Paying Tribute to Return U.S. Citizens
Right after the United States became independent in 1783, the Continental Congress disbanded the Continental Army and the Continental Navy. They did this for three reasons. One, the Continental Congress could not levy taxes to pay for a standing military. Two, the country was deeply in debt to France, Spain, the Netherlands, and its own citizens. And three, several of our leaders (Jefferson and the Democratic-Republicans) didn’t think we needed one!
So, for 11 years, the country was essentially defenseless and was learning the hard lessons of foreign policy in a hostile world. Pirates in the Mediterranean and the Caribbean knew the U.S. had no means to fight back and began seizing U.S. merchant ships, selling off the cargoes and ships. At the same time, they contacted the ship’s owner asking for ransom money for the crew. The alternative for the ship owner was not to pay and allow the crews to be sold into slavery.
Before 1775, ships sailing from U.S. ports flew under the British flag, and pirates knew better than to take them. Between 1778 and 1783, our ships were protected by the French Navy. Once this ended, our ships were fair game to any pirate on the high seas.
Still, even after the Constitution was ratified in 1788, no action was taken to create a navy. In fact, the U.S. government paid pirates both tribute, i.e., a fee not to seize our ships, and ransom money to bring back crews. President Adams used the payments as justification for the Navy Act of 1794 that brought the modern U.S. Navy into being.
Nonetheless, it takes time to build ships, train crews, and then deploy them to where the pirates are. South Carolina Congressman Robert Harper’s 1787 statement, “Millions for defense but not one cent for Tribute….” is often attributed to what the U.S. was paying pirates. However, to be accurate, Harper was referring to the bribes French diplomats were demanding that got exposed during the XYZ Affair.
Harper’s sentiments were shared by many in Congress because by 1800, we were paying millions to the Barbary Pirates. Most historians agree that 20% of the Federal budget was given to the Barbary Pirates who kept upping their demands.
By 1803, the Barbary Pirates, who were based primarily in Algiers, Tripoli, and Tunis, upped their demands. Finally, in 1803, Jefferson had enough and told Congress he was going commit the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps to defeat the pirates. He did not ask for a declaration of war, but what we would call today, “an authorization to use military force.”
By 1805, the Barbary Pirates came to their senses and agreed to a treaty in which they would stop demanding tribute and seizing our ships. In 1815, they reneged on the treaty, and again, we had to use military force.
What came out of this was the U.S. policy that we, as a nation, would not pay ransoms for our citizens ever again. As the U.S. grew in stature, wealth, and power this policy continued.
In the aftermath of the Barbary Pirates Wars, the policy of the Federal government is not to pay ransoms to foreign governments or non-government organizations like pirates for our citizens or property. While Congress first passed laws in the 1800s to make it illegal to pay ransoms, those laws have been codified and strengthened. They are now found in Title 18, section 1802 of the U.S. Code.
Yet, this #5 of the 10 political issues we faced in the 1790s that we still face today. American citizens are targets when we travel abroad. Often, countries who want to excerpt pressure on the U.S. will arrest U.S. citizens on the flimsiest of charges just to hold them.
Several administrations (Reagan was one) have skirted the law and have been “caught.” Despite attempts at foreign policy slights of hand, ransom payments were not made by the Reagan admin.
However, in 2016, when the Obama administration was desperate to get the nuclear deal done, agreed to return $400 million in frozen assets plus $1.3 billion interest to the Iranians for the release of American citizens being held against their will in Iran. The Obama admin claimed that we were simply releasing funds seized after the Shah fell as an incentive to the Iranians to sign the deal and the release of the Americans was coincidental. You can decide if that is the truth.