Past examples of negotiations w/ terrorists proving successful?

I have a debate for school where I have to argue that the US should negotiate w/ terrorists or terrorist states. I have some pretty solid points but I was wondering if anyone knew about any examples where terrorist negotiations turned out best for the country that engaged in negotiation. I vaguely know somehting about N Ireland's troubles and consequent peace, but I'd like some more examples, if there are any.


Look, I didn't choose the side I got it was assigned to me so all this stuff about "don't negotiate w/ terrorrist" isn't really helping me. I'm just looking for any examples, no matter how ambiguous; i doubt the opposing ppl will have full extensive knowledge of stuff like "hostage situation off ethiopia"

11 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Okay, negotiations with "terrorist" usually give time to the strongest player to eventually handle the problem in some way. The "terrorist" doesn't win just because negotiations take place, like too many imply. The US had negotiated with the PLO, the Taliban, North Korea, Iran, or whoever else you want to use as a definition of "terrorist". Negotiations happen and at the end of the day the strongest side does what they do. Police negotiate with criminals until the police accomplish their aims. The US didn't just blow up the Somalian pirates without consideration, they conveyed that no deals would be made, messages were exchanged, time was taken, then the US acted. The US negotiated with the Nazis and Imperial Japanese to surrender. The US negotiated with "terrorist" in Iraq to turn them against others. Negotiations work for the strongest player, buying time is not defeat. Negotiating is not copitulating.

  • L.T.M.
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    If the opposing team is mostly male then just wear the outfit in your pic up there and you'll win hands down.

    Seriously, I think "lonesome" before me nailed it. That's the smart way of using negotiations. The latest rescue of the captain by our Navy Seals is a great example to use.

    Of course that is more of a stalling tactic than an actual negotiation.

    If you study how Israel has handled situations in the past you can learn a lot. Here's a link to an operation called ( The raid on Entebbe ) that was very successful given the circumstances..

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Iran-Contra concluded in the successful release of six hostages from Lebanon. The scandal of course cost the US an untold amount of "good will".

    I would submit that negotiating with terrorists never really ends well if it strengthens the terrorist organization, and causes unjustifiable cost to the country that engaged in the negotiations.

  • Usually, right after a lopsided military engagement the terrorist's sponsors barely survive, there have been successful "negotiations." For example, Libya has been essentially NO trouble ever since we very nearly killed it's leader.

    Otherwise, not so much.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    How about the Colonial Wars and the Colonization of America? Could we consider the British to be terrorists against America's Independence and freedom from British rule? It would be an interesting debate! Likewise, the "Americanization" of America from the Indians. Would not the French, Spanish, and British be considered terrorists against those that were already living here prior to their arrival?

  • 1 decade ago

    I think arguing the history of the subject will sink your position, there are little to no sucessful negotiations with terrorists in our brief history as well as the history of the world. What you may be able to argue is the nature, ethics and morality of the situation, research crisis intervention techniques used by police and SWAT negotiators and how they can sucessfully defuse situations and how their practices may be able to be expanded to a global level.

  • 1 decade ago

    Reagan sold 10,000 TOW missiles to Iran to buy the freedom of six American hostages in Beirut.

    You could also use the recent payment of ransoms to Somali pirates. They can be classified as terrorists because they started seizing ships to protest the dumping of toxic wastes in their fishing grounds and the overfishing of their waters by international trawlers

  • 1 decade ago


    The "recent hostage situation off the Coast of Ethiopia (?)" was determined by a valiant group of United States Navy Seals and the Captain and Crew of the Battleship U.S.S. Bainbridge that moved into position despite being ordered NOT TO.

    Were it not for them - our folks would have been killed by children with M-16's or, more likely, AK-47's larger than themselves.

    They place NO value on human life - including their own.

    There is NO successful negotiating with TERRORISTS.

    I appreciate your position - it's not one I envy. Boos to your teacher for making you do this.

    I know of NONE in current times.

    There are examples of SOLDIERS agreeing to cease hostilities in order to remove their wounded - that kind of stuff. Would that be acceptable?

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The recent hostage situation off the coast of Ethiopia.

  • 1 decade ago

    looks like you are on the wrong side ot the battle, terrorists are basically criminals who will do or say anything to get what they want.the only reason to possibly consider negotiating with them would be to appease third parties. they are not interested in the slightest in negotiating, they only use it as a tool to get concessions then continue with their tactics.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.