I don't think your logic matches what was reported at all. Your explanation implies the 'Hannibal Directive' is an attempt to rescue hostages by force. What's

I don't think your logic matches what was reported at all. Your explanation implies the 'Hannibal Directive' is an attempt to rescue hostages by force. What's described in the article appears to be orders to strike and all kill those in the vehicles that hostages are transported in. The strategy described is the deliberate killing of hostages to prevent any need to bargain over hostages. It's a kill order in short. One other point is that the article cites the 'Hannibal Directive' being applied to soldiers at one point, but then says it majorly happened for civilians. This feels like an important distinction.