Opposing Government-sponsored Torture by Dr. Chris Bolan

The National Security Archive published a recently declassified memorandum from a senior U.S. State Department advisor Philip Zelikow who in 2006 courageously (if belatedly) opposed the Bush Administration's authorization of water boarding and other methods of what is often euphemistically referred to as 'enhance interrogation.'  The legal opinions by former Deparment of Justice lawyers led by John Yoo endorsing the use of torture will serve as a blot on the soul of our nation for some time to come.  It is a credit to both John McCain and Mr. Zelikow that they pressed the government to adhere to its own laws and professed principles.

Much of the Zelikow memo is written in legal-ease.  The essence of his argument is that many of the "enhanced interrogation techniques authorized for employment by the CIA...[are] intrinsically cruel, inhuman, [and] degrading...[and should] be barred even if there is a compelling state interest asserted to justify them."  The memo goes on to more explicitly make the case that specific coercive techniques including water boarding and stress positions are unconstitutional; while other measures such as sleep and food deprivation may be legal "depending on the circumstances and details of how these techniques are used."

Nations often reflect the aspirations, hopes, and fears of their people and leaders.  In the of 9/11, many Americans have become overly fearful and only too willing to sacrifice personal liberties and bypass constitutionally-guarantee legal protections in the pursuit of an imagined (and unachievable) sense of security.  Thankfully, President Obama has put some of the uglier aspects of the 'global war on terror' behind us.  However, other aspects such as warrantless searches, 'targeted assassinations', and indefinite detentions remain.  We will yet need many more citizens, politicians, and officials to demonstrate the courage of their convictions.

The author is professor of national security studies at the U.S. Army War College.  The views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

Comments

[turcopolier]

rjj

I took his earlier comment as including me among the people who needed to be lectured about the Iraq War. pl

[Alba Etie]

Thats right thank you - Liz Cheney .

[Alba Etie]

Col Lang
I am very likely bloviating from the cheap seats . And yes I do not know you personally - but what I was attempting to address with you was the ill decision making that lead us to occupy Iraq. I do recall that in the run up to the invasion of Iraq you were on I think CNN saying that this premptive war was a very bad idea. I listened carefully and agreed with you. Forgive me I do not remember exactly when that was you spoke on the MSM - but I do recall it was about the time that General Shinseki appeared before Congress and said it would take better then 100,000 soldiers to secure Iraq. Shortly after that General Shinseki was asked to resign by the Neo cons . Both you and General Shinseki were proved right about the Iraqi invasion - and I agree with both of you then & now.
I do apologize if I offended you -my comments addressed to you were meant to convey my agreement with those who have served- what a bad idea the illegal Iraqi occupation was and is - for us all.

[turcopolier]

Alba Etie

The occupation of Iraq in 2003 was not illegal. The UN and the US Congress sanctioned it. It was worse than illegal. It was stupid. I don't like stupid. Try reading my article, "Drinking the Koolaid." pl

[turcopolier]

Jane

What do you think? Would impalement on the courthouse lawn satisfy you? pl

[Alba Etie]

Col Lang
I am not a legal scholar - but as I understand the UN resolution -it only authorized the destruction of the non existent WMD program in Iraq.The USG willingfully lying about Saddam's restarting his WMD program made the use of military force in my mind illegal .The Congressional AUMF for Iraq was also illegal I believe in the strictest Constitutional traditions -as it was not a declaration of war. And yes the occupation was very stupid .

[turcopolier]

AE

THere should have been a declaration of war or severaol declarations of war to include one against AQ and its affiliates. I tried to convince people of that at th time. but Cheney and his pals wanted to be able to torture prisoners and knew that the US military would be a problem if the prisoners were PWs under international or our law. "In my opinion" and five dollars will get you a cup of coffee. pl

[Chris Bolan]

The scenario of a 'ticking nuclear time bomb' is ridiculous on its face.

The first implicit assumption of this scenario is that the USG 'knows' that the person being held has the information. This is never the case. No one can 'know' with certainty what's inside someone's head.

The second assumption is that the detained person will under torture reveal the correct information in sufficient time for authorities to react. As you and others have suggested, the person under torture is likely to reveal whatever information he/she suspects the torturing authorities want to hear. This information is not verifiable and will inevitably send authorities off on many wild goose chases wasting valuable time & effort.

Jack Bauer doesn't exist in real life.

[Alba Etie]

Col Lang
What are your thoughts regarding AQ now ? Is the threat still as large as it appeared to be the week after the attack on The Twin Towers?
And I hope that five dollar cup of coffee comes with a refill...

[turcopolier]

AE

AQ was an example of the recurring waves of revivalism thathave characterised Sunni Islam since the failure of the Ottoman failure at Vienna and the recession of Islam's "tide." THe AQ wave has crested but will rerturn in another form when living memory fades of the cost. How long? It used to be 100 years plus or minus. Time have changed. It might be sooner. I have written of this many yimes. pl

[Alba Etie]

Col Lang
Then is the GWOT/Long War still needed ? Should we still be targeting AQ and related organizations ? Our low level engagement with al Shabab in Somalia comes to mind - are these activities helpful or harmful to our national security interest ? Are we still under direct threat of an attack here in the USA from Sunni Revivalism?

[turcopolier]

AE

We don't need to seek to reform any more Mudlim countries. that was never a pratcable notion. Nevertheless, those Muslims dedicated to "ijma'" that includes the ifea of "jihad" against the west on a pgysical and violent basis are dangerous and largely inreconcilable to us. Ir is worth the time and the money to hunt them down with CT troops, intelligence forces and cooperation with foreign intelligence. Would I kill them? Yes, if it did not involve major hostilities. pl