Tran 1

Kenny Tran

ENGL 1102-010

March 12, 2014

Literature Review

I’ve always been a fan of a situation that causes an intense feeling. When people aren’t sure about

what will happen next or even have the slightest prediction of the next sequence of event, I think it’s

fascinating how people can really have a lot of interest in a thriller situation. Even when they weren’t

interested in an intense situation at first, they end up wanting to know more information about it in the

end because they either hear about it all the time, and then actually find interest in it or they just took a

shot at understanding what was going on and really liked it. Hostage situations are probably one of the

most interesting forms of causing an intense reaction because people are worried and want to ensure

hostages are safe, especially if they know the person. When a person is close with someone involved in a

hostage situation, they freak out and have anxiety since all they want is peace and a positive outcome for

the situation. I will be discussing some key terms and topics pertaining to hostage negotiations.

Terms:

Hostages: I define hostages as people/things used as a part of a negotiator for reasons of obtaining

material things or primary/secondary resources. David Ansen (2000) states how hostage negotiations are

used in films and what makes people really want to watch them. When there’s a scene where someone is

about to get murdered for a specific ransom, it is called K&R (kidnap and ransom). Hostage negotiations

like those don’t just happen in movies, but in reality too. Hostages are mainly those that are helpless and

can’t do anything to help the situation get better. They are just an object used to help someone or an

organization receive a favor.

Inner Perimeter: This would be the people who are neutral and are just trying to find common

ground. They are the negotiators who try to meet the desired needs and wants of the person

1

Tran 2

holding the hostage. Dominick Misino (2002) states that it is the subject area that separates all of

the unnecessary police personnel from the immediate danger area.

Outer Perimeter: This is the people that don’t really have an important role in the situation.

They aren’t involved and should stay out of trouble regarding this hostage negotiation. Dominick

Misino states that it is line that separates the civilian population from the dangers of the incident.

Expressive Demands: These demands are those that involve feelings towards a specific person

or event that causes a person to hold someone hostage to get an answer or response to a request.

This happens often, especially in other countries where they want things to go their way, and hold

hostages from other countries to prove how they really feel about a situation. Michael McMains

and Wayman Mullins (2010), authors of the book “Crisis Negotiations: Managing Critical

Incidents and Hostage Situations in Law Enforcement and Corrections”, describes this as

demands that involve the need to express intense emotion.

Substantive Demands: Michael McMains and Wayman Mullins states that these are demands

that are tangible and can be traded. I believe this happens as much as expressive demands, but it

isn’t a bigger problem. Things, such as money and jewelry, are negotiable trades for a hostage.

The only thing hostage holders really want is money and power. I’ve seen this type of demand

often in films.

Ultimate bargaining game

Many people are involved in a hostage situation, but only a significant few actually matter to help

determine the outcome of the event. Robert Shuppa, Pamela Schmittb, and Kurtis Swope (2005) call this

the ultimate bargaining game. The hostage, criminal, and negotiator are the only three characters and they

are important throughout the negotiation process. The negotiator and the criminal mainly converse with

each other to find common ground and meet each others’ need. The hostage is in danger at all times, so

anything they do can get them killed. Everybody else, civilians and policemen, aren’t important in this

ultimate game because they don’t understand the situation. In Dominick Missino’s article (2010), there is

2

Tran 3

a man name Hector that’s holding his wife hostage, and the only person that could help save her is the

negotiator. The negotiator’s intention isn’t to put the hostage in any more danger than they already are or

to make the criminal feel uneasy, so he bargained with the criminal until he found something that suits his

wants, and that would be to spend more time with daughter.

Foreign Disputation

Anne Nivat (2010) is a French Journalist who was once “kid-napped” or taken hostage because

she entered a country (Chechnya) that doesn’t really like outsiders who don’t have proper identification.

Internationally, countries use hostages from other countries to get what they want. It doesn’t’ surprise me

that countries would actually hold people hostage to show their dominance and power. Iraq had people

from other countries holding operations in their county without consent (Fisher 2004). As a result, they

held two of their men hostage, stating that if they don’t leave Iraq and move their operations elsewhere,

they will murder both of the hostages.

Holding people hostage is probably the best option a country could choose to get their point

across. I’m not saying that it’s a beneficial technique; it just seems like that is what it will come to if a

country doesn’t get what they demand. I don’t believe it is right at all because a person’s life has nothing

to do with a foreign dispute. Innocent people shouldn’t have to be involved with the countries’ problem

no matter what the situation is. I think it is crazy how countries will actually hold a person hostage

because another country didn’t pay-off their complete debt (Blackwell Publishing 2009). As a result, I

don’t believe anyone is safe.

Hostage Safety

The main goal of a hostage situation at all times should be to keep the hostage safe. The

negotiator has to ensure that no matter what is being offered, the hostage should be as far away from

danger as possible (Yue-bing 2010). They have to make the criminal believe that the chances of them

getting what they want are high. This will ensure that the hostage won’t be harmed because the criminal is

getting closer to what they desire. It is interesting how far a negotiator has to go just to make sure

3

Tran 4

someone’s life is protected. Criminals will do anything to get what they want, as if they don’t have a

heart.

4