Is “Nobody pays” a pro or a con?
This is a good point. Increase the cost to who? What costs? You can increase costs to hostages by raising airfares … increase costs to terrorists be raising the price of ammunition … or machetes. But I’m thinking the OP means something else.
Pro. Paying nothing and reducing terrorism sounds good to me.
I mean nobody pays the fine you’ve proposed. The U.S. is not the world government, and is therefore not in a position to assess fines to other countries. Nevermind that these fines are based on “suppositions,” which sounds like the thinking of a bad or corrupt government.
Well I’m sure there’s something more we can do to lean on them. We’ve already gotten most of Europe to sign a treaty to the effect that they won’t negotiate with terrorists, but it seems that whatever we did to get that was insufficient to make them actually do that.
That’s about all you can do. If countries are negotiating with hostage-takers, I suspect they’re not signatories to the treaties you are referring to. But offhand I don’t know what treaty that is.