator will therefore at times assume an unofficial status as a
mediator between the two parties.
In crisis incidents where there are a clear difference in the cultural and linguistic
characteristics of the kidnappers and the CMT, then it is crucial that the CMT realize
that the negotiator is far more than merely an instrument of language translation.
Because, language convey meaning in not just “words” but also in the structure of the
sentences and the interaction of words within the utterances. Since meanings of words
and phrases are interpreted differently between cultures, countries, social-classes,
ethnicities, and sub-cultures of the same population, then a correct translation of
“meaning” can never be achieved with a literal translation of the words and sentences.
Thus, in the role as a dialogue interpreter the negotiator both monitor and actively
contribute to the dialogue/negotiation and thereby affects the participation
framework (Goffman 1981: 226 and Wadensjö 1992).
The direct negotiator must appear (act if necessary) to be humble and "obedient" in all
communications with the kidnappers, while pleading for mercy on behalf of the victim.
The negotiator should continuously strive for more time to obtain the ransom money
while begging for understanding by the kidnappers of the difficulties the family is
having in trying to raise the ransom money.
Negotiations
During the negotiation process there are several highly important actions you must
take and behaviours you must display to ensure that the negotiation process is kept
going according to the CMT’s plan; just keep in mind that “no plan survives contact
with the enemy”. However, there are also several acts and mannerisms you must avoid
in order to ensure the victims safety.
▪ Avoid accepting deadlines even if you do not appear to have any choices in the
matter. You must continue to plead for extension of the time given to collect
the ransom and make the payment, and explain that you, the family and the
company cannot raise the cash in so short notice. Express concern for the
victim's health; plead for the victim's life, show submission and express fear
and anguish. Cry and plead for mercy, repeat concern for the victim's life during
every communication.
▪ Avoid getting angry with the kidnapper or insulting him or enter into any
discussions related to the legality or morality of the kidnapping act.
▪ Keep the kidnapper talking, ask for a repetition of the demands, and repeat the
demands while pronouncing shock of the size of the ransom demands and the
threats made. Repeatedly reply that you want to cooperate but that the

demands are unrealistic, that the victims and the victim's family are not rich
and do not have assets sufficient to pay that amount of ransom. If the victim or
the victim’s family are known to be wealthy then you must explain that they
are actually heavily mortgaged and that their investments have been a loss the
last years. That they have expanded their business and property using up near
all of their capital wealth and currently have credit problems.
▪ Be sure the hostage-taker understands that you are not able to make final
decisions, keep repeating that you are trying to hurry up the process, but it
takes time to sell off assets and the quick sales leads to low bids. Explain that
the assets are not sufficient to meet the kidnapper's demands, try to convince
the kidnapper that the victim's and the family's assets are primarily acquired
through loans and borrowed money.
▪ Withhold promises of a full ransom; keep pressing that you and the victims
family are trying their best and that they are selling assets, acquiring loans and
borrowing from family and friends, but that it takes time and the money raised
is just not enough. Plead for understanding and express futility and despair, as
you just cannot raise the full ransom.
▪ There will be threats about mutilation and death, in a prolonged incident

threats will occur regularly and are usually followed by the kidnappers
employing a psychological tactic of silence. The silence can last from hours to
days, weeks or even months. The threats of violence and death are primarily
directed at undermining the confidence of the negotiator and placing
emotional pressure on the family. However, the victim will often be informed
about the threats made to the family and will often be threatened as well.
▪ The victim is often used unwittingly by deceit to apply pressure on family and
the negotiator. Body parts or shocking “proof of life” pictures are sent to the
family to affect the negotiations and increase the ransom demands. Although,
the vast majority of “shocking” proof of life pictures is usually fabrication by the
kidnappers if they are from a large "professional" kidnap organization;
however, fundamentalist terror groups and common criminals/bandits are
more likely to harm the victim!
The CMT’s negotiation process strategy should except in “highly volatile cases” be
based on the psychological “squeeze the orange strategy”. This has proven to be far
the best and most successful negotiation process. The term is based on the image of
squeezing juice out of an orange; when you start squeezing the juice flows rapidly first
and then slower and now demand more pressure, eventually only drops come out
even when you squeeze applying full pressure. Eventually you conclude that you have
gotten all the juice you can from that orange, where after you discard it and enjoy your
juice!
The kidnappers will start with a high demand and a short time frame in which to
comply and give explicit demands and threats of what will happen if you do not
comply.
• You will have to plead for the victim’s safety and return and express chock as to
the ransom demand.

On the second communication you will with quivering voice tell the kidnapper that
having emptied your accounts and borrowed from family you have x amount of
money, which should averagely amount to about 5% of the demand. The kidnappers
will refuse this offer, be angry, threaten the victim, and try to instil fear in you and the
victim’s family/company to ensure that more money is collected to pay the ransom.
On the next communication you will for example increase your available ransom
amount to 7-8% and keep pleading and explaining that the victim and family/company
has invested and that the money are not accessible etc. This process will continue until
the kidnappers are convinced the source of “juice” is dried up and then a final offer
that is slightly above your current collected amount is usually made. However, it is
highly important that you do not appear eager to accept this slightly higher offer,
otherwise the kidnappers may have reason to believe that you are not as pressed as
you either are or pretend to be. Plead again and only offer to try, but claim you do not
know how and show deep concern for what will happen to the victim if you cannot
collect the remaining amount. During the next communication begin by apologizing for
only having slightly less than the final demand and plead for acceptance.
The negotiations can take months so don't despair, if you don’t immediately feel that
you are making any progress, remember that every single communication with the
kidnappers is in fact a sign that the negotiation process is working. In the beginning,
the kidnappers will issue a high demand, which you will answer with a “low” offer, the
kidnappers will at first refuse, repeat their demand, and make threats and you will
later “offer” a higher amount. Eventually the kidnappers will lower their demand to
another still too high demand, which you will over time answer with an increased
offer.
Again, the negotiation process will appear to stall and the kidnappers will usually
communicate again and initially repeat their last demand, to which you now can make
only a slightly higher offer on top of your earlier offer. The kidnappers will likely
continue their demand but may also provide slightly lower demands with an explicit
and short time frame combined with “final threats”. However, by now you know that
your negotiation process strategy is slowly working and you will “only” be able to make
a minimally increased offer. Eventually settlement will usually occur without serious
bodily harm having occurred to the victim.
However, it is important to realise that even though you are actually “playing” the
ransom down, the family of the victim eventually pays most ransoms; most often, both
the victim’s immediate family as well as other close relatives will face dire financial
consequences and even bankruptcy in the years following the incident. It has been said
with “grim smiles”, that a kidnap victim and his immediate family pay the ransom
amount once to the kidnappers, but twice to banks and loan sharks.
Thus during this process you essentially "let" the kidnapper squeeze the “juice” out of
your "orange" at a speed you and the CMT control; as you gently turn of the tap and
for each day/week/month that pass by, the ransom amount increase in smaller and
smaller amounts. Your aim is to settle the ransom negotiation process at an amount
that averagely is equal to about 10-20% of the full ransom demand.

Attention
It is highly important to have performed a thorough analysis of the kidnappers based
on their method of abduction, communications and negotiation process, and then
compares these processes with the known "modus operandi" of local and regional
kidnappers. In Colombia it is not uncommon for kidnapping incidents to take several
months (sometimes years) to complete safely. In Mexico, kidnapping incidents are
usually settled in less than three weeks and physical abuse is common. However, in
countries such as Russia and Chechnya, the threats of death and mutilation are very
real and cases will often need to be settled in a week’s time.
 If you do not have knowledge about the "going rates" and the approximate
“time frame” for negotiating a kidnapping case in your country and with the
specific type of kidnappers; then you need to seek professional K&R assistance!
Ransom Delivery
All ransom deliveries include some elements of danger, not just from the possibility of
the couriers also being kidnapped by the kidnappers collecting the ransom, but there is
also a very real risk of becoming victims of crime caused by other perpetrators. The
likelihood of robbery, assault and hijacks should be considered seriously, as most
ransom drop-offs, are in areas with either non-existent, or very low law enforcement
and military presence.
There is also a possible threat from other crime, terrorist, guerrilla or Para-military
groups, who might perceive the delivery person/s as easy targets inside an area with
non-existent or low law enforcement/military presence and thus attempt to kidnap
them. In many medium to high-risk countries, police and military forces are heavily
corrupted and thus may attempt to intercept and seize the ransom payment if they are
aware of it being paid, or they may be tempted to kidnap the delivery person/s and
hold them for ransom. In Mexico, for instances it is commonly acknowledged that
former and current police officers are involved in one-way or another in up to 80% of
all kidnap cases. This is likely to be the same in most other countries of medium to high
risk though in various levels.
Para-military, police, intelligence agencies and regular military units may also want to
prevent the delivery of the ransom fee, to serve their own agenda, as the ransom will
most likely be used to fund further crime, terror, guerrilla or kidnapping campaigns.
Thus, it is in the interest of these units to prevent the delivery of the ransom payment,
as it will be used to fund their enemies. They may also wish to prevent the delivery of
the ransom in order to cause mistrust and grief between the kidnap gang and the
family of the victim. The interception of the ransom money may be made to appear to
have been done by the kidnappers to cause bad press for cause of the kidnap gang and
thus complicate future negotiations.
Finally it may not be forgotten that they human mind is frail and often easily tempted
thus the ransom delivery person may be tempted to embezzle the ransom payment
and either keep it to him/herself or deliver only a part of it. Thus claims by the
kidnappers that the ransom has not yet been paid, or that the ransom was incomplete
might not be just another negotiation tactic or secondary crime, it could be reality.

Family, friends and co-workers in the “know” might also be tempted to intercept and
steal the ransom payment and make off with it or parts of it. Family members might be
particular vulnerable to temptation as they might rightfully or not, feel that the
carelessness of the victim led to his or her capture and that the ransom amount comes
from their joint property or inheritance and thus they may feel unjustly treated.
For the various security reasons listed above it is important that the crisis response
agent and the direct negotiator, does not get practically involved in the delivery of the
ransom. If they should fall prey to a crime or kidnapping incident, the CMT would be
crippled in their ability to continue or restart the negotiations, as either one or both of
the two key operatives are now missing. It is always advisable to try for as long as
possible, to obtain permission from the kidnappers, for a two-man delivery team.
The ransom delivery person/s should be chosen by the CMT after careful consideration
of their involvement and stake in the incident. It is always best to use a two
man/woman ransom delivery team, when two are used, it is important that they are
not from the same family, friend or worker “group”. This is a highly important in order
to minimize the risk of theft or embezzlement occurring, and to prevent the couriers
from preparing a “cover story”. If the delivery person/s are chosen and instructed
shortly before the ransom is due for delivery, then that will further minimize the
likelihood of foul play.
Ransom Payment
The actual ransom amount may be significant and most people have no idea of how
much space a significant ransom in small notes may take, or the immense weight it
may have. Rarely outside Hollywood movies can the ransom be concealed in a small
briefcase or paper bag, for the most it will consist of one or several suitcases, boxes or
duffel bags. The CMT must therefore allow for amble time for obtaining and often
exchanging the ransom amount, which must then be accurately and securely counted
and recounted and then finally packed securely and discrete; all are tasks which may
take significant time to complete.
Finally, the chosen ransom delivery person/s should never be told what the actual
ransom amount is, or in what form or currency, it is being delivered. In a country
where guerrilla groups are operating, it may be possible to “pretend” that the ransom
consist largely of medicine and medical supplies etc, thus again minimizing any foul
play on behalf of the delivery person/s.
It is also highly important that the ransom delivery person/s is explicitly informed of
the dire consequences it might have to the life and limp of the victim, should the
ransom not be delivered properly and in a timely manner. This must however be done
in a diplomatic and earnest manner, in order to avoid offending and antagonizing the
delivery person/s.
This is a situation where role-play can be utilized successfully, wherein the crisis
response agent may act the suspicious and questioning role and a CMT member the
trusting and grateful relative etc. Upon completion of the ransom delivery, the delivery
person/s should be thanked heartfelt for their assistance and preferably be awarded
some form of financial gratitude for the delivery.

Release on Humanitarian Reasons
At times other reasons than payment of a financial ransom may affect the release of
the victim. This is most common when the primary reason for the kidnapping was for
political rather than financial reasons, or if the political climate and reprisals following
the kidnapping incident proved likely to cause a greater loss than the potential gain
from the ransom would offer. In such cases the kidnappers may look for a way to
release the victim while still keeping face, this can be caused by unexpected negative
media attention that could adversely affect the kidnappers status among their direct
and indirect supporters.
In these cases, the kidnappers may agree to a release on non-financial terms, such as
in return for political concessions, building of schools or hospital clinics or through a
donation of medicine or other supplies. Thus the official release reason given by the
CMT is not always the same as the actual truth, in cases where an expatriate,
corporation employee, government official or a diplomat has been the victim; a
“release story” on humanitarian grounds has often been given to the media. This could
be on demand of the kidnappers, or to appease the tensions among expats and other
employees still in country. Another reason for giving a cover story is to avoid the risk of
“copy-cat” kidnappings, if news or suspicions that a large ransom has been paid, leaks
to the media.
This is a common strategy if the kidnapping of a high profile celebrity or family

member is known to the Medias. When such a strategy is chosen by the CMT, it is most
often a decision that is taken early in the negotiation process and in such cases a local
Religious entity or a NGO, have often been asked to conduct the “official” negotiation.
In such cases, the “official negotiators” are often unaware that financial ransom
negotiations are also in process; this strategy has been used so often in Colombia that
it is known in K&R circles as “el gancho ciego” meaning “the blind hook”. However, in
far the vast majority of kidnapping cases the CMT will attempt to keep the incident as
confidential as possible, and when this is not a viable option the CMT will release just
enough information to satisfy the Medias.

THE 4CRISISRELIEF.ORG RECOVERY PROCESS PLAN
It is highly important that a psychological recovery plan have been prepared during the
kidnapping period, so that the plan can be easily and smoothly implemented upon
release of the victim. The plan should start with medical examination and treatment by
the victims Doctor, followed by counselling by a psychiatrist or priest etc, and then
followed up by the family, friends and co-workers. The psychological torture of being
kidnapped or taken hostage can have devastating effects on adults and lead to serious
mental illnesses in children. The trauma of the kidnapping incidents can affect the
nervous system, the swift and usually violent abduction phase usually leave the victim
with little or no time to prepare physically or emotionally for the oncoming trauma.
This fact often leads to “PTSD” or post-traumatic stress disorder in kidnap victims.
Posttraumatic stress disorder can occur acutely (soon after the trauma) or in a delayed
onset months after. The trauma often causes the victim to shut down mentally and can
lead to feelings of loss of control, intense fear and helplessness. Without attention to
the psychological condition of the victim immediately after the release, kidnap victims
could in addition to the symptoms mentioned above, resort to aggressive behaviour,
which could spell disaster in their family, social and professional life.
It is not yet completely understood medically why some victims develop PTSD after a
kidnapping experience, and others do not. However, there are some risk factors, which
seem to make PTSD more likely to happen. If the victim for example already
experienced some level of depression or anxiety before the kidnapping incident, then
this could greatly increase the likelihood of PTSD. A detailed medical profile of the
victim should have revealed this during the initial crisis response briefing, and thus the
symptoms should be expected and pre-treated as soon as possible after the release.
Victims, who receive little or no support from family, friends and co-workers after the
incident, are more susceptible to the condition, thus the crisis response agent should
cover PTSD in detail during the initial crisis response briefing.
Medical Studies have shown that in people with PTSD, there are abnormal levels of
hormones involved in their response to stress. People in danger normally produce
natural opiates; these chemicals trigger a reaction in the body when put under
extreme stress or into a “fight or flight” situation. Being outnumbered and held captive
by force further aggravates the situation as the victim can neither physically enter the
“fight or flight” mode.
It has been found that people with PTSD continue to produce high levels natural
opiates even when the danger is over and the victim has been released and returned
to family or friends. This may cause the victim to have feelings of detachment and
blunted emotions, which further prevents a quick recovery as the victim will often
refuse to participate in psychological therapy. Persons who like kidnap victims have
been threatened with injury (physical or psychological) or death to themselves or
others. Then, the person's response to the event or to the threat involves intense fear,
helplessness and horror.

PTSD Symptoms
Most victims, who were exposed to the trauma of a kidnapping incident, will
experience some or more of the symptoms of PTSD. However, in most cases the
symptoms will disappear in the days and the weeks following release:
✓ Flashbacks, nightmares, or frightening thoughts, especially when exposed to
anything reminiscent of the traumatic event
✓ Sweating and shaking
avoidance of reminders of the event and a refusal to discuss the experience
✓ Numbness and feelings of estrangement or detachment from others
✓ Inability to remember aspects of the traumatic event
✓ Decreased interest in life
✓ Increased consciousness of one’s own mortality
✓ Avoidance of reminders of the event and a refusal to discuss the experience
✓ Flight/fight syndrome
✓ Problems with concentration
✓ Problems with sleeping
✓ Irritability or outbursts of anger
✓ Hyper- vigilance and alertness to possible danger
✓ Increased startle reaction re-experiencing the traumatic event
✓ Feelings of guilt
✓ Long term behavioural effects
✓ Alcohol abuse
✓ Drug dependency
✓ Failed relationships/divorce
✓ Severe depression, anxiety disorders or phobias
✓ Chronic illness- Headaches, stomach upsets, dizziness, chest pain and general
aches and pains, together with a weakened immune system
✓ Employment problems
Symptoms usually develop immediately or within three months of a kidnapping

incident, although occasionally they do not begin until years later. It is important to
realize that PTSD could set in shortly after the abduction and thus will have been
untreated during the duration of the kidnapping. This will likely increase the
rehabilitation time and could increase the severity of the symptoms. It is important to
note, however, that having strong reactions to the trauma caused by a kidnapping
incident is normal.
In addition, there is a range of expected reactions and symptoms depending on a
person’s exposure to trauma during the kidnapping incident. Almost one third of PTSD
patients will have related symptoms up to ten years after the trauma, ranging from
mild to severe. The majority of these people will likely also suffer from other
psychiatric, marital, occupational, financial, and health problems.
Helping victims recover from the trauma of a kidnapping incident is a family matter,
since it is instrumental to the victim’s mental health. Therefore, the family need to
take the lead and show their victimised family member, that they are coping positively
with the incident. The family, friends and co-workers should encourage the victim to
talk about the incident, their feelings and emotions, without being pushy, it should be
a “gradual” journey controlled by the victim but guided by the family. During the
treatment the family should try to follow the “listen 80%, ask 20%” rule. During

conversations it is important to explain to the victim that there is no blame, that they
did not do anything wrong, could have done nothing different based on the situation
and that the kidnappers bears the entire fault. Just as the victim, the family need to go
through counselling as well. It is also highly important that they know how to respond
to their victimized family member.
However, treatment may work from person to person, according to the severity of the
trauma, the victim’s mental composition, and the availability of support from family
and co-workers. Some victims will show persistent avoidance towards the treatment;
this is another typical PTSD symptom. The avoidance refers to the person's efforts to
avoid trauma-related thoughts, feelings and activities or situations that may trigger
memories of the trauma.
Most important though is to give the victim time to recover without undue pressure,
the transformation from being isolated for extended periods and suddenly returned to
the family and society can be highly stressful. Thus it is important that the victim is
given amble time to find themselves again. The victim should not be exposed
immediately to the “Press” or having to receive too many visitors. Getting back, into
society and work related activities, should be a gradual process and at times relocation
will be needed to avoid undue exposure to situations that could bring flashbacks of the
kidnapping incident.
Victims of extended kidnap incidents can benefit tremendously from reading a diary
written by their spouse or another close relative. The diary should include short
descriptions of the incident and negotiation, how the family member felt and
experienced the process. It is also good to include short news of local or world affairs
that is known would be of interest to the victim, as this will help the victim follow up
on “lost time” and thus reduce feelings of isolation and estrangement.
It is common for victims to regress in various degrees, both behaviourally and
academically/professionally. Many victims will have problems interacting with people.
They hide from friends and family members, and prefer to be alone. Medication may
be used in addition to psychological therapy to control severe anxiety, depression or
sleeplessness. Treatment is a one-day-at-a-time approach. It is also critically important
to realise that many of the symptoms associated with a highly stressful incident such
as a kidnap for ransom, does not just affect the specific victim of the incidents, but also
the victims family.
At 4CrisisRelief.org our mission is to provide relief to victims of crisis ranging from

kidnap for ransom, to refugees of war, oppression and natural disasters. Recovering
from a traumatic event always take time and can be a painful and horrifying
experience, not only for the victims but also for their families. 4CrisisRelief provides
post-incident relief such as PTSD counselling after the initial crisis is solved. We use our
tried and tested system called SPARC or “Solution-Focused PTSD & Anxiety Relief
through 4R Counselling” for providing efficient relief from PTSD and Anxiety.
▪ Solution-Focused - systematic methods
▪ PTSD - group therapy
▪ Anxiety - personal therapy
▪ Relief - from debilitating symptoms
▪ Counselling - individual and group
▪ 4R - Research, Respond, Recover, Report

A kidnap for ransom case is very often much more stressful to the family than an
unsuspected death within the family. In a death of a family member, which of course is
extremely painful and stressful there are nevertheless a sense of closure and there is
knowledge of the cause and the incident. In a kidnapping incident, there is the
increased stress of not knowing the whereabouts of the victim and the physical and
emotional status of the victim. This leads to increased emotional stress among the
victims family and can often lead to an emotional roller-coaster ride as the
negotiations drag out and threat are made to the life and health of the victim.
Therefore, the CMT must not only focus on the recovery of the specific kidnap victim
but also keep in mind that the family have also been victimised and will often need
psychological crisis counselling. PTSD symptoms may therefore be detected and
expected during the negotiation period and after the release of the victim and should
be carefully monitored and treated. Thus, the crisis management does not end with
the release of the kidnap victim but must be an ongoing process expected to last from
weeks to months after the incident.
Press Release Case Study

German archaeologist Susanne Osthoff and her driver were
kidnapped near Irbil in northern Iraq on November 25th 2005.
She and her driver was released unharmed by her captors on
December 18th 2005 after a ransom of $5 million, had allegedly
been paid by the German Government. On the day of her
kidnapping, she was due to travel north from Baghdad for a
meeting about her projects. However, her driver took her to a
house in the capital, where three men pulled her into an
apartment. Since then, her driver has disappeared and is
suspected of having been directly involved in her kidnapping.
On December 23rd 2005, Susanne Osthoff gave her first interview since her release
from captivity to the Arab TV Station Al-Jazeera. In the interview speaking to the Al-
Jazeera satellite channel, Susanne Osthoff was clad in the traditional Islamic burqa. She
said her captors told her not to be afraid as her kidnapping was "politically motivated".
"Do not be afraid. We do not harm women or children and you are a Muslim," she
quoted them as saying. "I was so happy to know that I had not fallen into the hands of
criminals."
Osthoff, a Muslim convert and Arabic speaker, said her captors demanded German
humanitarian aid for Iraq's Sunni Arabs and stated clearly that they did not want a
ransom. "They said we don't want money ... Maybe we want from Germany ...
hospitals and schools in the Sunni triangle, and they would like to get money in the
form of humanitarian aid." She described her captors as "poor people" and said that
she "cannot blame them for kidnapping her, as they cannot enter “Baghdad's heavily
fortified” Green Zone to kidnap Americans." She said she lived with her captors in a
clean place and that they treated her "well".
The German “Süddeutsche” Newspaper; the day after argued that Osthoff's behaviour
is a snub to the German government, which presumably paid a high sum for her
release. "Every citizen who ultimately contributed to this money can only be alienated

by the archaeologist’s point of view." Moreover, it sees her behaviour as having
negative repercussions for other foreigners in Iraq. "Her appearance on Arab TV is like
an invitation to copycat kidnappers. Osthoff has increased the danger to other
Western aid workers." In her first television interview in Germany, with ZDF on
December 28th, Susanne Osthoff reacted to questions in a seemingly incoherent
manner and showed herself again in traditional Muslim clothing (burqa), including
headscarf. This was mainly due to a lack of communication and preparation
beforehand, but in the German public, many took it as a sign of estrangement.
She has also received a lot of bad press and speculation of whether she was herself
involved in the kidnapping. This due to the fact that she had $3000 of the ransom
money in her pockets after being released by her kidnappers, this was discovered
when she was changing clothes and taking bath upon her arrival in the German
Embassy in Iraq. The serial numbers on the $3000 were confirmed as being part of the
ransom money.
The lesson to be learned is that this is a classic example of a very poorly managed
release and recovery process of a kidnap victim. If the CMT had prepared thoroughly
and had advised and controlled the public relations in the weeks after her release, the
media coverage would undoubtedly been very different.
▪ For the first, the crisis management team that negotiated her release had not
considered the fact that although Osthoff is a German citizen. She had
converted to Islam years before her kidnapping and she were married to an
Iraqi and her home was in Iraq, close to the Syrian border. Thus, it should be no
surprise that her first desire was not a swift return to Germany, but instead to
stay with friends in Jordan. However, her German staffed crisis management
team returned to Germany according to their plan, rather than staying with her
in Jordan during the first crucial weeks of her release. Thus, no one from the
CMT was available to offer her therapy and monitor her for signs of
posttraumatic stress disorder.
▪ Secondly; she wore the burqa when travelling in Jordan, in accordance with
Islamic tradition, and thus that was what she wore when being interviewed by
Al-Jazeera. Her second media appearance on the German news channel ZDF
was also filmed in Jordan, thus she was again wearing the burqa. When her
interviewer asked her if she did not want to remove the burqa, she replied
somewhat incoherently that she was not pretty and that one did not feel pretty
at such a time. Being a convert to Islam, one should neither be surprised nor in
any way offended, by her choice to wear a garment in accordance with her
religion. Besides her religion, anyone with knowledge of PTSD would be aware
that the desire to hide herself and having low self-esteem. Is consistent with
symptoms of PTSD and should have raised concern over her “mental” health,
instead of resentment and anger.
▪ Thirdly, the speculation of her involvement in a fraudulent kidnapping just

because she had $3000 of the ransom money on her after her release, is again
an example of a failure of the CMT. Anyone with knowledge of Iraqi
kidnappings would have known that several other female kidnap victims have

upon their release, been given not only cash but also gold necklaces by their
kidnappers. Italian kidnap victim Giuliana Sgrena was given an expensive gold
necklace upon her release and US Jill Carroll was in addition to a gold necklace
also given $800 in cash. Thus, the small amount of $3,000 out of a ransom of
“$5 million” should by itself, not raise suspicions of foul play.

FINAL BRIEFING AND REPORT
Once the incident has been finalized a final briefing should be made to all relevant
managers and family members. This is most often referred to as a “PIR” or Post
Incident Report. A PIR is, simply an evaluation of the organisations and family’s
response to an incident. The evaluation should include all relevant parts of the family
and organisation. This could be the entire organisation, or selected departments or
regional or local divisions within the organisation, as well as the crisis response
managers and professional consultants involved in the incident. The review identifies
weaknesses while emphasizing the strengths within the organisation, which will serve
to establish and reinforce improved policies and programs.
The PIRs are critical to the long-term success of the organisation. It should be
undertaken as soon as possible after the incident while memory is still current, it is
important to document, organize, and prioritise what everyone in the organization has
learned and convert these lessons learned into real changes in:
• Policies, plans, procedures, personnel, and budget priorities.
The organisations that identify and accept these lessons and change the way they do
business are the organisations that will respond more effectively should another crisis
incident occur. During the framing of the PIR the crisis response management team
(CMT) should ask themselves such questions as:
• What should be learned from the incident?

• What can be done to avoid repeating the same mistakes?
• How do you determine which policies and procedures worked? Didn't work?
• What are the implications of the incident on customers, employees, and the
industry we operate it?
• What changes need to be made? What worked well?
• How do these questions get answered? Who has the authority to address the
findings?
• Should an expert, third-party firm be invited in to facilitate this process?
Once the decision has been made to conduct a PIR, the first step is determining who
will conduct it. Who will be on the team? What expertise will be needed? What level of
management should be involved? What functional areas of the organization need to
be represented? What locations need to be involved? What is the role of counsel on
the review team? An effective review depends heavily on the objectivity, expertise,
and authority of the review team.
GEO/4R recommends that the team should have access to an advisory group of senior
leadership from within the organization that experienced the incident. These advisors
help guide the activities of the team based on the culture, vision, and values of the
organisation. Their direct experience also assists with the assessment of how

management responded to the incident and what long term effects have occurred as a
result of their actions or the incident itself. During interviews everyone involved with
the actual response, management, or recovery effort should be provided the
opportunity to supply input. No one person can see, hear, or know everything that
happened. Often it is not practical to interview everyone; however, it is necessary to
ensure an adequate cross-section of those involved with the incident is covered.
The findings are then assembled into a PIR report which documents the methodology
of the review, findings, lessons learned, recommendations for improvement, and
specific changes to existing security policies, plans, and procedures. The report should
also include:
• a consolidated event time line

• incident cause and recommendations for future correction or prevention
• prevention, mitigation and response equipment performance and procedures
• performance of the crisis management program including strengths and areas
of improvement
• stakeholder reactions, e.g., Board members, stockholders/investors,
government responders, trade associations, customers, and other businesses in
your industry
• the perception of the media in press reports
The PIR process provides all organisations, large and small, with a "teaching moment"
to learn from a crisis. An honest review must be made and hard facts accepted as steps
in the learning curve. The focus of a GEO/4R PIR is prevention of a similar incident
occurring rather than a fault finding and finger pointing report that will only serve to
cause more stress than already accumulated.

CASE STUDIES
“During the civil war in Sierra Leone, two Red Cross workers on a field trip to a
provincial town found themselves under the control of the Revolutionary United Front
(RUF), when after a short exchange of fire they took the town. Subsequently, they were
prevented from returning to their main office by the RUF who stated that crossing the
lines was too dangerous. RUF officers referred them to higher levels of command,
which took them deeper into RUF-controlled territory.
Altogether they stayed under RUF control for five weeks. The rebels insisted that they
did not hold them against their will, but restricted their movements for their own
safety. No demands were made, and the Red Cross workers noticed that the rebels
stopped taking interest in their presence. One day they simply started walking, and
talked themselves through RUF check posts, until, after 27 miles, they reached a village
controlled by government troops.”
March 5th 2005, Jordanian businessman Ibrahim al-Maharmeh, who supplied food into
Iraq, was kidnapped in Baghdad's Mansour residential district. His abductors
demanded $250,000 in ransom to release him, Jordan's Foreign Ministry spokesman
said. The ministry said al-Maharmeh and a brother, Taha, had been warned by the
embassy to leave Iraq after Taha was abducted in August 2004 and later released after
his family paid $50,000 ransom. It was not immediately clear if these were the same
kidnappers. A third brother announced al-Maharmeh's release two days later, saying
the family paid $100,000 to his captors.
Thomas Nitzschke and Rene Braeunlich, were taken

hostage in Iraq on the 24th of January and were
released unharmed on the 2nd of May 2006. Two
videos showing the pair was released over the
course of their captivity, the first were shown on
the 29th of January and the second on the 11th of
February. The kidnappers a “militant” group had
threatened to kill the pair unless the kidnapper’s
demands were fully met. The kidnappers demanded
that the German government close its embassy in
Baghdad, withdraw all German companies from Iraq
and stop all cooperation with the new Iraqi
government. The previously unknown Tawhid and
Sunnah Brigade abducted Nitschke and Braeunlich
on Jan. 24. They were seized by armed men in
military uniform while on their way to work at a
detergent plant near the oil refinery in Beiji.

Two Macedonian contractors kidnapped and held for
ransom near the southern Iraqi city of Basra, on the
16th of February 2006 and were released on the 21st of
February 2006. Officials are unaware if any ransom had
been paid for the two men, who work for Ecolog, a
German cleaning company. However, when keeping in
mind that German authorities and companies have a
history of solving kidnapping and hostage crises
through negotiations and concessions, then it can be
relatively safely assumed that a ransom was indeed paid for contractors.

COUNTRY ASSESSMENTS
As mentioned in chapter 2 a countries risk for kidnappings can easily be established, by
assessing its socio-political status. Countries that are provide ideal conditions for
kidnappings are those mired in conflict from the presence of frequent demonstrations
and up to civil war. Another indicator of risk is countries where the Government
authority is weak, due to the presence of revolutionaries, terror groups, guerrillas and
where significant areas of the country are generally lawless or rule by crime syndicates
or warlords. A third indicator of risk is countries where the police are largely
ineffectual, usually due to a poor economy that leads to corruption. The fourth
indicator of risk is countries that has in recent decades experienced violent conflicts
such as civil or declared war and thus is filled with weapons and explosives, along with
large numbers of unemployed combat veterans.
It is unfortunately the truth that domestic armed conflicts is partly based in a obvious
socio-economic and political disparity between the different classes, cultures and
ethnics within a conflict country, this is true of both present day and historic conflicts.
Another significant factor in the growth of conflicts and their following escalation into
organised crime, drug trafficking and kidnappings, is due to the inability of the
domestic security forces and military in responding to the conflict.
This inability is near always caused by a lack of funds and discipline within the security
and military forces, combined with the inability or unwillingness of the judicial system
to prosecute and convict those individuals and groups who infringe the law. These
factors leads to a rapid rise in the level of corruption within the security and military
forces, which again further increases the decline of domestic peace and stability. The
combination of all these factors in a specific country leads to an increasing negative
image internationally, which then causes a drop in foreign investment and export, thus
leading the country spiralling faster and faster down towards anarchy and open civil
war.
The only groups who stand to gain from this process is the organised crime and
guerrilla groups, who due to the deteriorations of law and order are able to operate
more or less freely and with impunity in larger areas of the country and increasing
their resources from new crime fields such as kidnappings.
The international industries of insurance companies have adopted more or less similar
factors for assessing a countries political stability and crime level. The assessment is
based on a scale of 1-5 and is generally assessed in accordance with the following
criteria’s.
1. Minimum Risk; petty crime is the most common threat

2. Low Risk; crime showing some organization and occasional demonstrations are
the most common threats
3. Medium Risk; from violent acts associated with organized crime,
demonstrations and occasional terrorist attacks
4. High Risk; from violent acts associated with organized crime, demonstrations,

terrorism and guerrilla warfare
5. Very-High Risk; from violent acts associated with crime, demonstrations,
terrorism, guerrilla warfare and open acts of war
Countries in category 1 – in alphabetical order

Bermuda, Faeroes, Greenland, Iceland, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Samoa,
Seychelles, Tonga and Vanuatu.

Andorra, Antilles, Aruba, Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Bhutan, British Virgin Islands,
Brunei, Canada, Capo Verde, Cayman Islands, Chile, Cuba, Denmark, Dominica, Finland,
French, Guiana, Grenada, Guam, Ireland, Japan, Lesser Antilles, Luxembourg, Maldives,
Monaco, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Slovenia, South
Pacific Islands, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland,
Taiwan, Turks & Caicos and Uruguay.

Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Belgium, Belize, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina
Faso, Cameroon, China, Comoros, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Djibouti,
Dominican Republic, East Timor, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, France,
Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Greece, Guinea, Hong Kong, Hungary, India, Italy,
Kazakhstan, Laos, Latvia, Lesotho, Lithuania, Macau, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia,
Mali, Malta, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, Namibia, Netherlands, Nicaragua,
Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Puerto Rico, Romania, Sao Tome & Principe, Senegal,
Slovakia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Trinidad and Tobago,
Tunisia, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States and Vietnam.

Albania, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia,
Herzegovina, Burma, Cambodia, Chad, El Salvador, Georgia, Guatemala, Guinea,
Guinea Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya,
Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyz Republic, Lebanon, Libya, Macedonia, Mauritania,
Montenegro, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Oman, Papua New
Guinea, Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Sri
Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Turkey, Turkmenistan,
Uganda, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Afghanistan, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chechnya, Colombia, Congo
(Democratic Republic of Congo), Congo (Republic of Congo), Haiti, Iraq, Ivory Coast,
Liberia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine and Somalia.
Case Example – Philippines

Republic Act. No. 7659. December 13th 1993. Section 8. Article 267 of the same Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
"Art. 267. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention. - Any private individual who shall
kidnap or detain another, or in any other manner deprive him of his liberty, shall suffer

the penalty of reclusion perpetual to death:
1. If the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more than three days.
2. If it shall have been committed simulating public authority.
3. If any serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted upon the person
kidnapped or detained; or if threats to kill him shall have been made.
4. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a minor, except when the accused
is any of the parents, female or a public officer.
The penalty shall be death penalty where the kidnapping or detention was committed
for the purpose of extorting ransom from the victim or any other person, even if none
of the circumstances above-mentioned were present in the commission of the offense.
When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the detention or is raped, or is
subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts, the maximum penalty shall be imposed."
In June 2004, two police officers involved in kidnapping incident were arrested inside
the National Police headquarters in Camp Crame. Police said the two officers were
involved in three kidnap for ransom cases in which 1.7 million pesos were paid in
ransom. Police and military involvement in the kidnappings is increasing and erodes
the trust of victim’s families and their willingness to report kidnap incidents to the
Police for fear that; financial and negotiation strategy information will leak from the
Police to the kidnappers.
Chinese-Filipino businessmen and their relatives have so far been the primary targets
of kidnap-for-ransom groups in the Philippines; this is due to their real or perceived
wealth and/or access to wealthy lenders, combined with their tendency not to report
kidnappings to the police. However wealthy Indian and Filipino business men and their
relatives are increasingly being targeted in kidnap for ransom cases. Occasionally
western businessmen and expatriates are kidnapped too.
Country Example – Iraq

Since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, more than 280 foreigners and 5000 Iraqi
citizens have been kidnapped by insurgents and criminal gangs. The kidnappers are
either seeking to extort a financial ransom or political gain, in their attempt to force
foreign troops and company staff to leave the country. At least 40 hostages have been
killed, while many others have been freed. A study by the Brookings Institution
estimated that between 30 and 40 Iraqis were kidnapped per day in the Baghdad area
alone, these victims are either kidnapped for the sole purpose of collecting a ransom
or due to sectarian strife and vengeance. Based on survival rates in the Middle East;
Iraq is currently the most dangerous country to be kidnapped in.
If the victim is covered by K&R insurance then follow the crisis response agent’s advice.
However, if the victim is not covered by a K&R insurance package and there is
insufficient funds or for moral or political reasons it is not considered an option to
employ a K&R Response Consultant. Then the best way to proceed is first of all to
gather the preliminary information about the abduction and use that information to
find the best avenues of preliminary negotiations. Once the kidnappers have made
either direct or indirect contact the negotiation avenue may be simple but can in some
cases also be complicated by “rivalry” and different political and religious agendas by
the kidnappers and the negotiators.

In most cases, good results have been achieved by staying in close diplomatic contact
with the US military and Iraqi Governing Council to secure the victims release.
However, more direct results, been achieved by contacting Sheikh Abdul Salam
Kubaissi. Kubaissi is a senior official of the Committee of Muslim Scholars and has
often emerged as a key player in efforts to release foreign hostages in Iraq.
Country Example – Haiti

Since the ousting of former President Aristide in 2003 the security situation has
deteriorated significantly and violent crimes have increased at an alarming rate. In
2005 there were more than 800 criminal kidnapping incidents in Haiti, most of the
victims were abducted in the capitol Port au-Prince and held captive in the various
slum areas such as Cite Soleil, Cite Militaire and Martissant slums.
Haiti’s highest security challenge is two-fold: to manage the demobilization and

disarming of the illegal gangs in the Cite Soleil, Cite Militaire and Martissant slums of
Port-au-Prince and other cities such as Gonaives and recently Petionville, and to rid the
Haitian National Police of the corruption and criminals embedded there. Currently
there are too many armed gangs operating freely and often using the cover of the
Haitian National Police to carry out kidnappings, drug trafficking and assaults. Haiti
National Police Chief, Mario Andresol has stated that 25% of the HNP are corrupt and
need to be replaced. Thus reporting a kidnapping and seeking the assistance of the
police in a K&R case is presently not advised.
Ransom demands are often from $200-500,000 and negotiated settlements are
between $30-50,000. Most Haitian cases can be settled relatively quickly if there is
access to quick cash, even if it is less than 10% of the ransom demand. However, one
should always follow the emotional based “squeeze the orange” negotiations process.
According to Reuters on the 27th of October 2006, then the ELN has consistingly relied
on kidnappings and extortion to fund their guerilla operations. The kidnappings have
mainly taken place in the oil-producing province of Arauca. As of date (27th of Oct.
2006) ELN is holding about 300 hostages.
The amount of ransom depends on the income and assets available to the victim, the
kidnappers are often well informed about the figures of income and assets, through
the previous kidnap planning process. The ransom for a lower class Colombian citizen
can vary between US $1,000 and US $400,000 and the ransom for a middle class
Colombian citizen can vary between US $1,000,000 and US $2,000,000. Whereas the
ransom for an expatriate working for a multinational company, can vary between US
$1,000,000 and $10,000,000.
According to the Pais Libre Foundation then Colombian kidnappers are now targeting
middle class citizens more frequently than wealthy Colombians, as was the norm in the
80’s and 90’s. Today 55% of Colombian kidnap victims are from the middle classes.
Country Example - Palestine

In Palestine the major threat of kidnappings of westerners and expatriates are to those
in the media business; since 2004 there has been eleven kidnappings of journalists and

two incidents were prevented. The incidents are usually of a political cause and reflect
the power struggles between the Fatah and HAMAS groups, the choice of international
journalists is due to the immediate press coverage and the embarrassment it cause to
the opposing group.
In most cases, theses kidnappings are quickly solved and the hostages are released
unharmed, however the August 2006 kidnappings of two Fox News journalists, were a
change in tactic and they were held for two weeks, much longer than the usual few
days of previous cases. In addition, they also suffered physical and mental abuse in
captivity, were forced to make televised statements and forced to convert to Islam
before being released.
However, in the past two years, Palestinian militants have also kidnapped foreigners as
bargaining chips to get relatives and group members released from Palestinian prisons,
secure government jobs, ensure contracts and settle personal scores. In most cases,
theses kidnappings are quickly solved and the hostages are released unharmed.
For Further Examples, contact 4CrisisRelief.org/GEO for a full risk assessment and
briefing of any country you intend to travel, invest or do business in. We can provide
updated country specific risk assessments in days. Please feel free to contact us:
For full contact details please visit: www.4CrisisRelief.org or www.geo-ops.com or

contact Dan Sommer directly through dan@geo-ops.com or call Cell nr: +354 663
0552.

K&R INSURANCE
The insurance company provides the actual policy and takes the financial risk that goes
with it. The insurance company will pay up on the policy, when a valid claim of covered
losses is formally submitted and proven.
“Lloyd's of London began selling kidnap and ransom insurance after the Lindbergh
kidnapping in 1932”.iv
The fact is that only 2-5% of kidnap victims are covered by a K&R insurance, however
many CEO’s, directors, risk managers, security managers and expatriates wants to have
a ‘Special Risks Insurance’ in place, and wants to purchase a K&R insurance but do not
know where to start. Thus, the aim of this chapter is to provide specific information
about the K&R insurance policy and where to purchase it, so that an informed decision
can be made prior to the purchase of K&R insurance.
One condition of a K&R policy is that the insured tell “no one” that the person or
company is in fact covered by K&R insurance. This is to prevent the “temptation” by
disgruntled employees and employees with financial troubles, as well as family
members and friends, from kidnapping the persons covered by the insurance. The
knowledge that a K&R insurance policy exists for a specific kidnap victim, will make the
kidnapper/s confident that they will gain financially from the kidnapping act.
“A spokeswoman for (Lloyd’s) admits “if it becomes common knowledge that a person
has kidnap insurance, then this person is much more likely to become a target”. v
Therefore, kidnap and ransom insurance clients are asked to keep a low profile, and to
withhold information on actual ransom payments, so as not to wet potential
kidnappers’ appetites for more insured hostages. As part of the kidnap and ransom
agreement through Lloyd's, the underwriters or the insured individual are not
permitted to reveal to anyone that they have such cover.vi
Several cases in the past have shown that the kidnappers had “insider” access to
detailed information on their victim’s insurance policy. For example, when the wife of
a former president of BASF, a German multinational corporation, was kidnapped in
Colombia in 1996; the first communication sent by the kidnappers referred to the fact
that they knew an insurance policy for $6 million was in place. Knowledge of the
presence of K&R insurance, can also lead to the hoaxed kidnapping of oneself also
known as “Autosecuestro”. In that case, an employee or private person with kidnap
insurance arranges to be kidnapped, often by contacting criminal elements suspected
of engaging in kidnappings, in exchange for a part of the insurance money.
To secure the anonymity of the policyholder, it is also common practice for companies
not to insure their employees as private persons, but merely to insure their position as
an employee. The employee concerned is often held unaware, whether his or her
position is insured. In any case, whether the client is a private person or a company,
the policies never carry names, but a secret code instead. This secret code is supposed
to be known only by the insurance company and the client’s senior management.

K&R insurance companies also “require the victims”, the victims’ family or a third party
to contact them within 24 hours of the kidnapping incident occurring. Once contacted
the insurance company will have their crisis response agents on the case, and from
then on they will advice and guide the crisis management team.
Resolving a kidnapping incident both safely and efficiently requires the assistance of
specially trained and experienced kidnap and ransom experts, thus companies
operating in areas of risk should acquire Kidnap & Ransom - Extortion insurance.
Because a Kidnap & Ransom - Extortion policy is not just a funding mechanism for the
ransom, but includes a range of highly important services, such as access to security
consultants whom specialises in kidnap and ransom incidents.
These security consultants are due to their expertise, by far the essential component
of the K&R insurance policy. The consultancy will despatch kidnap negotiation experts
with extensive knowledge of other related issues such as; family counselling and the
country where the kidnap took place. Because they are familiar with the local laws and
the dynamics of kidnapping and the local “going rate”, they are able to act swiftly and
decisively and to mobilize the resources necessary to resolve the incident safely.
Liabilities
Companies have a duty-of-care to protect employees who may be working or travelling
to areas where the kidnap risk is high; it also makes good business continuity sense
and should be a part of any realistic risk management plan. In any kidnap incident, a
company will face many liabilities. In addition to the temporary losses from operations
and the ransom payment, companies can also find themselves the subject of expensive
litigation from either the victim/s or their families.
From a legal point of view, few companies can mount a credible defence without proof
of pre-incident advice from risk experts like 4R. If however a company provides pre-
deployment hostile environment training, and create crisis contingency plans and have
adequate insurance cover, the kidnap victim/s and their families will feel assured that
the company indeed did its best to protect their people, which will minimize the risk of
litigation.
In addition, shareholders will likely be quick to hold the executive management

responsible for the losses a company have after having paid a $1 million ransom plus
$100 thousand in related expenses. Shareholders will likely enquire as of why they are
paying this loss, when it is common knowledge that this loss could have been paid by a
K&R insurance policy. Kidnapped employees or their families have sued companies in
the past, and the risk of a lawsuit is particularly high if intelligence reports indicate that
kidnapping risks were high in the country where the incident occurred.
Further Advice
There are several preventive measures that a company can take to protect employees
against the risk of kidnapping and detainment. Such preventive measures include Risk
Awareness, Hostile Environment Training, Security Measures, Incident Response and
Insurance coverage. Dan Sommer Consulting associates with specialist consultants
with extensive experience in each of these areas.

RECOMMENDED INSURANCE COMPANY
Dan Sommer Consulting and 4R recommends Chesterfield Group as a K&R Insurance
Broker. Chesterfield specializes in placing bespoke insurance policies for Insurance
companies and Insured's alike, with an exposure to Terrorism, Sabotage, stand alone
or extended to include, Strikes, Riots, Civil Commotion and Malicious damage, where
not provided for within the Material Damage and Business Interruption Policies.
See: www.chesterfieldgroup.co.uk
Chesterfield Insurance Brokers Ltd.

Chesterfield Group are a transparent independent insurance broking and underwriting
organisation, composed of four specialist and complementary businesses; each of
which has the strength and capability to outperform even the biggest and best-known
international brokers. Chesterfield is focused on getting as close as possible to their
clients in order to establish a sound understanding of their business needs and
providing them with solutions - innovate where appropriate. Top quality security is
paramount for our clients.
Overview:
Recent developments on the world stage have thrown the risk of kidnap and terrorism
into sharp relief. While these threats are far from new, they need superior exposure
analysis if they are to be cost effectively reinsured. Where it is permissible to buy
kidnap and ransom cover, such products can provide invaluable support for
corporations.
However, such portfolios need to be expertly assessed to protect against potential

accumulations for kidnap, detention, extortion, highjack and ransom. Similarly, on the
terrorism side assessing the true nature of exposures is essential if underwriters are to
make informed decisions on the business they write and benefit from competitive
reinsurance pricing.
Details:
Kidnap and Ransom – is one of the most comprehensive policies available in the
market place, our policy will provide the ransom amount; including the loss of the
ransom in transit and any other incurred expenses. Policies also provide for expert
negotiators (at unlimited expense) to be deployed within 24 hours after an incident to
handle all aspects concerning the kidnap.
Chesterfield Insurance Brokers Ltd - Accreditation:

Chesterfield Group are authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority
(FSA). Chesterfield Group's FSA Reference Number is 309345. The FSA is the regulatory
body overseeing all UK financial services firms. To get authorisation from the FSA a
company must:
1. Be experienced and qualified professionals.
2. Retain rigorous quality controls.
3. Be compliant and transparent.

Visit the FSA website for more information: www.fsa.gov.uk
Chesterfield Group and the FSA Requirements

Chesterfield Group does far more than meet the requirements, because Chesterfield
Group consider these requirements a minimum standard, and at Chesterfield Group
everything is of the highest standard, thus our clientele always receive the best and
most professional service available.
At Chesterfield Group Confidentiality is Key

Chesterfield Group ensures strict confidentiality of any recorded incident. As part of
our service to clients, a specialist assistance company will be appointed to respond to
your policy 24 hours a day / 365 days a year.
Chesterfield does not outsource or delegate any claims handling to external service
providers or third party administrators. Should an insured incident occur, our team will
be available to assist you through the entire process from initial notification to
collection of information down to final settlement.
Chesterfield Group`s extensive experience and excellent relationships with insurers has
made the company a recognized market leader. Chesterfield Group is a UK
management and employee owned independent Lloyd's Insurance broking operation
based in the City of London.
For Initial Account Enquiries, Please Contact:
Andrew Thacker - Director

Email: athacker@chesterfieldgroup.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7481 1683
Contact Chesterfield:
Chesterfield Group
St Clare House
30/33 Minories
London, EC3N 1DD
United Kingdom
Tel: 0044 (0)207 481 1683

Fax: 0044 (0)207 488 1919
Email: enquiries@chesterfieldgroup.co.uk
Web: www.chesterfieldgroup.co.uk
Registered in England 3013489

VAT Registration No: 752364236
FSA Reference Number is 309345

GEO/4CRISISRELIEF & CHESTERFIELD GROUP
GEO & 4CrisisRelief recommends that our clients insure their risks, including kidnap for
ransom and extortion incidents, through Chesterfield Group Insurance whom the
author fully endorse as a world class provider of risk management insurances. There
are of course several other providers of such insurances. However, care must be taken
when choosing a risk insurance provider, as even “reputable” insurance providers are
not always as reputable as they claim to be, as the following example shows.
 In November 2004, AIG reached a $126 million settlement with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission and the Justice Department partly
resolving a number of regulatory matters of a "non-traditional insurance
product."
 In 2005, AIG came under investigation for accounting fraud. The New York State
Office of Attorney commenced a civil action against Marsh & McLennan
Companies for steering clients to preferred insurers with whom the Company
maintained lucrative payoff agreements, and for soliciting rigged bids for
insurance contracts from the insurers. The Attorney General announced in a
release that two AIG executives pleaded guilty to criminal charges in connection
with this illegal course of conduct.
 In May 2005, AIG restates financial statements, and issues a reduction in book
value of USD $2.7 billion, a 3.3 percent reduction in net worth.
 In February 2006, AIG and the New York State Attorney General's office agreed
to a settlement in which AIG would pay a fine of $1.64 billion to settle
accusations that it had misled investors, fabricated insurance quotes and short-
changed state workers compensation programs.
 AIG is part of the Marsh & McLennan Companies Inc, a diversified risk,
insurance and professional services firm, AIG a Marsh & McLennan branch; Kroll
Inc as their K&R consultants. Whether or not, Kroll Inc was involved in the
fraudulent insurance activities of AIG, and if so to what extent is unknown,
however today AIG retains Clayton Consultants as their K&R consultants.
Key Points for a K&R Insurance Policy & Insurance Company

✓ Full and comprehensive coverage for all expenses the company and / or the
family may incur during the incident in order to managed the kidnapping
effectively
✓ Experienced crisis management professionals who can respond quickly,
bringing calm and experienced decision-making abilities to a stressful and
emotional incident
✓ An insurance company with strong financials and a solid reputation
The synergy of GEO/Dan Sommer/4CrisisRelief and Chesterfield Group, provides our

clients with the full requirements of the above three Key Points. When faced with a
crisis, of any sort, it is critical to know the best way to respond to minimize the damage
and its impact on personnel, assets and reputation. Dan Sommer and GEO Consulting
provides you with comprehensive, actionable guidelines to help you implement a Crisis
Management Plan and through Chesterfield Group, you will minimize your economical
loss from any crisis incident.

What Else Does a Company Need From a Kidnap Policy?
Cases can go on for weeks, months and sometimes years, and are very expensive to
manage. Most policies reimburse the insured for costs and losses but they do not
normally pay up front. Some of the costs and losses involved that should be covered
under the policy are:
✓ Ransom money up to the limit insured
✓ Travel costs (for the family, victim, company staff and K&R consultants)
✓ Lost salary of the victim/s
✓ Medical costs
✓ Rest and rehabilitation (for the family and victim)
✓ Retraining the victim after release
✓ Interpreters
✓ Rewards for information
✓ Forensic analysis (to ascertain if a body or body part is that of the victim)
✓ Increased security (for the victims family and co-workers after the kidnap)
✓ Legal claims against the insured (if victim or the family sues the employer
following release or death)
✓ Death or dismemberment of the victim, or the person handling the negotiation
✓ Loss of ransom in transit
✓ The response consultants’ fees and expenses, this is one of the most important
elements and this costs should be unlimited under the policy
Some organisations are ethically opposed to paying ransoms. This is fine too. You can
buy a policy that covers all the other expenses, including consultants, but does not
cover ransoms. Many organisations may feel uncomfortable paying a ransom in cash.
In cases where victims are held hostage by an identifiable community entity, or a
known faction are sometimes settled by an agreement, that a well be dug or school
built, or some other material concession in place of a cash ransom. Standard policies
would still pay for the costs involved in implementing these non-cash ransoms.
Regardless of the type of insurance, a company must always be clear about “who” the
policy covers, because some policies only cover expatriates, whilst others also include
national staff. Again, it should be considered if the policy is also to cover these
people’s families as well. Obviously, a policy that for instance dictates the position as
“country development manager” does not include the manager’s spouse unless
specified. However, the manager might be in the “belief” that the position he took
with the company would naturally include insurance coverage for his family as well.
This is particularly true in those cases where the company facilitated in the relocation
of an expatriate and his family and household to the country of operation.
The broker is the interface, or intermediary, between the client (policyholder) and the
insurance company. The broker earns money in one of two ways: a commission paid by
the insurance company that comes out of the premium paid by the client or by the
payment of a flat fee from the client. It is worth bearing in mind that commissions can
vary greatly and that some brokers receive up to 50% commission for some special
risks policies. That is, half the money the client pays for the policy will go to the
middleman. Brokers are required to reveal the commission’s involved, but only if the
client asks them to do so. Make sure you do!

You should further ask; what is the link between the broker and the insurance
company? What is the commission that the broker will receive from the insurance
company and can this be outlined in writing? Are there any other rewards the broker
will receive from the insurance company for sale of the policy? What is the relative
value of the commissions on the policies being offered?
Kidnapping-related expenses, including hostage-negotiating fees, lost employee wages

and ransom fees, consulting fees, death and dismemberment fees, personal financial
losses, medical and dental costs, rest and rehabilitation, travel and accommodations,
loan interest, forensic analysis, family counselling, cash benefits to victimized families
and legal costs, including judgments and settlements, are usually covered under the
Kidnap & Ransom - Extortion policies.
Feel free to contact us through www.4CrisisRelief.org or GEO/Dan Sommer directly

with help in procuring K&R insurance. See: www.geo-ops.com or contact Dan Sommer
directly on dan@geo-ops.com or on Cell nr: +354 663 0552.

K&R RESPONSE CONSULTANTS
K&R Response Consultants are consultants who deploy to advise the clients CMT in the
event of a kidnap incident. They will guide the clients CMT in the management of the
kidnap event and remain with the client until a safe resolution has been ensured.
Usually there are two consultants assigned to each case to ensure 24-hour
accessibility; the leading consultant always has more experience from handling dozens
of kidnap and extortion cases. Insurance companies who provide kidnap cover usually
retain one or more kidnap consultancies which means they pay the consultancy certain
amount of money each year to maintain a team of experienced responders who are
ready to deploy worldwide at a short notice.
K&R Crisis Response Consultancies are highly specialised and well-established

companies who are often retained, either exclusively or in some cases non-exclusively,
by major K&R Insurance Companies. These crisis response agencies are on standby. In
the event of an insured individual or company being victimized with kidnapping or
extortion incident their crisis response function is to advise, assist and guide its clients
in determining the most appropriate crisis strategy, including creation of a Crisis
Management Team and deciding upon the best negotiation strategy, and advise on
whether or not to contact and/or involve the authorities.
Among the professional response consultancies are: Ackerman Group, Clayton

Consultants, Control Risks Group, Corporate Risk International, Kroll Associates, Neil
Young Associates and Special Projects Services. It is, however, an unregulated market.
Anyone can, and some do, claim to be kidnap response experts without any rights for
doing so. Make sure you meet the consultants attached to your policy and make sure
you question them about their experience, such as:
▪ What is their kidnap experience with proved tracking record?
▪ What is the collective experience of the consultancy’s personnel?
▪ How do they manage their cases?
▪ Do the consultants have experience of working with your type of company or
organisation?
▪ Where did they get their experienced? What countries they worked in?
▪ What cases have they dealt with in the last two years?
▪ What back up do they have in terms of analytical support?
▪ How many consultants do they have?
▪ How many cases a year they handle?
▪ What is their “success rate”?
▪ And finally ask yourself if you will be comfortable to work with this consultancy
over a longer period of time (for weeks or even months)?
The kidnap consultant works for the sole purpose of seeing the kidnap victim being
released unharmed. A K&R Consultant does not work for the insurance company to
save them money. Therefore, the Consultant should not report to the insurance
company during the case, except in such matters as directed by the insurance policy,
unless the client wishes or permits this. The Consultant should report to the CMT, the
victim’s family and to the client’s headquarters. Furthermore, the role is purely

advisory and it is up to the family or company whether to follow the Consultant’s
advice or not. Even if the client does not follow the advice this should not affect any
claims made under the policy, unless it is fraudulent.
K&R insurance providers calculate with an average rate of $1-2000 per day for crisis
response agents plus travel, accommodation and other related expenses. Thus, K&R
insurance crisis response is a “big” business and its “trade secrets” are jealously
guarded by the few companies who control the majority of the K&R insurance market.
According to Kroll Inc. the market for K&R insurance is already estimated at around
$200 million in annual premiums and the annual growth rate is ~ 10-20%. Consultants
in this sector do not only earn fees from responding to kidnap incidents but also make
significantly higher amounts from providing country risk assessments to the insurance
companies and corporations, as well as providing incident avoidance training to the
insured families and companies.
The kidnap response firms charge considerable fees per day for their operations. In
1996, Ackerman reportedly charged up to $2,000 per day plus expenses and if a
second agent was needed, they charged an additional $1,350 per day. Considering the
fact that hostage negotiations can last several months, then the total bill for the K&R
consultant can rise to well over one hundred thousand dollars. CRG reportedly works
on a fee-paying basis of about US $2,000 a day plus expenses. In accordance with Dan
Sommer’s view that provision of K&R advice is a humanitarian service GEO/Dan
Sommer’s fees are held at a maximum of $940 per day plus direct incurred expenses.
Many crisis response agents are often former Military Officers, Special Forces or FBI,
CIA, MI5, Special Branch or Police Hostage Negotiators. Beside their local country
experience these K&R agents usually also have extensive experience from troubled
areas with high kidnapping incidences of criminal events such as: Latin America, the
Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe, and the Far East. However, in the last years K&R
Consultants have also come from the ranks of private Security Consultants, often with
an additional background and/or education as counsellors or priests. This is often
highly beneficial to the victim’s family as the need for a “mental holding of hands” is
often necessary and recommended.
The crisis response consultant’s foremost concern is the safety of the victim and
protection of the client’s assets, and the consultancies profess to always remain
sensitive to the client’s wishes, and providing them with their unbiased advice
regarding the situation and negotiations etc. The vast majority of the crisis response
consultants are fortunately genuinely concerned with the victim’s safe return and in
contrast to Hollywood’s stereotype then most are also very warm and charismatic
persons who truly care for the victim and the family.
However, there are those who are also concerned with the ransom amount, simply
because if a paid ransom is higher than the usual or average ransom for a specific type
of victim, then that may set an example or new standard that the kidnappers will
pursue in the future. Please keep in mind that the crisis response agent and his
company are usually aware and well informed about what ransom demands to expect
and what amount is acceptable to pay in the specific country or region. An experienced
K&R Consultants want to keep the final ransom close to that amount or even, if

possible, much less than that. Thus, they will employ lengthy negotiation strategies
that near always lead to the safe return of the victim and the payment of the
“accepted” ransom fee.
Although one can argue that the safe return of the victim for a minimum ransom fee is
obviously, the best solution for everyone involved, including the victim, the family and
the society in general. Then it should be kept in mind, that the victim and the family
would likely have been better off, with a shorter time span of the crisis, even if that
meant paying a higher ransom amount, which the victim after all were insured for.
Thus any victim, be it a company or the family of the victim, should keep in mind that
the agents are not necessarily working directly for them, but could in fact be working
at the best interests of the insurance company that retained them. Not to mention of
course that they also work for a specific response consultancy, that want to ensure it
retains the contract with the insurance company. Thus, there may be incidents where
the negotiations takes longer than actually needed, due to the insurance companies
desire to keep the “average ransom fees” down on a more “profitable” level.
Because, if higher ransom demands are paid often enough, then they will become the
“new standard” paid ransoms and that affects the insurance companies overall profit.
It therefore pays to be realistic about this and realise that K&R crisis response is
primarily an insurance business, and insurance companies are businesses and like any
other business they need to make an annual profit. Thus, their business is based on
ensuring a profitable annual turnover, in accordance with its board and shareholders
business plan. Such plans are beyond doubt based on increasing the value of the
shareholders stocks and annual profits, even if that may inconvenience the victim and
family with a longer than necessary crisis.
Thus the reality is, that the Crisis Responders mission is to recover kidnap victim safely
but at the least possible cost and the insurance companies “encourages” this cost
effectiveness by awarding the kidnap response company a bonus, which increases the
lower the paid ransom fee, is. There are numerous private companies that claim to be
in the kidnap for ransom and extortion business, many of these are merely security
and protection agencies, which look upon crisis response as another opportunity to
cash in on the international and local crime and terrorism incidents. Unfortunately,
then the vast majority of them have no clue about the ins and outs of the industry.
Thus in the real world of “K&R” there are generally speaking only a handful of
companies, who are professionally engaged in the K&R industry.

K&R INDUSTRY TERMS
Abduction A general term to denote the taking away of a person’s
control over his/her movements, by illegal
means/authority, normally with an implicit or explicit
threat
Autosecuestro A case where an employee or private person with kidnap

insurance arranges to be kidnapped in exchange for a
part of the ransom/insurance money
Consultants Fees The Fees and Expenses of the K&R Consultant/s, these
fees should be included as unlimited in the insurance
Extortion A ransom demand made by threat towards a person or

company by issuing a threat to kill, injure or abduct, a
threat to damage property, a threat to contaminate
products, a threat to divulge trade secrets or a threat to
introduce a computer virus, etc.
Hijack Taking control of an aircraft, motor vehicle, railroad train

or waterborne vessel by force or threat
Hostage Taking Taking forceful and illegal control over another person in
order to strengthen one's own bargaining position in
demanding concessions in exchange for the safety and
release of the hostage
Kidnapping Any illegal and forceful removal of a person against his or

her will for the sole purpose of gaining from their release
Legal Liability Includes those costs incurred by any action for damages
brought by or on behalf of an insured person because of
the kidnap incident
Personal Accident The death, loss of limb, loss of sight, loss of extremity or
permanent total disablement of the kidnap victim as a
result of the kidnap incident
Ransom The price pay for the release of the victim, this includes
cash and/or marketable goods submitted by or on behalf
of the Insured in connection with the incident
Surveillance Detection The skill of being alert and able to detect the indicators
of hostile surveillance by noticing suspicious activity of
people/individuals and/or vehicles that appear to
coincide with your movements

Transit The process of delivering the ransom to the kidnappers,
this part is usually covered by the insurance and includes
damage, destruction, disappearance, confiscation or
wrongful abstraction of Ransom while being delivered
(Separate Limit)
Wrongful Detention Wrongful detention is a term for being detained and/or

arrested on false charges or from a misunderstanding, or
mistaken identity; this commonly occurs at airports or
border checkpoints, or at local police or military checks.
This Kidnap & Ransom – Crisis Response Manual is written for Executives and Risk
Managers who might need to purchase special risks cover such as K&R Insurance for
their company. Please, note, that it is a condition of almost all policy providers that
general disclosure of the existence of such insurance cover within or outside the
company can invalidate the policy.
For further information about K&R or any information contained within this K&R
manual, please contact: Dan Sommer – Global Executive Outreach SAL, full contact
details below.
Dan Sommer – Senior Advisor

4CrisisRelief
Storhofdi 15
110 Reykjavik
Iceland
Tel: +354 770 2949
www.4CrisisRelief.org
Global Executive Outreach

Beirut, Lebanon
Tel: +354 663 0552
dan@geo-ops.com
www.geo-ops.com

REFERENCES
i
Briggs, Rachel (2001) The Kidnapping Business: 2. London: Foreign Policy Centre.
ii
Borodzicz, Edward P. (2005) Risk, Crisis and Security Management.
iii
Baktin, M. Michail (1986) [originally 1979] Estetika Slovesnogo Tvortjestva. Moscow: Isskustvo.
iv
Radcliffe, J., quoted in: A. Hagedorn Auerbach (1998), Ransom: The untold story of international
kidnapping: 212. New York.
v
Wilson, J., “Kidnaps for ransom reach worldwide high”. In; The Guardian, April 21, 2000.
vi
Hagedorn Auerbach, A., Ransom: 203-204.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Auerbach, Ann Hagedorn. Ransom: The Untold Story of International Kidnapping. New York: Henry Holt
& Company, 1998.
Crouhy, Michel. Galai, Dan. Mark, Robert. The Essentials of Risk Management. New York: McGraw-Hill
Companies, 2006.
Wright, Richard P. Kidnap for Ransom: Resolving the Unthinkable. Boca Raton: Auerbach Publications,
2009.
Dawood, N. J. The Koran. London: Penguin Group, 2006.
Gottschalk, Jack. Crisis Management. Oxford: Capstone Publishing, 2002.
Sommer, Dan. The SD Agent. Reykjavik: Dan Sommer Consulting, 2005.
Briggs, Rachel. The Kidnapping Business. London: Foreign Policy Centre, 2001.
Borodzicz, E.P. The missing ingredient is the value of flexibility. International Journal of Simulation and
Gaming, 35(3): 414-426, 2004
Borodzicz, Edward P. (2005) Risk, Crisis and Security Management.
Goffman, Erving. 1981.Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
Wadensjö, C. 1992, Interpreting as interaction: On dialogue-interpreting in immigration hearings and

medical encounters. Linköping University.
EISF. (2017) Abduction and Kidnap Risk Management. European Interagency Security Forum (EISF).
Hostage UK – A family’s guide to coping during a kidnapping. www.hostageuk.org / resources

Kidnap and Ransom Crisis Response Manual

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kidnap and Ransom Crisis Response Manual

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

K&R CRISIS RESPONSE GUIDE

DAN SOMMER &

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 2

Objectives of this Manual

The 4 Parties Involved:

The four R’s of a Successful Recovery:

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 3

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 4

Dan Sommer – Counter Terrorism & Crisis Management Consultant 1999-2011.

Historically, kidnapping has been a part of both war and

Thus, it is clear that kidnapping has been used throughout

The necessity of liberating prisoners of war after conflicts

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 5

In Medieval times, it was a common practice during wars

The Spanish Conquistadors later carried the Old-Worlds

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 6

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 7

Diffusing Crisis, Easing Suffering, Bringing Hope

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 8

More than 1000

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 9

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 10

Insurance Companies' K&R Report

However, if research of kidnap cases worldwide is based on those reported in the

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 11

60,0% 55,5% Asia & Pacific

10,0% 4,9% 7,3%

Kidnapping Incidents Jan-Jun 2006 Africa

Asia & Pacific

5,0% 7,4% 5,7%

In 1998 the international “kidnap for ransom industry” was estimated to be

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 12

The Top Ten Countries

Socio-Political Risk Assessment

1. Countries mired in conflicts, ranging from frequent demonstrations up to civil

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 14

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 15

40% Latin America

Individuals at risk in today’s “kidnap for ransom industry” include:

✓ Middle-class citizens living in countries of medium to high risk

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 17

✓ Middle-class citizens living in countries of risk – Case Study:

✓ Business employees and representatives – Case Study:

✓ NGO workers and representatives – Case Study:

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 18

✓ Journalist & News reporters – Case Study:

✓ Expatriates and their families – Case Study:

✓ Business executives – Case Study:

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 19

✓ Wealthy people and their families – Case Study:

✓ Diplomats and dignitaries – Case Study:

✓ Celebrities and families – Case Study:

The Official Response to Kidnappings

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 20

✓ A Greek shipping magnate was ransomed for $44,000,000 in January 2010

©Dan Sommer & Anna E. Jemiolek 2020 – www.4CrisisRelief.org Page 21

✓ ~ 10% $50,000 - $100,000

✓ ~ 40% $100,000 - $500,000

✓ ~ 10% $500,000 - $1,000,000

✓ ~ 15% $1,000,000 - $5,000,000

✓ < 0.3% $5,000,000 +

Motivations for Kidnappings

100% 92% Kidnap for Ransom

80% Kidnap for Propaganda