1. KIDNAPPING & HOSTAGES
A CHALLENGING NEW DYNAMIC
CRISISRESPONSEVOL :1 1 | ISSUE:3 | MARCH 2016 WWW.C R I SI S-RESPO NSE.CO M J O U R N A L
PLUS: Interoperability; Family support during victim identification;
Mass casualty management lessons from Paris incidents;
Critical space infrastructure and security; Displacement crisis in
Europe; Insider threats to critical national infrastructure

2. 22 Resources, links, pictures, videos and much more are available for subscribers in our digital and online editions www.crisis-response.com2
Editor in Chief
Emily Hough
emily@crisis-response.com
Business Development
Jeffrey Montgomery
jeff@crisis-response.com
Chief Scientific Editor
Ian Portelli, PhD, Msc
ian@crisis-response.com
Urban Resilience Editor
Andy Marshall
andy@crisis-response.com
Design and Production
Tim Baggaley
www.graphicviolence.co.uk
Subscriptions and Administration
Emma Wayt
emma.wayt@crisis-response.com
Web Administration
Rhys Jones
rhys@crisis-response.com
Director
Colin Simpson
colin.simpson@crisis-response.com
Subscriptions
Crisis Response Journal is published quarterly; it is
available by subscription in hard copy, digital and online
Tel: +44 (0) 208 1661690; subs@crisis-response.com
Back issues
Existing subscribers: £25 (US$45; €36) per hard copy
issue (free with online access);
Non subscribers: £40 (US$72; €58) per issue
Tel: +44 (0) 208 1661690;
backissues@crisis-response.com
Published by Crisis Response Journal Ltd
PO Box 6269, Thatcham, RG19 9JX, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 208 1661690; mail@crisis-response.com
www.crisis-response.com
COPYRIGHT Crisis Response Journal Ltd 2015
Articles published in may not be reproduced
in any form without prior written permission
Printed in England by Buxton Press
ISSN 1745-8633
www.crisis-response.com
join the CRJ LinkedIn group
follow us on twitter @editorialcrj
March 2016 | vol:11 | issue:3
contents
News ���������������������������������������������������������������4
Comment���������������������������������������������������������8
Features
Resilience in informal settlements����������������10
It is vital to understand the self-regulating dynamic of
informal settlements, contends Evgenia Mitroliou
World Civil Defence Day��������������������������������13
ICDO President Vladimir Kuvshinov’s message
to the global civil defence community
Flood response in Georgia�����������������������������14
Last year Tbilisi suffered devastating floods
that killed 22 people and hundreds of animals
from the Georgian capital’s zoo
Interoperability utopia������������������������������������16
The word interoperability doesn’t necessarily flow easily
from the lips, which is analogous to the difficulty of
achieving it in practice, according to Brian Dillon
Why do we still make the same mistakes?����18
Corporations and businesses have crisis procedures
in place, yet they often seem to forget what they have
learnt when crisis strikes, says Caroline Sapriel
INGO kidnap – a challenging new dynamic ���20
Andrew Brown traces how fatalities and lawsuits have
improved response and negotiation in kidnapping, arguing
that these pressures also apply to INGOs and NGOs
Incident analysis
The Bacha Khan University attack�����������������24
Four gunmen stormed the Bacha Khan University in
Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, killing 21 people and
injuring another 22. Luavut Zahid visits the scene
Support in victim identification processes�����27
How responders can help families to reduce trauma during
identification processes, by Erik de Soir and Emily Hough
Earthquake public preparedness�������������������30
Gillian Dacey looks at the challenge of convincing people
to take earthquake preparedness activities seriously
Conflict and displacement
Iraq’s mental healthcare crisis����������������������32
As the violence in Iraq continues, mental health needs
require careful and urgent attention, says Alys Brown
Sexual violence in conflict�����������������������������34
Understanding how, why, if and when sexual violence is
used is central to understanding and responding to armed
conflict, contend Dr Dyan Mazurana and Phoebe Donne
Mass sexual abuse: Portent of wider crisis?�38
Lina Kolesnikova and Emily Hough examine
how an increase in sexual attacks could be in
danger of damaging European cohesion
Displacement crisis in Europe�����������������������40
Much has been facilitated, enabled and achieved
to respond to the emergency looming on Europe’s
doorstep, explain Lisa Hastert and Marcia Kammitsi
The border security paradigm �����������������������42
Dr Attila Freska Attila Freska outlines strategic security
imperatives when seeking effective control of frontiers
in an age of porous borders and global radicalisation
Picking up the pieces: UXO in Syria���������������44
James Le Mesurier and Ethan Wilson describe
training and equipment to help the White Helmets
assist the civilian communities of Syria
University attack in Pakistan p24Floods in Georgia p14
EMA Georgia Luavut Zahid

3. 3join the CRJ LinkedIn group follow us on twitter @editorialcrj Crisis Response Journal 11:3 | March 2016 3join the CRJ LinkedIn group follow us on twitter @editorialcrj
CRISISRESPONSE
Cover story: INGOs and kidnap
Cover illustration: Nick Lowndes
Urban services in armed conflict�������������������46
Some 50 million people are affected by armed conflict in
urban areas, with effects that go beyond the visible signs
of destruction, say Michael Talhami and colleagues
UNISDR science event
The North Atlantic and weather extremes������50
Dr Aurélie Duchez and colleagues look at connecting the
dots between climate change, extreme weather and health
The Aral Sea disaster�������������������������������������53
Dr Abror Gadaev and colleagues from Uzbekistan present
possible sustainable solutions to the Aral Sea disaster
Simulation aids training in Japan������������������56
Dr Sonoe Mashino describes Japanese university
collaboration on a disaster nursing global leadership
programme, and the technology it utilises
Medical response
Europe’s emergency medical corps���������������58
The EU’s Medical Corps will mobilise medical teams
and equipment to emergencies, writes Monique Pariat
Casualty management in counter-terror �������60
Emergency medical support specialists from France’s
counterterrorist tactical unit, RAID, look at lessons learnt
Technology
CRJ RD: First responder safety�������������������64
Ian Portelli, Megan Mantaro and colleagues present
possible solutions to firefighter fatalities
Critical space infrastructure and security������66
Dr Liviu Mureșan and Alexandru Georgescu
discuss the complex evolution of space systems
and potential future vulnerabilities
The ripple effect of insider threat attacks������72
Ryan Meeks considers resilient critical
national infrastructure in the age of connected
systems within the Internet of Things
Social media analysis tools���������������������������78
It is important to integrate social media into
emergency management practices, say Hayley
Watson, Susan Anson and Kush Wadhwa. But
don’t be daunted, there are tools to help
Spatial information sharing���������������������������82
Ivan Baehr provides an overview of how spatial information
for humanitarian response has developed, as well as
the challenges in implementing this technology
Innovation in crisis����������������������������������������86
The EU-funded Driver project aims to valorise European
innovation and science in crisis management by assessing
and delivering solutions for crisis management
Hover power��������������������������������������������������88
Dr Dave Sloggett examines the ways that helicopters
provide assistance to people in disaster stricken
areas and the vital role that they perform
In Depth
Legal liability in nuclear accidents����������������90
Effective decision-making records�����������������92
Regulars
Events������������������������������������������������������������94
Books�������������������������������������������������������������96
Looking back��������������������������������������������������97
Frontline���������������������������������������������������������98
Emily Hough speaks to Dr Martina C Fuchs
of the Real Medicine Foundation
T
he geopolitical
aspects of the
global migration
crisis currently appear
to be overshadowing
those of climate-related
issues and human-caused
technological disasters.
The world is possibly
experiencing its worst refugee crisis ever:
around 60 million people around the globe have
fled their homes, displaced by conflict, violence
or persecution. Predictably, the main – though
by no means exclusive – cause of this exodus
is conflict, whose attendant effects extend far
beyond the communities directly involved.
Eighty-six per cent of the world’s refugees
are being sheltered by developing countries,
says the UNHCR. Mass migration of this
scale is an immensely difficult situation to
manage with dignity and humanity in any
circumstances. The situation in Europe in
particular appears to be in danger of spawning
far wider consequences, exposing fault lines
in European unity and politics, possibly
threatening the cohesion of its societies.
This is particularly true with regard to
the controversial subject of integration,
where public sympathy for refugees has
suffered some erosion after incidents of
sexual attacks and harassment (page 38).
Our article on page 40 looks at how the
European Commission is co-ordinating
requests for assistance from those countries
at the frontline of the crisis, while possible
solutions in terms of border control
technology are outlined on page 42.
In case we needed any reminder of why so
many people are making the dangerous journey
to what they hope will be a safe haven, the
article on page 44 reports on the staggering
levels of UXO dropped onto civilian communities
by airstrikes in Syria, while page 46 looks
at the detrimental effect of conflict on urban
services. And lest we forget the psychological
impacts of war, its effects on mental health are
examined in the article on page 32, while sexual
violence in conflict is discussed on page 34.
So this is how the narrative of this edition of
CRJ has been shaped – we can only present the
briefest snapshot into how the trauma of conflict
not only causes near-inconceivable suffering to
those who are directly caught up in it, but also
how its effects inevitably seep across borders
into neighbouring countries and far beyond.
Emily Hough
ICRC US Navy | Virginia Tech
Services in urban conflict p46 RD: First responder safety p64
comment
3

4. 20
I
nternational Non Governmental Organisations (INGOs) work in
some of the world’s most hostile environments, but the very
people who bring aid to people in need are increasingly being
targeted for kidnap. Abducted from their humanitarian work, many
are held over varying periods of time and are sometimes released
through ransom payments or high-risk rescue operations.
The provision of pre-deployment preparation, in-field support
and post-mission debrief by INGOs has come under judicial scrutiny
recently and set a precedent for litigation by humanitarian workers.
INGOs intentionally distance themselves from government policy
and politics, so there is a tendency for them not to be the main
focus of politically-motivated kidnap. Their personnel are, however,
increasingly being targeted by terrorist and organised crime groups
in kidnap for ransom; they are often no longer viewed as a sacrosanct
commodity to help recovery from conflict and humanitarian crises.
Kidnap for ransom has developed significantly since 75 BC,
when Julius Caesar was kidnapped by Cilician pirates in the
Aegean Sea. Kidnapping has been increasingly used by terrorist
and organised crime groups today as an effective source of
revenue to fund further illegal acts and to purchase weaponry.
Kidnappers’ tactics are increasingly dynamic, sophisticated
and complex, exposing some INGOs as being ill equipped to deal
with such matters, especially those affected by missionary zeal.
Negotiation in response to hostage taking has a long history, which
can be traced back to 168 BC when Polybius, the son of Lycortas, a
Greek Governor, was kidnapped, taken to Rome and held for 17 years.
More recently, the 1970s exposed the ill prepared nature of
law enforcement response to incidents of terrorism and hijacking.
Authors such as McMains Mullins cite the Attica prison riot
of 1971 in the US and the Munich Olympic Games of 1972 as
perhaps two pivotal incidents where traditional police tactics led to
significant loss of life and reputational damage to the authorities.
This, in turn, led to the development of “... the soft negotiation
approach to conflict rather than the hard, tactical approach.”
Harvey Schlossberg, a detective with a PhD in psychology,
and Lieutenant Frank Bolz, then both serving members of the
New York Police Department (NYPD), developed the need and
desire for a negotiation strategy to crisis and hostage incidents
in a police culture where tactical intervention was invariably
considered as the first and only option. These two police
officers established the first hostage recovery programme.
Shortly thereafter, the NYPD had the opportunity to test
this new approach in the Williamsburg incident of January 19,
1973 at John and Al’s Sporting Goods Store in New York City.
This incident saw a change in strategy when dealing with the
four armed robbers who had taken hostages within the store:
“In which emotions were running high on both sides, the more
controlled, slower and less reactive approach proved successful
in the sense that no other people were killed or wounded.”
This incident provided testimony to the new concept, thus
demonstrating the benefits of negotiating over tactical intervention
where armed force is used to conclude such incidents.
Through the auspices of its Special Operations and
Research Unit (SOARU), the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) proceeded to develop the NYPD training model to
become a national training programme and one which
was subsequently adopted by the Metropolitan Police in
London, UK and more widely among UK police forces.
The 1980s saw the emphasis in negotiation move from
INGO kidnap –
a challenging
new dynamic
Andrew Brown traces how fatalities and
subsequent lawsuits against law enforcement
and shipping companies have improved
response and hostage negotiation in
kidnapping and piracy, arguing that these
pressures now also apply to INGOs

5. 21 Crisis Response Journal 11:3 | March 2016
intervening only in hostage incidents to responding to
incidents involving emotionally disturbed individuals,
trapped criminals and domestic incidents. Research into
this law enforcement tactic began to develop further.
The efforts of McMains Mullins have to be regarded as the
foundation on which an informed basis for negotiating has been
developed, as their work collates the experiences of a number of
negotiators from across the US, and establishes central themes in
a clear and concise manner. Although this work is well constructed
and detailed, it lacks academic rigour, has frequent anecdotal
reference to case studies and uses scripted dialogues in training
scenarios to evidence many of the points under discussion. Yet,
negotiations rarely – if ever – follow a script, so this approach
is therefore of limited value as an in depth examination.
Feldmann admits: “Relatively little scientific data exists
on the characteristics of negotiator incidents,” in his 2001
analysis and categorisation of 120 incidents involving some 144
perpetrators. It is in his examination of a number of other areas,
however, that issues begin to emerge with regard to this work. He
included figures on whether or not demands were made during
incidents, although the definition of a ‘demand’ was unclear.
A demand is commonly understood in negotiating training circles
to refer to a variety of circumstances including the: Forceful request
for commodities; the release of political prisoners; movement of
police cordons; and money. Consequently, Feldman’s research is
severely limited as a basis for achieving reliable data, particularly as
this limitation was also replicated in other aspects of his research.
Within the UK, the field of hostage and crisis negotiation remains
shrouded in secrecy and misunderstanding for two predominant
reasons. First, this is partly down to its close connection at an
advanced level with national counter terrorist response. Second,
it pertains to the fact that negotiators closely protect their training
and tactics from other police officers, the courts and the media.
Specialist response
More recently, Rogan Lanceley reviewed the work of both
American and European law enforcement agency negotiation
experts. In their conclusions they recognise the need for a greater
research focus on actual negotiations and an investigation of
the various human interactions in dynamic, fast moving critical
incidents. Additionally, they highlight the requirement for closer
collaboration between practitioners and those in the academic world,
to provide knowledge to academics and advanced techniques to
practitioners that is realistic and, therefore, of applied relevance.
In essence the response to hostage taking, whether domestic
or international, is a specialist one, where the skills of the
negotiator can: Keep the situation calm; gain valuable intelligence;
buy time; build rapport with the hostage takers; and, in many
cases, successfully secure the safe release of hostages.
Negotiation tactics established in the 1970s continue to be
effective globally in influencing people’s behaviour during a
crisis incident, but only achieve this through the commitment
of this specialist group to learn continually through sharing
experiences and tapping into applied academic research.
The International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages
was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1979. Article One
clearly defines: “Any person who seizes or detains and threatens
to kill, to injure or to detain another person (hereinafter referred
to as the ‘hostage’) in order to compel a third party, namely,
personnel security
Everett | Rex | Shutterstock

6. As predicted, litigation has now
crept into the INGO and NGO world
22 Resources, links, pictures, videos and much more are available for subscribers in our digital and online editions www.crisis-response.com
a state, an international intergovernmental organisation, a
natural or juridical person, or a group of persons to do or abstain
from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the
release of the hostages commits the offence of taking of hostages
(‘hostage taking’) within the meaning of this Convention.”
This means: “Any person who: Attempts to commit an act of
hostage-taking; Participates as an accomplice of anyone who
commits or attempts to commit an act of hostage taking; or Likewise
commits an offence for the purposes of this Convention.”
As we can see, the 1970s was a time for the international
community not only to respond to the rise in hostage taking, but to
review the tactics of hostage/crisis negotiation, designed to reduce
the likelihood of injury or death to
hostages while gaining valuable
intelligence on the hostage takers,
with a view to a consequent judicial
process for the perpetrators.
The 52 Americans taken
hostage in Tehran, Iran, in
November 1979 and held until January 1980, struggled to cope
with the ordeal. Concern from their families and others led US
Congress to enact legislation in 1980, designed to make the
hostages and their families eligible for the same kind of benefits
afforded to prisoners of war and soldiers missing in action
during the Vietnam conflict, including their dependents.
The Hostage Relief Act did not provide cash payments to hostages
or their families, but provided benefits in various other formats,
leading to an expectation that hostages would be compensated.
The UK introduced the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate
Homicide Act in 2007 to hold organisations to account for
employee’s duty of care and defined the offence as: “An organisation
to which this section applies is guilty of an offence if the way
in which its activities are managed or organised – causes a
person’s death, and amounts to a gross breach of a relevant
duty of care owed by the organisation to the deceased.”
This specific piece of legislation, derived more from a health
and safety background, was implemented to ensure that employers
paid due regard to the safety of their employees who predominately
worked in environments where risk mitigation was a daily task.
More recently, we need only look at the case of the crew of the
MV Maersk Alabama – portrayed in the Hollywood blockbuster
Captain Phillips – based on the Somali pirate attack on the vessel
and the subsequent hostage rescue of Captain Phillips by the US
Navy Seals. The crew, traumatised by the event, filed lawsuits in
the US, arguing that despite clear warnings, Captain Phillips and
Maersk Line chose to send the crew into an area of known Somali
pirate activity to save money on shipping costs. The Maersk
Alabama was neither armed nor protected at the time of the 2009
attack and the crew also claimed that they were unguarded and
unprotected in dangerous waters, with no way to defend themselves
against the heavily armed criminals who boarded the vessel.
Thus began the era of piracy litigation, where former
seafarer hostages, aggrieved at their employers’ decisions,
took civil action in search of damages for both the physical
and mental injuries they sustained during captivity.
As predicted, litigation has now crept into the INGO and NGO
world with the recent case of Steve Dennis. Working for the INGO
Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), Dennis was abducted during a
field trip to a refugee camp at Dadaab, Kenya on Friday, June 29,
2012. He and his colleagues were violently taken hostage at gunpoint
and forcefully taken into Somalia. The team’s driver was shot dead
and Dennis also sustained gunshot wounds. On the fourth day of
their captivity, all hostages were rescued in another violent gunfight.
NRC undertook both internal and external reviews of its security
processes in the aftermath. Unsatisfied that anyone was being
held to account, Dennis sought damages through legal recourse.
The relationship between him and his former employer had
broken down, resulting in a David and Goliath legal battle. However,
on November 25, 2015, the Oslo District Court awarded Dennis
compensation for financial and non-financial loss. The court found
that NRC was grossly negligent in regard to the safeguarding of
staff during the visit of the Secretary General in Dadaab in 2012.
To conclude, the significant change in law enforcement tactics
from immediate armed intervention to the introduction of hostage/
crisis negotiation as a tactic, has greatly reduced risk and saved
countless lives. This change was brought about by numerous deaths
and subsequent lawsuits against law enforcement agencies.
There has been a similar trend in the approach to tackling
piracy: improved intelligence, better security measures, best
practice for shipping and a collaboration among global agencies
in reducing the incidence of this type of hostage taking, which
has also been subject to litigation by former hostages.
Now that INGOs and NGOs have been subjected to similar
pressures, they require a security culture that is embedded and
integrated properly within their organisations to reduce the divide
between policy and practice in their humanitarian operations to keep
their staff safe.
References:
■■ Alexander, DA and Klein, S (2009): Kidnapping and
hostage taking: a review of effects, coping and resilience; The
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 102: 16-21;
■■ Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate
Homicide Act 2007, Chapter 19;
■■ Feldmann, TB (2001): Implications for Negotiation Strategies
and Training; The Journal of Police Crisis Negotiations, 1: 3-33;
■■ Hatcher, C et al (1998): The Role of the
Psychologist in Crisis/Hostage Negotiations; Behavioral
Science and the Law. 16(4): 455-472;
■■ Hostage Relief Act 1980;
■■ International Convention against the taking of hostages
(1979): General Assembly of the United Nations;
■■ Kennett, RJ (2009): Implications for the Selection and
Training of Hostage Negotiators through an analysis of Hostage
Negotiation Data; Unpublished DEd Thesis, University of Hull, UK;
■■ McMains, M and Mullins, C (2001): Crisis Negotiations, managing
critical incidents and hostage situations in law enforcement and
corrections; Second edition, Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing;
■■ Rogan, R Lanceley, F (2010): Contemporary
Theory, Research and Practice of Crisis and Hostage
Negotiation, New Jersey: Hampton Press.
Author
Chief Inspector
Andrew B Brown is
an internationally
recognised negotiator with
specialist knowledge and
experience in dealing with
hostage/crisis incidents
particularly within a maritime
environment and in designing
conflict de-escalation skills for
military operations. He is a
Member of CRJ’s Editorial
Advisory Panel
personnel security

7. IN PRINT | DIGITAL | ONLINE
CRISISRESPONSE
The Crisis Response Journal is
available by subscription only
Subscribers receive our quarterly
hard copy, along with iPad or
Android tablet version. A
full archive of all past and
current articles is also
available to all subscribers
Choose the right
subscription plan for
you, from Individual Full,
Digital Only, Institutional
Corporate or Student
Visit our website
for around-the-
clock news, blogs
and events updates
www.crisis-response.com