Bringing Americans Home

This is a hard week to find bipartisanship and a humble, reflective U.S. government tackling the most emotionally challenging problems, but here is that story.

Over the last four years, the government has made real progress to improve the lives of families affected by hostage-taking and deaths. It’s a story that shows rare continuity from the Obama to the Trump administrations, as well as a significant change in American policy.

After the loss of James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Peter Kassig, and Kayla Mueller at the hands of ISIS in a span of about six months, the Obama administration knew something had to change. In a speech unveiling a “comprehensive review” of U.S. hostage policy in 2015, Obama called the situation “totally unacceptable.”

And in a recent report, produced by the James W. Foley Legacy Foundation (JWFLF) in partnership with New America, author Cynthia Loertscher recounts how the policy was changed and how unusual the process of the change itself has been. The report is the first non-governmental assessment of U.S. hostage policy since the enactment of Presidential Policy Directive 30 (PPD-30) in 2015, which called for “a broad reorganization of personnel and intelligence-sharing in federal hostage recovery efforts.” It also created the Hostage Recovery Fusion Cell (HRFC), which “represents the government’s unified approach to recovering American hostages abroad—and its commitment to support the families whose loved ones are being held captive.”

Through interviews with 27 former hostages, detainees, and family members, the report assessed the results of PPD-30 on the people affected most by the policy. Though Loertscher made multiple recommendations for further hostage policy improvements, thus far, the results have been largely positive.

Prior to PPD-30, hostage families felt that the State Department was “useless,” and that “families were left in the dark,” according to Loertscher’s report. One interviewee said, “I felt the U.S. government had just abandoned us.”

Since PPD-30, families have had “a very positive response with the State Department.” Even in classified situations, loved ones walked away from meetings with government officials “with a deeper understanding of the situation,” ultimately feeling “satisfied with the opportunity to voice their opinions and concerns.”

How did this effective change happen so quickly?

The Obama and Trump administrations embraced two rare qualities in politics when solving this issue: humility and continuity.

First, President Obama’s admission that it wasn’t working was powerful, as it ushered in the complete renewal of a broken system. Acknowledging Obama’s efforts to listen to them, the families of Sotloff, Kassig, and Mueller called the policy changes “a step in the right direction.”

At a recent New America event, former National Security Council senior director for counterterrorism Luke Hartig said that the administration “actively solicited the opinions of people who mattered the most on the outside of government” to create a “new paradigm” for thinking about hostage recovery. Unlike most government assessments, this one solicited the opinions of people most affected by hostage policy, which Hartig called “unique.” This demonstrated a willingness to defer to others more equipped to solve the issue.

One such successful hire, former director of the HRFC Rob Saale, said “there was no manual” for improving hostage policy in 2015, and that the government was completely open about this. Even today, each hostage case is determined by the captors, the location, and the ransom demands, among other factors. Each element can vary, making any blanket policy about recovering hostages difficult, according to Saale.

But communicating this lack of a blueprint to families is an improvement on some level, and there has been an optimistic response to this communication despite the fact that we still had at least 25 loved ones held abroad at the end of 2018. “I don’t want it to appear that we’re patting ourselves on the back,” Saale said.

Remaining humble is crucial in elevating the importance of issues, as it never gives the impression that a job is done or a goal has shifted. And the Trump administration has admitted that the Obama hostage policy is one of the few that it’s not interested in changing. This continuity of prioritizing hostage recovery efforts has allowed for success in this field—something event moderator Peter Bergen says Trump can rightfully boast about.

According to Loertscher, “hostage families expected to have to start from scratch” after the 2016 election, but experienced almost the exact opposite. Because of this continuity, President Trump has been able to use momentum from the past administration to bring a significant number of American hostages home.

According to Hartig, hostage policy “should not be a partisan issue in any way, shape, or form,” and all members of the panel were complimentary of President Trump for mostly keeping it that way. In particular, JWFLF President and Founder Diane Foley said, “I’m very thankful...for the Trump Administration for keeping the 2015 interagency structure in place to bring Americans home.” Continuity rarely happens in today’s political climate, but this success story shows that it ought to.

At the event, Bergen called Bringing American’s Home largely “a good news story.” Though there is still a long way to go, the last four years have shown measurable improvements in transparency and support between the U.S. government and hostages and their families.