With Taliban's release of Korean Christian hostages, caution for missionaries

This week brought relief in South Korea, as the Taliban released 21 Korean Christians held hostage for six weeks in Afghanistan.

The missionaries were part of a robust effort by Korean Evangelicals to work in "frontier missions" – places with few other believers. Yet after South Korea's reported deal with the Taliban to withdraw troops and possibly pay a ransom, the risks of private groups doing good in hot spots are being rethought by humanitarian and church groups.

One lesson is the interdependence of aid groups and the need to protect one other, especially in 2007 when outsiders are more at risk in many parts of Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Missionaries and humanitarian groups must coordinate: conduct local assessments, know the unwritten codes, work with locals, and work together as a way to deflect harm that might ensue through rash decisions, they argue.

Unlike proselytizing in the West, "When [Evangelicals] go to Afghanistan, their actions have a huge impact on the rest of us and the and the things we're trying to accomplish," says Randolph Martin, director of global emergency for Mercy Corps International. "In [the South Koreans'] case, the Taliban also got a reward, because the Korean troops will pull out."

South Korea has also banned its citizens from traveling to Afghanistan since the 23 Evangelicals were captured in July.

In 2007, hot spots are ever more complicated, experts say.

The fall of the Berlin Wall, the 9/11 attacks, and especially the invasion of Iraq, have resulted in more fragmented and weaker states, the rise of guerrilla groups, land and power grabs, and manipulation of ethnic and religious feeling. The environment in places like Iraq, Darfur, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, Haiti, and Gaza is a turbulent mix. On the ground is every type of foreigner – undercover intelligence, civil society groups, private security, and state military, doctors, construction teams, mine clearing groups, journalists, humanitarian aid workers, and church people, some of whom do both gospel and aid work.

Views on missionaries whose chief aim is sharing the gospel in hot spots vary widely among the nongovernmental (NGO) and religious communities. But even those who accept missionaries argue that good intentions, enthusiasm, and bravery must conjoin with a professional approach.

"To work in dangerous areas you need ... deep networks, and deep knowledge," says Jerome Larchu, a director of the Paris-based Médicins du Monde (Doctors of the World), which has volunteers in 55 countries. "You bring in skilled people, lots of locals – and only then do you send people in."

In February Médecins du Monde pulled its team out of Darfur for security reasons. But the doctors felt their mission wasn't over. This summer they put scouts into Sudan for eight weeks to travel, talk with locals, and assess risk – before going back in.

If missionaries or aid workers do not have the proper help and concept, "it is a problem for us," says Mr. Larchu. "I think anyone has a right to proselytize if they want to. But to locals, an NGO is an NGO; they don't know who we are. They don't make a lot of distinctions. They don't know who is legitimate. So NGOs are interdependent, whether we realize it or not. We have to gain local trust together."

Koreans followed 19th-century model

Page: 1 | 2