The tragic death in Afghanistan of aid worker Linda Norgrove as US Special Forces closed in, seconds away from rescuing her, makes us think about Negotiation again.

At the International Bar Association annual conference in Vancouver last week I heard various people say that some major corporations were changing course, away from high-profile battles in the courts towards intelligent low-key attempts to settle disputes by mediation or otherwise:

"Having a moderate and non-confrontational dispute-resolution strategy and style is now increasingly being seen as a sign of corporate strength, not a sign of corporate weakness".

Kidnappings are a grisly example of relative strength and weakness, and raise far-reaching questions about how to negotiate in extremis.

Kidnappers are the ultimate example of people who play upon the Sanction of the Victim. They are evil precisely because they rely upon the very good will and human kindness of others to extort money from people who would rather give up money than have their relatives and friends harmed or killed. That same good will and kindness in effect become weapons of the honest person’s self-destruction.

In Vancouver we had some lively discussions within our travelling group about the best way to deal with hostage situations, and in particular about the circumstances in which it is morally right to risk the lives of hostages to try to save them.

Is it invariably better to negotiate with the kidnappers, maybe for years on end, to try to wear them down and hand back their victim? Is there any special issue of principle at stake, or are disagreements ‘really’ all about tactics? What value if any should be placed upon the lives of the kidnappers themselves? Where and how and over exactly what to negotiate?

When you start negotiating with kidnappers, don’t you by that very fact enter the issue on their terms?

So with corporations. There is value in projecting strength, as long as that it does well and with integrity. But does it pay to fight every battle with competitors or disgruntled customers or vexed employees? Or to win many battles but lose the war? And which war is it anyway?

Fascinating. And very difficult.