WHEN CITIZENS BECOME LEVERAGE: France and UK Hostage Diplomacy in 1980s' Lebanon

1980s Lebanon was a deeply fragmented and militia-dominated territory, facing the collapse of central authority and entrenched in a battle between regional and global powers. Lebanon’s landscape of (in)security was indeed rooted in a volatile sectarian context and witnessing a critical phase in the political consolidation and public expression of Shi’i identity, now transitioning from marginalized community to a position of resistance leadership. These were years of fragmentation and violence, catalyzed by the Israeli invasion of the country in 1982 that fueled a new wave of state-sponsored terrorism. In this context, Lebanon came to be a geopolitical arena in which hostages became targets used as leverage to engage in diplomatic exchanges. The present work’s main objective is the analysis of the hostage crisis in Lebanon, reflecting on the broader landscape of security, with a particular attention to the roles of the multitude of groups and organizations that emerged in those intense years, fostered by Iranian and Syrian influence. How did Western States respond? This research will focus on the attempt to draft a common European policy to counter the phenomenon and will reveal the opposite – and competing – methods adopted by France and the United Kingdom. At first, this research will try to present a social and cultural overview of the Lebanese sectarian society, highlighting the emergent role of the Shi’i community and will then delve deeper into the role played by the Israeli invasion – Operation Peace for Galilee – and by the involvement of Iran and Syria in shaping the emergence of a multitude of armed non-state actors. Once these premises are set out, the study will examine in depth the practice of hostage-taking and kidnappings of Western nationals adopted by said groups, and will analyze the London Declaration of 1986 as an attempt for European Political Cooperation, assessing its implications and actual implementation. This second part will be followed by a thorough exploration of the different approaches adopted by Francois Mitterrand and Jacques Chirac and Margaret Thatcher, comparing the methods of pragmatic ambiguity and strategic distance from hostage diplomacy. This analysis will be accompanied by the presentation of four case studies, showing how France’s approach of “openness and dialogue” led to the liberation of its captured nationals. Was France’s approach a fuel for state-sponsored terrorism or a lecture on Realpolitik?