The reaction of the President Zelensky understandable desire to save the lives of the hostages. But to treat the actions of the Ukraine must like the exception that proves the General line.
What motivates terrorists in a hostage situation? How to evaluate the reaction of the Ukrainian authorities on the drama in luck? This DW asked the expert of the International centre for counter terrorism (ICCT) in the Hague, Romano van Ark.
DW: Ms. van Ark, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky agreed to fulfill the demands of terrorists who seized hostages in Lutsk, and recorded a video message. How do you evaluate it?
Blush van Ark: the resolution of the UN Security Council 1904 of 2009 requires States parties to prevent the payment of ransoms, directly or indirectly, groups or persons considered as terrorists according to the definitions of the UN. In 2013 year, according to the resolution, the G8 countries clearly rejected the possibility of such payments. In this context, the reaction of the President of Ukraine is unusual and quite atypical. However, according to the requirements (of a terrorist. – Ed.) do not touch the question of the payment of money. Saving lives was the main consideration (authorities in Kiev. – Ed.), therefore, this reaction is probably understandable in these specific circumstances. But to treat this is necessary as the exception that proves the General line.
– What usually motivates the attacker to commit such crimes as armed hostage situation?
– There is no single answer. Motives can be different: from personal to ideological, political or even a combination of the two, all three or even more motives. The intention, in itself, is extremely difficult to investigate and prove – as in the case of standard crimes like murder, and in the case of terrorism or in support of such. In connection with these difficulties, particularly in the context of terrorist activities, there is often a need for joint investigation by intelligence agencies and the police.
– The hostage in luck was known to law enforcement. It is reported that before he was convicted, in particular, for robbery and unlawful use of a weapon. Was it possible to prevent drama?
– Unfortunately, even in the case when the suspect is in the field of security services and police, and conducted investigative actions, it is very difficult to predict whether carried out by a terrorist act, and if so, when. The fact that people in the past could commit a crime, radicalized or begin to adhere to extremist views, does not mean that one day he will commit himself or to pander to the Commission of a terrorist act. It is important to establish whether the security services and the police potential for action, in which these events (hostage-taking. – Ed.) could have been prevented. Here can be a useful investigation against the terrorist, exploded a bomb at the stadium “Manchester arena” (in 2017. – Ed.), and the report of the Commission of the British Parliament. It is, for example, the adoption of measures against persons found or in contact with extremists, abruptly changed his behavior, including social networks, and so on.
Some analysts believe that the media attention and publicity can inspire others to commit similar crimes. Do you agree with this?
There is always a chance that after high-profile events and publications on crimes and terrorism can occur more attempts to carry out attacks. Scientists often think of terrorist acts of political theater, because criminals and related group looking for broad public stage to spread their views and ideologies. The media, not simply to preserve the balance – report about the course of events, without providing the rostrum attackers. That’s because the approach (Prime Minister of New Zealand. – Ed.) Jacinda Ardern, which focused on the victims of the attack in Christchurch, but refused to name the attacker, won praise among the academic community and among practitioners.
Law enforcement officers