The U.S.’s War on Terror has generated and continues to engender a great deal of international and domestic condemnation. This essay consequently analyses one of the most controversial and insidious repercussions of the ‘War on Terror’: the U.S.’s use of torture on terrorist suspects. Ultimately, this paper argues that torture as a counter-terrorism tactic was an ill-conceived act of desperation that violated human rights, damaged the U.S. government’s integrity and potentially increased terrorism. For this reason, the U.S.’s choice of torture is argued to be the basest of its mistakes in its War on Terror. Thus, this discussion focuses on the emergence of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, cases of torture at Guantanamo Bay, the indefensibility of torture and the irreconcilable consequences of state sponsored torture. To substantiate its main arguments, this analysis draws on the International Committee of the Red Cross Report On The Treatment Of Fourteen High Value Detainees In CIA Custody and reports from the Select Senate Committee on Intelligence.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction: What are the main criticisms of the use of torture by the U.S. in its War on Terror?
1.1 Definition of torture
2. Background
2.1 Emergence of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’
3. Evidence that enhanced interrogation techniques constituted torture
3.1 Cases of torture at Guantánamo
4. Key criticisms of torture
4.1 Refutation of the ticking time bomb scenario
4.2 Torture does not provide useful information
4.3 Torture is counter-productive and may increase terrorism
5. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Key Themes
This paper examines the controversial use of torture by the United States during the War on Terror, arguing that such tactics were ill-conceived acts of desperation that violated international human rights, damaged government integrity, and proved counter-productive to national security.
- The evolution and implementation of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EITs).
- Documented evidence of torture at the Guantánamo Bay detention facility.
- Critique of the "ticking time bomb" scenario as a moral and legal justification for torture.
- The impact of state-sponsored torture on military institutions and the rule of law.
- The link between torture practices and the radicalization or recruitment of terrorists.
Excerpt from the Book
3.1 Cases of torture at Guantánamo
GITMO is arguably the most infamous detention facility in the U.S.’s War on Terror. Today it continues to serve as recognisable reference point for the U.S.’s direct use of torture. Thus, GITMO exemplifies torture’s horrifying effects and offers concrete evidence of official collusion in a still largely hidden programme (Amann, 2005: 2086). From the 11th of January 2002 GITMO functioned as a joint military prison and interrogation camp under control of the Joint Task Force Guantánamo (JTF-GTMO) of the U.S. Navy. During the CIA’s D&I program the majority of GITMO’s population comprised of suspects captured in Afghanistan after the 2001 invasion. These individuals were suspected of being Al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives (Maran, 2006: 152). Consequently, GITMO became the U.S.’s principal D&I facility and unlike other sites, faced international protests. The majority of GITMO’s criticisms stemmed from the U.S. government’s contradiction of procedures enshrined in its own laws and the Geneva Convention (Amann, 2005: 2089).
According to the ICRC the most prevalent form of torture among HDVs was sleep deprivation. 11 of the 14 HVDs experienced this form of torture in conjuncture with forced stress positions, cold water and the use of repetitive loud noise or music (ICRC, 2007: 9). The SSCI corroborates the ICRC’s information and found that at least five detainees suffered from disturbing hallucinations due to prolonged sleep deprivation. In two of those cases the CIA continued despite this development (SSCIa, 2014: 3). Prolonged stress positions were almost as prevalent, with 10 of the 14 HVDs reporting such an experience. These stress positions would be conducted with the detainee being forced to be naked and with their arms extended and chained above their heads continuously for up to three days. Sometimes these interrogations involved the denial of toilet access which resulted in four HVDs reporting that they had to defecate and urinate over themselves. Beatings that involved kicking, slapping and punching and the use of a collar was reported by nine of the 14 HVDs (ICRC, 2007: 8).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: What are the main criticisms of the use of torture by the U.S. in its War on Terror?: This chapter outlines the scope of the essay, detailing how the U.S. response to 9/11 led to covert, illegal detention practices and sets the foundational arguments against the use of torture.
1.1 Definition of torture: This section defines torture through the lens of international law, specifically referencing the Convention against Torture (CAT), and addresses the attempts by U.S. officials to navigate or circumvent these definitions.
2. Background: This chapter contextualizes the political climate post-9/11, explaining the passage of the AUMF and the issuance of a Memorandum of Notification that granted the CIA unprecedented power to detain and interrogate suspects.
2.1 Emergence of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’: This section explores how the CIA collaborated with legal counsel to classify detainees as "illegal enemy combatants" to justify the development and application of coercive interrogation methods.
3. Evidence that enhanced interrogation techniques constituted torture: This chapter evaluates the findings of the ICRC report on high-value detainees to prove that the CIA's techniques were a systematic violation of the CAT.
3.1 Cases of torture at Guantánamo: This section provides specific evidence from the Guantánamo Bay facility, detailing the use of sleep deprivation, stress positions, and physical abuse on detainees.
4. Key criticisms of torture: This chapter introduces the SSCI report, which concludes that the CIA's torture program lacked efficacy and was fundamentally based on deceit.
4.1 Refutation of the ticking time bomb scenario: This section critically examines the "ticking time bomb" thought experiment, exposing the logical fallacies used by proponents to justify torture as a last-resort measure.
4.2 Torture does not provide useful information: This section argues that torture is an unreliable method of intelligence gathering, as it frequently produces false confessions and lacks evidence of preventive success.
4.3 Torture is counter-productive and may increase terrorism: This chapter analyzes the institutional damage caused by torture and its role as a propaganda tool that fuels terrorist recruitment globally.
5. Conclusion: The final chapter synthesizes the main arguments, reaffirming that torture failed as a security strategy and undermined the fundamental human rights and democratic values of the United States.
Keywords
Torture, War on Terror, Guantánamo Bay, Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, CIA, Human Rights, International Law, Ticking Time Bomb Scenario, Intelligence, SSCI, Counter-terrorism, Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, State-sponsored torture, Radicalization.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this academic work?
The work focuses on the U.S. government's use of torture during the War on Terror, specifically analyzing its legal, ethical, and strategic implications.
What are the central thematic fields addressed in the analysis?
Key themes include international human rights law, intelligence interrogation methods, the institutional consequences of state-sponsored torture, and the effectiveness of such practices in counter-terrorism.
What is the core research objective of this study?
The objective is to argue that the use of torture was an ill-conceived and counter-productive strategy that failed to provide actionable intelligence while severely damaging the moral integrity of the U.S.
Which scientific or research methods were applied?
The author uses a qualitative analysis approach, drawing upon verified government reports—specifically the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) report and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) reports—as well as academic literature on state terrorism and political philosophy.
What does the main body of the paper cover?
The main body covers the legal definitions of torture, the emergence of "enhanced interrogation techniques," detailed case studies from Guantánamo Bay, and a critical refutation of common justifications for torture.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
The most important keywords include Torture, War on Terror, Guantánamo Bay, Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, Intelligence, and Counter-terrorism.
How does the author address the "ticking time bomb" scenario?
The author refutes this scenario by applying the "Deductive Fallacy," arguing that the scenario relies on false presumptions and fails to acknowledge that torture consistently produces unreliable information.
Does the paper discuss the impact of torture on U.S. personnel?
Yes, the paper discusses how authorized torture and the normalization of violence contribute to the demoralization of military troops and erode the integrity of a nation's legal and military institutions.
What conclusion does the author reach regarding the effectiveness of these techniques?
The author concludes, based on the SSCI report, that the intelligence gained was largely inaccurate and that torture is fundamentally ineffective, serving instead as a propaganda tool that fuels terrorist recruitment.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Jeremy Raguain (Autor:in), 2016, The U.S.’s use of torture in the War on Terror, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/364681
