Just How Useful is Torture to US Counterterrorism Efforts?

Published in Beijing News
(China) on 11 December 2014
by Xie Yongliang (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Nathan Hsu. Edited by Laurence Bouvard.
Upon examining U.S. counterterrorism policies in practice, it has been discovered that very little intelligence was obtained from torture. Moreover, it is hard to overlook the other effects of such harsh methods, including the extraction of false confessions and a significant moral cost.

According to reports, on Dec. 9 the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee issued a Central Intelligence Agency torture investigation report detailing sexual abuse threats, waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other forms of torture exercised upon detainees within secret prisons in Asia and Europe. The report immediately seized the attention of the international community and began a global discussion of the value of torture on intelligence gathering.

Within U.S. politics as well, factors such as the partisan divide have made the issue even more contentious. The Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that the CIA's extraction of confessions failed to provide key pieces of intelligence that would otherwise have been unobtainable through conventional interrogation. The CIA's response, however, was that the intelligence obtained through those means was in fact extremely valuable. To make a proper judgment, one must analyze the merits of each with an eye to interrogation techniques and efficacy.

One should find that in light of the unique threat presented by terrorist bombers and the urgency of stopping attacks in a timely manner, more than a few Western nations have permitted the use of special measures — including torture — on suspects based on the principle of "facilitating the collection of evidence." But judging by the results of declassified interrogations from the United States, United Kingdom, Israel and other countries, intelligence obtained through torture has proven to be of little use thus far. For example, with the U.S. military operation to kill bin Laden, none of the intelligence was obtained through the torture of captured terrorists, but rather through standard interrogation techniques.

Some experts have pointed out that people who exhibit violent terrorist behavior are usually under the hold of certain extremist ideas and philosophies, so bodily suffering will not necessarily be successful at coercing them into cooperating with national agencies. In fact, torture will at times result in false confessions. France's crackdown on Algerian terrorists was clear evidence of this.

The torture report also pointed out that out of 20 successful counterterrorism operations, not a single one resulted from these brutal interrogation methods when the intelligence would have been otherwise unobtainable. As a matter of fact, even former White House counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clark has in the past stated that the torture methods utilized by the United States were "disgusting" and ineffective. He pointed out that the U.S. government's source of information linking al-Qaida, Iraq and weapons of mass destruction was likely a forced confession, and that this information led to the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

It is also found that in the United States, according to the interrogation memoranda of U.S. detention center personnel, unconventional methods in counterterrorism interrogations are categorized into two types; the first requires standard approval, while the second can only be applied after approval and with sufficient reason to believe that the detainee holds key intelligence. From the torture report, however, it is evident that many of those interrogation methods can be marked down as decidedly inhumane. The findings further revealed that among the 119 known detainees of the program while it was active, at least 26 were wrongfully held.

The use of torture in counterterrorism interrogations is now being called into question due to its lack of efficacy and high moral cost. Interrogation practices in Japan, the United Kingdom and other nations show that useful information can be gleaned from terrorists' minds through hypnosis and analyzing brain waves. This is yet another point to consider when weighing the value of torture to U.S. counterterrorism efforts.


就美国的反恐实践看,酷刑在获取反恐情报方面的作用微乎其微。更何况,其制造虚假供述、增加反恐道德成本等“副作用”不容小觑。

  据报道,美国参议院情报委员会12月9日公布了中情局“酷刑逼供”调查报告,详尽披露了中情局在亚洲、欧洲等地秘密监狱中,对受刑人实施性虐待、水刑、禁止睡觉等酷刑的情况。报告甫出,引起国际社会关注,而酷刑对反恐情报获取的价值,也成了国际舆论聚焦的议题。

  在美国政坛内部,囿于党派斗争等因素,酷刑对美国反恐的价值引发诸多争议。参议院情报委员会结论认为,中情局刑讯逼供未能提供常规审讯所不能得出的重大反恐情报。而中情局则回应,以此方式获得的情报很有价值。而要廓清这问题,还得回到侦讯技术与实际收效的框架下剖析。

  应看到,鉴于暴恐犯罪的特殊性、及时制止恐怖袭击的急迫性,不少欧美国家基于“取证便利”原则,都允许对相关嫌疑人采取诸多特别措施,甚至包括酷刑。但迄今为止,从美国、英国、以色列等国披露的审讯结果看,酷刑在获取情报方面的作用微乎其微。像美军击毙本拉登的活动中,美国所有情报信息没有一项是通过对在押恐怖分子使用酷刑获得,所有的都是技术侦察侦得的。

  有专家就指出,暴力恐怖犯罪行为人通常会受到某些极端思想和理念的控制,肉体痛苦未必能逼迫其在诉讼中与代表国家的侦控机关合作。事实上,有时酷刑之下还会带来虚假供述。法国打击阿尔及利亚恐怖主义犯罪的例子,即为明证。

  而酷刑报告也提出,20项反恐胜利行动中没有一项是因为用了这些刑讯手段获得的,或非此手段获取不了的情报。实质上,就连美国前白宫反恐首长克拉克也曾指出,美国使用的酷刑“令人反感之至”,且收效不佳。他指出,美国政府获得的基地组织、伊拉克和大规模杀伤性武器之间有关联的消息来源,可能就是个被逼供者,而这消息却“导致美国攻打伊拉克”。

  还应看到,在美国,根据美国羁押人员审讯备忘录,反恐审讯中的非常规方法被分为两类:第一类其适用一般须经批准;第二类须有充分理由相信被羁押人掌握有关键情报时经批准方可适用。但从酷刑报告看,很多审讯方式已在非人道的范畴内。像报告指出的,该计划启动期间在已知的119个被拘押者中,至少26人是被错误拘押。

  收效不佳,还会增加反恐道德成本,源于此酷刑在反恐侦讯的滥用才会备受质疑。日本、英国等国家侦查实践表明,完全可大量采用催眠、根据脑电波进行信息分析,帮助侦讯人员获取藏在恐怖分子头脑中的有益信息。这更为审视美国反恐侦讯用酷刑的价值提供了新切口。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Australia: Played by Vladimir Putin, a ‘Weary’ Donald Trump Could Walk away from Ukraine

Austria: Maybe Trump’s Tariff Bludgeon Was Good for Something after All

Spain: Spain’s Defense against Trump’s Tariffs

Canada: Donald Trump’s Oddities Mask a Real Threat that Lurks in Plain Sight

Topics

Germany: Trump-Putin Call: Nothing but Empty Talk

Austria: The Harvard President’s Voluntary Pay Cut Is a Strong Signal

Canada: No, Joly, We Don’t Want America’s Far-Left Academic Refugees

Germany: Trump’s Selfishness

Austria: Trump Ignores Israel’s Interests during Gulf Visit

Germany: Trump’s Offer and Trump’s Sword

Canada: A Guide To Surviving the Trump Era

Related Articles

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Previous article
Next article