I've always wondered if war and foreign correspondents, field execs, aid workers, and diplomats, at least those from major outlets, get urban survival, anti-kidnap, E&E training? Likewise, do they have their own special EDC/GHB kits? Anyone know?

One example:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/208551/...-trying-to-help

I suspect a lot of people, especially journalists, get/can afford only substantially less.

The specific answer to the OP is that correspondents working for major media outlets do have the opportunity to get training on safety and security. There are courses that are offered by qualified security experts that do help these people. Due to the expense, though, many journalists do not get this training. From what I can see, most journalists learn to "stay safe" by learning tips and tricks from their peers. This type of learning is no substitute for proper training, unfortunately.

There is a very real and wide gap between reporters and security professionals. It starts from the time when people were young. The kids who went into security were the ones who could keep a secret. The kids who went into journalism loved to hear and tell stories, and couldn't keep their mouth shut.

A good example of the problem is Syria. Many journalists being held as prisoners there now.

pete

And most journalists just hire some of those security professionals to go with them. I know a few guys doing that work now. Most journalists do not opt for the training even when encouraged to get it.

Totally understandable -- why learn to be self reliant when the network will pay someone else to be responsible. Seriously, when did a "security professional" ever get separated from his charge?

Hint: Lara Logan

"And most journalists just hire some of those security professionals to go with them. I know a few guys doing that work now. Most journalists do not opt for the training even when encouraged to get it."

I'm fine with that, as it tends to promote good judgments and good outcomes. At least it means that some US and UK journalists will be safe.

The people paying the terrible price are journalists of other nationalities. Their countries have poor economies, so their media companies cannot provide protection or training. Yet these journalists are sometimes very admirable people who are fighting for basic values such as freedom, integrity (against corruption), and human rights. ironically, they grow up in political systems that are so twisted that they do not trust anyone. So it's not even possible to give them a little bit of good advice for free ... they are not listening. These people pay a terrible price in blood. But they are brave, I will concede that.

Pete

What does the training teach them to do? The one article I found, which discusses the training for aid workers, seems to suggest the students learn how to get shot at and how to be hostages; i.e., how to be victims. I don't have those skills, but I'm not sure if having them would make me "self-reliant" in a war zone. If the training I get teaches me to be a better victim, then I'd be sure to hire security. That may be the smartest thing to do, if I can afford it.

Plus one on Pete's post. I know a journalist who did time under a military dictatorship, just because he did his job and reported news. He wasn't even some martyr wannabe with a death wish. He was trying to be smart and do as much good as possible without getting disappeared. But that was more than what the oppressors would bear.

The training for aid workers really depends on where the aid worker is headed, the security and threat situation in-country, the size and resources of the NGO and what they can afford to have their workers trained in and so on.

For example, my SO went to Sudan last year, the group underwent training in a number of areas. Meaning everything from personal/group safety, first aid, map reading and navigation for E&E purposes, what to do/don't if taken hostage and more. Again, depending on the resources of the NGO, some of this training is lead by former military. With the current situation now developing in South Sudan, it really demonstrates the peril that aid workers could find themselves in a short time.

On the flip side. When she went to the Philippines in the aftermath of the recent typhoon, the training was more relegated to briefings as the security situation there was much more calmer and under control. Also with the large number of local and foreign military on the ground and in the skies, providing supplies and logistics etc, any requests for assistance on security issues, appropriate resources were close at hand.

I posted this link last year to a comprehensive aid worker security manual

Another good source of information is Operational Security Management in Violent Environments.

I'm not sure there is a consistent set of training for volunteers who work for NGO's, church groups, humanitarian organizations, and medical groups. The standards and training very tremendously. This topic was recently discussed on a separate forum that is aimed at security professionals. Most of the people there have experienced a lot of frustration with the NGO's and have largely given up on them. The security folks think that it's a real shame that volunteers from the NGO's might be seized and taken as hostages, but it almost inevitable. The root of the problem is that NGO's do not want to spend a significant part of their budget for improved security (since most of that budget comes from donations), and in addition they do not want armed guards to be visible around their operations (since this is an image conflict with their humanitarian work).

Bingley is quite right - the few times I have spoken to volunteers of large NGO's I have found that when they got "training" it was often things like ... what to say if someone kidnaps you. Personally, it's more than a little alarming. I would rather see these groups set up proper security perimeters, post some 24-hour lookouts, and have a "rapid escape plan". Get people out of trouble, instead of coping with worst-case outcomes.

Journalists have a different problem because they have to get a story. So this compels them to go to riskier areas ... at least sometimes.

One thing that all these volunteers can do is to carry some sort of locator beacon or tracking beacon - so they could be found if there is an emergency. The single biggest thing that stops them from being rescued is that it is impossible to locate the kidnappers in a short period of time.

Pete

Interesting. Do you have a direct link to the forum thread?

Also it is not that they do not want to spend, more like they cannot afford to spend. Even if a country even allowed armed foreign guards, the prices commanded by private security contractors is horrendously expensive beyond belief.


Through my SO, I have met and talked with aid workers many of times over the last 20 years and I can tell you from personal discussions with them that the above is not the norm and without the full context of your talks with them, is hard to believe.


You have to remember that these aid groups do not have the manpower or resources to have 24-post lookouts etc. For the most part, any security issues that may occur such as what is going on South Sudan right now is beyond any aid group to defend against. As for the rapid escape plan, yes many have E&E plans but is the very last of the last resorts as no aid group can readily resist and outrun armed militia of any political stripe.


Most aid groups have some form of modern communications such as SAT phones etc. Keep in mind that if an aid group runs into trouble in an African desert hell hole and even if they have a SAT phone, they may get a chance to use it but they should never expect a SAR chopper or a US Marine Expeditionary Force coming to their rescue. It is just not that easy, logistically nor politically.