A Defense of a Policy of Torture
Torture may be bad. It may be inefficient, it may be politically unpopular, it may be morally wrong. Nations having a policy of torture, however – that may be good for both the torturer and the torturee.
Imagine the following hypothetical: you are a spy with valuable state secrets. You get captured. You know you will give up these state secrets, and with very dire consequences (e.g. the injury or death of thousands of people). Would you rather be tricked into divulging these secrets, or tortured? An informal poll suggested that most people would rather be tricked. Why? Because torture is painful and they did not want to endure the pain of torture. Fair enough.
Follow up question: when you return home, would you tell your superiors that you were tricked or tortured? Disclosing state secrets is serious business. Because there is a huge financial incentive to sell state secrets, your home country officials will naturally be suspicious. How can you prove that you disclosed the secrets against your will? Wouldn’t it be just as likely that you sold the secrets and lied about being tricked? If you end up being tortured, on the other hand, you can console yourself with the thought that the more horrible the torture, the more evidence there is that you disclosed the secrets against your will. Torture may be painful, but death by a firing squad could be worse.
Even if a nation is morally opposed to torture, having a policy of torture can actually encourage efficient disclosure. Spies will be reluctant to disclose secrets if it means death for treason. When a nation has a policy of torture, spies can sell secrets, give themselves a black eye and some burn marks, and have a relatively credible lie about being tortured. In a nation that is categorically opposed to torture, spies would not have this option so the cost of disclosure (firing squad) would be greater. Of course, a spy could always defect or otherwise not return to his home country, but as would-be mob informants know, living life as a known rat can be dangerous. In any case, the higher the cost of disclosure, the more spies will fight to keep secrets and the more aggressive the capturing country will need to be to elicit secrets. Giving people the credible excuse of torture decreases the possible costs of disclosure.
Torturees might like the option/excuse of torture so they could reveal state secrets when it suits them. Having torturees freer to divulge secrets is better for the capturing country because they could get more secrets faster. Trickery, torture, why not at least have options? Even if the country does not torture or does not torture frequently, having a policy of torture benefits both the torturer and the torturee.
Yeah, I never saw the point of saying we shouldn’t torture people. I mean, sometimes it’s gotta be done. I just hope those other countries don’t read this, otherwise we’ll have CIA agents selling secrets the first chance they get.
Alyosha
September 30, 2008 at 10:02 pm
From a post entitled ‘Torture Memos: Food for Thought’ (http://porkopolis.blogspot.com/2009/04/torture-memos-food-for-thought.html)
Assume for the moment that torture was used on terrorists like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (KSM) (”principal architect” of the 9/11 attacks). The science of immune systems (Immunology), Evolution and an analysis informed by Game Theory — a branch of applied mathematics that is used in the social sciences (most notably economics), biology, engineering, political science, international relations, computer science, and philosophy — offer us billions of years of ‘best practices’ in dealing with deadly threats that can be translated to the moral challenges our society faces in the Global War on Terror.
In principle, an immune system’s mechanism works to protect an organism by attacking pathogens that would do it harm. White blood cells, or leukocytes, are constantly at work defending against harmful microbes in the body. The fevers we experience when our bodies get the flu, a ‘high-level attack’ and a disease that takes 250,000 to 500,000 humans annually, are part of the overall defenses the immune system utilizes. Because the body doesn’t operate properly in a fever’s high temperatures, it maintains a normal temperature when it is simply experiencing ‘low-level attacks’, like the germs that infect a small wound on your hand.
Unfortunately, the immune system’s protection comes at a price; it’s a two-edged sword with built-in imperfections. Sometimes it attacks the very organism it’s trying to defend. This condition is called Autoimmunity. Rheumatology is one branch of medicine that treats one of these imperfections.
Eons of Evolution have given us a mechanism that precariously balances aggressive actions with unintended consequences. We must remind ourselves that the attack-and-defend interplay between pathogens and immune systems is not a steady-state system, but is co-evolving. One of the more fascinating adaptations is the process of active immunity and its production of antibodies. With active immunity, an immune system is constantly re-programming itself in response to the diseases/attacks it has survived.
Much like the immune system uses fever, our society should keep waterboarding as a legitimate, but rarely used, tool to protect the greater good. Particularly against individuals like KSM who are determined to destroy our society.
The argument is often made that the Geneva Conventions and policies against torture are there to protect our soldiers. But the historical evidence doesn’t support this claim. The Nazis and Japanese abused POWs during WWII. POWs were tortured during the Vietnam War. And more recently, our troops have been tortured to death in Iraq.
Like a doctor treating a patient, our society should be guided by the core principles of ‘first do no harm’ and the Golden Rule (treat others as you would have them treat you) as we debate and evolve our policies. Implied within the Golden Rule and the Geneva Conventions is an expectation of reciprocity; even from our enemies. It’s worth remembering that al-Qaida and its operatives are not signatories to the Geneva Conventions and have no claim on its protection.
While water boarding is an extreme tactic, it is justified by the extreme measures our enemies have taken against us. Our challenge is to make sure that we judiciously use this tool and don’t allow a potential abuse that would result in an attack on the very society we’re trying to protect; ala an autoimmune disease. We must be mindful of the potential hazard of declaring the operation (our anti-terrorism tactics) a success at the expense of losing the patient (our ethics and morals).
Porkopolis
April 29, 2009 at 12:16 pm