{"title":"Justifying Torture in the Philippine-American War","authors":"William L. d’Ambruoso","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"Through primary documents such as court-martial transcripts, letters, and diaries, the Philippine-American War (1899–1902) provides an underexploited opportunity to see torturers themselves justifying their behavior at length. U.S. soldiers accused of abusing prisoners consistently played down their acts, arguing that the rope went around the detainee’s jaw instead of his neck, that the hits were slaps from the sides rather than punches straight out from the shoulder, that the “water cure” (which is somewhat like waterboarding) did not last very long, and so on. Yet at the same time, soldiers believed that it was necessary to use methods that would not be considered appropriate in other settings, because, as one veteran of the war put it, “[S]cruples often mean[t] flat failure or belated action.” Overall, U.S. interrogators in the Philippines believed that their techniques were, in the words of one practitioner, “the least brutal and painful which would be efficacious.”","PeriodicalId":361404,"journal":{"name":"American Torture from the Philippines to Iraq","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123565804","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Search for “Nasty” but “Safe” Interrogation Methods","authors":"William L. d’Ambruoso","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0003","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter presents the book’s main theoretical argument, with examples from the French-Algerian War and other cases, followed by the empirical strategy. First, the antitorture norm can, paradoxically, encourage its own violation by convincing those who believe that those not bound by norms and laws have an advantage in international politics. This is called the Cheaters Win explanation. Torturers prefer their methods because they believe security requires brutality. Second, the norm’s lack of specificity allows practitioners to portray their behavior as something short of torture and redefine torture to exclude their behavior. In sum, torturers believe their interrogation methods are nasty enough to work but still permissibly mild, or mild-sounding. The emphasis on the importance of subtle beliefs best matches in-depth case studies, which are chosen to capture torture’s recurrence over time and demonstrate the explanation’s range across various actors and settings.","PeriodicalId":361404,"journal":{"name":"American Torture from the Philippines to Iraq","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123508131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Twenty-First-Century Torture","authors":"William L. d’Ambruoso","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"Immediately following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, members of the George W. Bush administration signaled that current rules regarding intelligence, detention, and interrogation were too confining. With approval from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), the president declared that the Geneva Conventions’ detention and interrogation guidelines would not apply to Al Qaeda and Taliban detainees. The problem with Geneva, administration lawyers argued, was that it would tie interrogators’ hands. The CIA and the military wanted an explicit legal blessing for their interrogation programs. They got it in the form of a series of memos by the OLC and military lawyers, who defined torture in exceedingly narrow terms. The result was “enhanced interrogation,” which the administration claimed did not amount to torture but was still a sufficiently “tough” program to break hardened terrorists.","PeriodicalId":361404,"journal":{"name":"American Torture from the Philippines to Iraq","volume":"90 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133413914","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Liberal-Democratic Torture","authors":"William L. d’Ambruoso","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0002","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter gives a primer on liberal-democratic torture. A brief summary of the historical record shows that liberal democracies have repeatedly engaged in “stealth” coercive interrogation, which the chapter argues usually qualifies as torture by the UN Convention against Torture’s standard definition. What can explain the pattern of recurrence that emerges? Previous work is a useful starting point but leaves important questions unanswered. Lack of monitoring can invite norm violations, but torture is not always hidden. Racism and anger make states and individuals more likely to torture, but they do not tell us why torture often occurs in conjunction with demands for intelligence. Realist and rational choice arguments help to explain the frequent connection between torture and intelligence needs, but they fail to address critical lurking puzzles: Why do people believe torture works? And how do torturers justify these norm-breaking deeds to themselves and others?","PeriodicalId":361404,"journal":{"name":"American Torture from the Philippines to Iraq","volume":"28 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129942668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Conclusion","authors":"William L. d’Ambruoso","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0007","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explores the scope and limits of the book’s central claims, extending the argument to other circumstances and norms and describing cases that do not fit the theory. The chapter examines the recent variation between the United States and Europe on the question of torture. The human rights picture in Europe has improved over the past few decades in part because European institutions have been clearer than the United States about prohibiting cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, eliminating the antitorture norm’s specificity problem, and preventing a slippery slope that so often ends with torture. Finally, the chapter broadens the argument by demonstrating how the pervasive belief that autocrats have an edge over rule-bound democracies has tempted certain elected officials to chip away at their own liberal-democratic institutions.","PeriodicalId":361404,"journal":{"name":"American Torture from the Philippines to Iraq","volume":"76 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115012147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Roots and Rationalizations of U.S. Torture in Vietnam","authors":"William L. d’Ambruoso","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0005","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter traces the twin tales of the CIA’s and the U.S. military’s use of torture during the Vietnam War. The CIA’s interrogation program was rooted in the early days of the Cold War, when the agency was founded. U.S. foreign policy elites like Dwight Eisenhower and Allen Dulles were convinced that the Soviet Union’s freedom from norms and laws gave it an edge. As a result, the CIA began researching and practicing behavioral control techniques, using drugs and sensory deprivation to compete with Soviet programs. The agency’s KUBARK interrogation manual (1963) considered physical torture off-limits and ineffective, but recommended “maxim[izing] mental discomfort.” Likewise, CIA interrogators in Vietnam such as Frank Snepp believed isolation and sensory deprivation were both ethically and efficaciously superior to harsher alternatives. While racism and exasperation explain much of the U.S. military’s use of torture, soldiers also used water and electricity because the techniques were “unpleasant” but not “injurious.”","PeriodicalId":361404,"journal":{"name":"American Torture from the Philippines to Iraq","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130668674","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Torture and the Norm against It","authors":"William L. d’Ambruoso","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197570326.003.0001","url":null,"abstract":"Why has torture persisted into the twenty-first century despite long-standing normative and legal prohibitions? Especially strange is torture’s occurrence at the hands of liberal democracies, which are supposed to uphold human rights. Perhaps we should not be surprised by democratic hypocrisy in war—realists and rational choice theorists expect all states to violate norms if doing so holds instrumental promise. Yet torture is likely to yield inaccurate intelligence, harm valuable detainees’ memories, stress interrogators, invite retaliation, and encourage the enemy to fight on rather than surrender. In short, torture is both ethically and efficaciously questionable—and its recurrence is puzzling.","PeriodicalId":361404,"journal":{"name":"American Torture from the Philippines to Iraq","volume":"99 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124974924","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}