Tortured Logic by Joseph Young & Erin M. Kearns

Author:Joseph Young & Erin M. Kearns [Young, Joseph & Kearns, Erin M.]
Language: eng
Format: azw3
Tags: POL037000, Political Science/Terrorism, POL012000, Political Science/Security (National &#x0026, International)
Publisher: Columbia University Press
Published: 2020-07-28T00:00:00+00:00

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Political scientists Conrad and colleagues note that elections are a mechanism that cannot provide accountability at the precise moment they should.26 When the state was under threat was the moment in which discussions were made in the Bush administration about enhanced interrogations. This was also the moment when our experiments and Conrad and colleagues suggest people can be persuaded to support harsher interrogation.27 If steps are taken to reduce the likelihood of using torture in interrogation of terrorism suspects, this suggests it needs to occur at a time of relative peace and security. During times of real or perceived heightened threat, most of the inertia in debates will lead to the use of torture. Again, the mechanism could be that individuals under threat have evolved to respond instinctively with violence to deter or survive. It may also be a little more complicated and indirect. People are influenced by elites and media that reinforce the perceived threat and suggest violent options in response. Regardless of which mechanism is prominent, real debate can only be fruitful outside of this threat environment.

Some of the policy implications of our findings are troubling. Exposure to pop-culture media depictions of torture working makes people more supportive of the practice in counterterrorism. One policy recommendation could be to limit media depictions of torture. Of course, constraining media would be an affront to our free and open society and its democratic values. Legal prohibitions on media depictions are out of the question in such a society if we are to remain free. But are requests from the public, academics, or political leaders appropriate? In the 2007 meeting in which military and interrogation professionals tried to convince the producers of 24 not to show torture working, one of the attendees, General Finnegan, is said to have asked that they “do a show where torture backfires . . . [because] the kids see it and say, ‘If torture is wrong, what about 24’?” However, our findings here show that depicting torture as ineffective may backfire. Priming people with threat and torture may already suggest violence as the appropriate response. So what can be done to minimize the impact of media on public perception of torture?

For over a decade, public officials, scholars, and the general public have debated whether and when torture is acceptable in counterterrorism. Consensus among scholars and high-level military officials is clear. Torture does not lead to accurate, actionable intelligence. In fact, torture may be counterproductive in at least three ways: (1) inaccurate information wastes time and resources; (2) suspects who have information may have divulged it under a different interrogation approach but will not after they are tortured (Abu Zubaydah, for example); and (3) when the United States uses torture, this can serve as a recruitment tool that leads to further violence (see Abu Ghraib).

As we’ve mentioned in previous chapters, it is difficult to precisely pinpoint the number of Americans that support the practice of torture. It is fair to say that this number changes, but

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.