Countries and their citizens, of course, don’t “claim” not to negotiate with terrorists, or anything else for that matter. Unfortunately, these decisions aren’t up to them. Their governments and politicians are the ones who make these claims for them.

The results of negotiating—saving hostages’ lives, for one—are more important than the fact that there was some contradiction between statement and action. I believe that is true even if the government must lie to the public about its actions (because of pressure from the U.S. not to negotiate, for example). If lies could help all the innocent victims in the world’s war zones, I would temporarily ban the moral principle of telling the truth. (Although I guess politicians have never complied with that principle anyway.)

The U.S. needs to reconsider how non-violent solutions could help its cause in Iraq. It’s time for the U.S. to recognize that its military power cannot fight terrorism effectively and will not bring peace, and to try other methods. It could mobilize the huge financial power of the richest country of the world: bring back the soldiers and send over millions, or even billions, of dollars. The current military operations are extremely expensive – maybe replacing them with cash could make good economic sense, too.
Does this sound stupid? Well, what the US is doing right now seems to me to be also stupid. Exchanging one stupidity for another one for a change couldn’t hurt – and who knows, it may work even better.