Government negotiation with terrorists

No negotiation with terrorists refers to a publicly declared policy of most Western countries to not negotiate with terrorists. This policy is often applied during hostage crises. Often the policy is limited to not paying ransom demands, and doesn't apply to other forms of negotiation. There are multiple motivations for such policies, including a lack of guarantee of the hostage's safe return upon payment, as well as not creating an incentive for future hostage-takings. As long as a country consistently applies this policy on a no-exception basis, terrorists can anticipate that there will be no reward for trading hostages. However, although most Western states put forth this policy, many have been known to violate it on certain occasions.
Background.
On June 18, 2013, G8 leaders signed an agreement against paying ransoms to terrorists.
By country.
United States.
The United States has a policy of no negotiation with terrorists for hostages. There have been heavily criticized incidents in which U.S. government leaders were found to have negotiated with terrorists, with the most notable being the Iran–Contra affair and Barack Obama's negotiation with the Taliban Five.
Israel.
Israel generally does not negotiate with terrorists.
Japan.
In January 2015, hostages Haruna Yukawa and Kenji Goto were beheaded by ISIL after Japan refused to meet ISIL's demand of $200 million for the release of the hostages.
By terrorist organization.
Al Qaeda.
An investigation by "The New York Times" found that Al-Qaeda and its affiliates have taken in at least $125 million in revenue from kidnappings since 2008. These payments were made almost exclusively by European governments, which funneled the money through a network of proxies, sometimes masking it as development aid.
Criticism.
Some Western countries such as the United States, Canada, and Britain tend to not negotiate or pay ransom to terrorists, and other Western countries such as France, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland are more open to negotiation and ransom payment. That creates tension between governments with opposing policies. Another area of criticism is that even if not negotiating with terrorists is the announced policy of a country, a country at times may still negotiate with terrorists, depending on which political party rules the country.