8

WikiLeaks confirms ransom paid for Robert Fowler and Louis Guay


 

Robert Fowler and Louis Guay were held captive by al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb for five months before they were released. Stephen Harper denied that Canada paid a ransom. He did not deny that other countries might have on Canada’s behalf. The Globe has the WikiLeaks story. I reported similar details in April 2009. Here and here.


 

WikiLeaks confirms ransom paid for Robert Fowler and Louis Guay

  1. So Canada has an unknown benefactor….someone who, out of the goodness of their heart…..

  2. So Canada has an unknown benefactor….someone who, out of the goodness of their heart…..

  3. Odds are, some day we'll find out a country receiving financial aid was quietly requested to redirect some of it on our behalf.

  4. Odds are, some day we'll find out a country receiving financial aid was quietly requested to redirect some of it on our behalf.

  5. The probability that ransom was paid for the release for Robert Fowler and Louis Guay after their kidnapping in the Maghreb in 2008 has always been high. The major question has been in regards to the avenues by which the exchange (money for life) took place and whether indirect cooperation alters the ethical considerations of negotiating with illicit factions.

    Stephen Harper was probably truthful in his assertion that that Canada did not partake in any direct exchange. Indeed, following the obvious logic that negotiating with illegal entities only breeds illicit behavior and popularizes attacks on Canadians is pretty sound. Assuming Canada would like to prevent attacks on its own nationals, direct negotiation would be a clear violation of logic. However, does intervention via Libyan and American officials provide any less encouragement for al Quaeda groups operating in North Africa? Does the status of Fowler and Guay as UN professionals make a deal any less ethically dubious?

  6. On one level, ransom paid, regardless of the bank account from which it comes, sets a scary precedent for future kidnappings which have and continue to occur regularly. At the same time, to abandon UN representatives at the hands of al-Quaeda doesn't exactly send a desired message either.

    Is there an appropriate response?

  7. The probability that ransom was paid for the release for Robert Fowler and Louis Guay after their kidnapping in the Maghreb in 2008 has always been high. The major question has been in regards to the avenues by which the exchange (money for life) took place and whether indirect cooperation alters the ethical considerations of negotiating with illicit factions.

    Stephen Harper was probably truthful in his assertion that that Canada did not partake in any direct exchange. Indeed, following the obvious logic that negotiating with illegal entities only breeds illicit behavior and popularizes attacks on Canadians is pretty sound. Assuming Canada would like to prevent attacks on its own nationals, direct negotiation would be a clear violation of logic. However, does intervention via Libyan and American officials provide any less encouragement for al Quaeda groups operating in North Africa? Does the status of Fowler and Guay as UN professionals make a deal any less ethically dubious?

  8. On one level, ransom paid, regardless of the bank account from which it comes, sets a scary precedent for future kidnappings which have and continue to occur regularly. At the same time, to abandon UN representatives at the hands of al-Quaeda doesn't exactly send a desired message either.

    Is there an appropriate response?

Sign in to comment.