Haiti Kidnapping

[Ken]

Found out today that I’m related to one of the kidnapped missionaries. A second cousin who I don’t really know.

I guess there is no new news today so not much really to talk about except speculation. I expect this is going to grow in national media attention because 17 kidnapped Americans is going to make front page news everywhere.

It is probably a subject for a different thread. But I’ve been thinking about what is the best and most Christian way to engage with parts of the world that have possibly become too dangerous for ordinary mission work. It isn’t just Haiti, there are many other similar locations like Syria, Yemen, Myanmar, possibly even parts of Mexico under the control of the cartels.

Does one just write-off work in dangerous parts of the world and avoid them? That would mean writing off some of the neediest parts of the world.

Does one just place their faith in God and set aside ordinary security concerns? That sort of seems like what happened here but I have no first hand information at all, just speculating.

Does one use heightened security such as private armed guards or close collaboration with local military forces, etc? That in itself can be problematic, especially since armed forces are part of the problem in many parts of the world and collaboration with them can undermine the mission. Especially for Anabaptist pacifist missions.

Should organizations restrict who works in high-risk zones and who comes with them? The military doesn’t bring children or family members into war zones, for example. If you are a soldier stationed in Germany or Korea you can bring your family along, but if you are sent to Iraq or Afghanistan, most definitely not. Some of the kidnapped victims in Haiti are children who didn’t choose to be there.

Anyway, we can spin this off as a separate thread if appropriate.

[Ernie]

Whitehouse Press Conference from yesterday...

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo ... r-18-2021/

[appleman2006]

Found out today that I’m related to one of the kidnapped missionaries. A second cousin who I don’t really know.

I guess where Mennonites are involved we can always find connections. The Canadian involved happens to be a son of a second cousin of mine.

[Grace]

Found out today that I’m related to one of the kidnapped missionaries. A second cousin who I don’t really know.

I guess there is no new news today so not much really to talk about except speculation. I expect this is going to grow in national media attention because 17 kidnapped Americans is going to make front page news everywhere.

It is probably a subject for a different thread. But I’ve been thinking about what is the best and most Christian way to engage with parts of the world that have possibly become too dangerous for ordinary mission work. It isn’t just Haiti, there are many other similar locations like Syria, Yemen, Myanmar, possibly even parts of Mexico under the control of the cartels.

Does one just write-off work in dangerous parts of the world and avoid them? That would mean writing off some of the neediest parts of the world.

Does one just place their faith in God and set aside ordinary security concerns? That sort of seems like what happened here but I have no first hand information at all, just speculating.

Does one use heightened security such as private armed guards or close collaboration with local military forces, etc? That in itself can be problematic, especially since armed forces are part of the problem in many parts of the world and collaboration with them can undermine the mission. Especially for Anabaptist pacifist missions.

Should organizations restrict who works in high-risk zones and who comes with them? The military doesn’t bring children or family members into war zones, for example. If you are a soldier stationed in Germany or Korea you can bring your family along, but if you are sent to Iraq or Afghanistan, most definitely not. Some of the kidnapped victims in Haiti are children who didn’t choose to be there.

Anyway, we can spin this off as a separate thread if appropriate.

Those are good questions, Ken. Over the years Christain Aid has been a great vehicle for the average person to help the poor and needy around the world. They have provided thousands with relief when disasters struck and we have donated and volunteered to them over the years.

But I must say I have been disappointed with some of their decisions in the last few years. The first was the handling of the Jeriah Mast sexual abuse case. Presently I am disappointed that they would allow families with very young children to serve in a highly dangerous, volatile and gangster ridden country. Adults going willingly with knowledge of the risks is a different story though.

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel ... isory.html

[Neto]

Found out today that I’m related to one of the kidnapped missionaries. A second cousin who I don’t really know.

I guess there is no new news today so not much really to talk about except speculation. I expect this is going to grow in national media attention because 17 kidnapped Americans is going to make front page news everywhere.

It is probably a subject for a different thread. But I’ve been thinking about what is the best and most Christian way to engage with parts of the world that have possibly become too dangerous for ordinary mission work. It isn’t just Haiti, there are many other similar locations like Syria, Yemen, Myanmar, possibly even parts of Mexico under the control of the cartels.

Does one just write-off work in dangerous parts of the world and avoid them? That would mean writing off some of the neediest parts of the world.

Does one just place their faith in God and set aside ordinary security concerns? That sort of seems like what happened here but I have no first hand information at all, just speculating.

Does one use heightened security such as private armed guards or close collaboration with local military forces, etc? That in itself can be problematic, especially since armed forces are part of the problem in many parts of the world and collaboration with them can undermine the mission. Especially for Anabaptist pacifist missions.

Should organizations restrict who works in high-risk zones and who comes with them? The military doesn’t bring children or family members into war zones, for example. If you are a soldier stationed in Germany or Korea you can bring your family along, but if you are sent to Iraq or Afghanistan, most definitely not. Some of the kidnapped victims in Haiti are children who didn’t choose to be there.

Anyway, we can spin this off as a separate thread if appropriate.

Those are good questions, Ken. Over the years Christian Aid has been a great vehicle for the average person to help the poor and needy around the world. They have provided thousands with relief when disasters struck and we have donated and volunteered to them over the years.

But I must say I have been disappointed with some of their decisions in the last few years. The first there was the handling of the Jeriah Mast sexual abuse case. Presently I am disappointed that they would allow families with very young children to serve in a highly dangerous, volatile and gangster ridden country. Adults going willingly with knowledge of the risks is a different story though.

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel ... isory.html

I agree that these are good questions. I understand that, like WBT, CAM has a policy of not paying any ransoms. Some here may be old enough to remember what happened to Chet Bitterman, in Columbia. (I was a fairly new member of WBT at that time, and I remember where I was when I heard that he'd been killed by his captors.)
Because we had a small child at the time, we were restricted from going (that is, not allowed to go in as a family) to our future allocation until an airstrip had been constructed, but that was in consideration of health concerns. There are all kinds of dangers, both in daily life here in North America, and different types of daily dangers involved in life on the field. If you are in a large city outside the "Western world", there are added dangers simply due to differing attitudes toward traffic laws, toward the rights of pedestrians, etc. Go back into the "interior" and then you are also dealing with poisonous snakes, spiders, intoxicated friends, and just simple sicknesses, because you are a long ways from any expert medical care. (Actually, we had poisonous snakes on our front porch out on the mission center more than once. One time it was a Sunday morning, and our daughter, around 4 or 5 at that time, was just ready to go outside. I stepped out first, and one was coiled up right there beside the door. I had left a length of chain laying there the day before, and I grabbed that and wailed on him.) Once when the men in the village had been down river working for some Brazilians, they arrived back late at night, all very drunk. They had been cheated out of their fair pay, and they knew it, so they were pretty angry. I went out & sat on the bottom step, with the door latched behind me. (I didn't want them to go inside in that condition.) They stood there in front of me, venting about their mistreatment, while holding their machetes and fishing spears, weaving back & forth. They would not have intentionally done me any harm, I don't think, but any one of them could have collapsed on top of me, I figured. It's a risk you take, because Jesus did more than just risk his life, he gave it. He came knowing what would happen. OK, so he didn't have any children. But real change (I'm convinced) comes about in people due to relationships. And sometimes it's very important that they, as families themselves, see you also with a family, with small children just like them. (But a short term deal to do construction work in a dangerous country, taking along small children, probably not. There won't be any real individual relationships anyway. Just my thoughts.)

[Grace]

Whitehouse Press Conference from yesterday...

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo ... r-18-2021/

That was yesterday's briefing. In today's press briefing the question about the Haitian abduction of American hostages was brought up again. Ms. Psaki responded saying that the FBI is part of a co-originated effort to get the U.S. citizens to safety. Also that the U.S. Embassy is working with local authorities and providing assistance to the family members of the hostages.

But she also noted that the U.S. has had and still has a travel advisory for Haiti, that is at a level four, conveying to NOT travel to Haiti, because of all the kidnapping, crime and civil unrest.

Some of the missionaries captured haven't been there long.

My question is, what testimony does CAM project,when they ignore the United States Government's travel advisory and now that same government that they didn't listen to, has to spend man power and resources to get them to safety?

[Ken]

I agree that these are good questions. I understand that, like WBT, CAM has a policy of not paying any ransoms. Some here may be old enough to remember what happened to Chet Bitterman, in Columbia. (I was a fairly new member of WBT at that time, and I remember where I was when I heard that he'd been killed by his captors.)

CAM may have a policy not to pay ransoms, but CAM isn't the only entity involved at this point. There are the families and home churches who may feel their interests are not the same as CAM's.

It has also been reported (In the NYT?) that this same exact gang recently kidnapped some Catholic priests and nuns and that apparently some ransom was paid to get them free. So they may be expecting the same thing here. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/19/worl ... ansom.html

My brother-in-law is an investment banker in Chile who manages investments across South America so frequently travels to places like Colombia. The bank he works for has kidnapping insurance for its employees but also strict security protocols. Earlier this year one of his younger colleagues disobeyed the security protocols on a trip to Bogota and left the hotel to go a nightclub where he got himself kidnapped. He was held in a nondescript apartment building (like an AirB&B for about 24 hours until they negotiated payment and released him. Apparently it was all very professional and they treated him well, like it was nothing personal, just business. Doesn't sound like Haiti is the same at all.

[Josh]

Whitehouse Press Conference from yesterday...

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo ... r-18-2021/

That was yesterday's briefing. In today's press briefing the question about the Haitian abduction of American hostages was brought up again. Ms. Psaki responded saying that the FBI is part of a co-originated effort to get the U.S. citizens to safety. Also that the U.S. Embassy is working with local authorities and providing assistance to the family members of the hostages.

But she also noted that the U.S. has had and still has a travel advisory for Haiti, that is at a level four, conveying to NOT travel to Haiti, because of all the kidnapping, crime and civil unrest.

Some of the missionaries captured haven't been there long.

My question is, what testimony does CAM project,when they ignore the United States Government's travel advisory and now that same government that they didn't listen to, has to spend man power and resources to get them to safety?

And also ignore that the orphanage they went to sent all Westerners home nearly two years ago.

[Josh]

Latest Update from CAM:

https://christianaidministries.org/upda ... abduction/

Ernie,

When kidnapped, the group was returning from a visit to an orphanage that receives support from Christian Aid Ministries.

Is this talking about the Holdeman orphanage in Garncier? If so, is it correct that it receives support from CAM?

As far as I know, that orphanage was started by Haitian Holdeman members. Later in some Canadian Holdeman members got involved and donated funds and other support. As of about two years ago, they couldn’t ensure adequate security for Canadian and American volunteers and sent them all home.

[Neto]

I agree that these are good questions. I understand that, like WBT, CAM has a policy of not paying any ransoms. Some here may be old enough to remember what happened to Chet Bitterman, in Columbia. (I was a fairly new member of WBT at that time, and I remember where I was when I heard that he'd been killed by his captors.)

CAM may have a policy not to pay ransoms, but CAM isn't the only entity involved at this point. There are the families and home churches who may feel their interests are not the same as CAM's.

It has also been reported (In the NYT?) that this same exact gang recently kidnapped some Catholic priests and nuns and that apparently some ransom was paid to get them free. So they may be expecting the same thing here. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/19/worl ... ansom.html

My brother-in-law is an investment banker in Chile who manages investments across South America so frequently travels to places like Colombia. The bank he works for has kidnapping insurance for its employees but also strict security protocols. Earlier this year one of his younger colleagues disobeyed the security protocols on a trip to Bogota and left the hotel to go a nightclub where he got himself kidnapped. He was held in a nondescript apartment building (like an AirB&B for about 24 hours until they negotiated payment and released him. Apparently it was all very professional and they treated him well, like it was nothing personal, just business. Doesn't sound like Haiti is the same at all.

My point (possibly not very clear) was along the lines that if an organization pays a ransom, it puts a target on the back of every other member. It isn't about the money - it cripples all of their potential to do any work in any country around the world. (I say "any country", because nearly every country where WBT operates involves a degree of danger which exceeds that experienced in the "Western world".) If a family (or another entity) pays a ransom, that doesn't have the same ramifications.