Sunday, May 09, 2004
Torture in Iraq
The torture complementing our mistakes has received enough publicity. My feeling is that it was due to a combination of low morale, overwork, a culture of disrespect, ignorance, confusion as to who was in charge, and an attempt by the "culprits" to satisfy repeated orders to "soften them up". The culprits "on the front line" had apparently received little or no training in what they were to do, although at least one had already had experience in U.S. prisons and a previous record of brutality in his marriage. One woman claims to have not heard of the Geneva Conventions. In any event, they clearly were not seriously exposed to such information. We are told now the purpose of taking the pictures was to have something to show to new prisoners when they were brought in, to give them more of a reason to cooperate. Whether the pictures were used this way or not, I do not know. But if it was understood that this was the purpose, it would help explain some of the poses — and would certainly implicate people much higher in the chain of command than the actors.
One point that has not been made is the extreme gap between what young Americans today understand as proper sexual behavior and that accepted by conservative Iraqis. The culprits knew they were humiliating the Iraqis, indeed that is what they thought was wanted. But they did not understand that their behavior would be seen, or said to be seen, as depraved and evil. Exposed to a culture that regards sadistic sexual play, including tying up one another, as just another alternative way to enjoy life, it would have been difficult for some of them to see what they did as "so bad", especially when others suggested and abetted the practices. I certainly hope these front-line "culprits" are not the ones who receive the brunt of the punishment for their actions.
I also read by today's paper that many "experts" say that torture, including such measures as the above, "never pays", that the information that is obtained in this way is generally worthless because unreliable. To me, this is just too neat. It would imply that rigorously following the Geneva Conventions is a "no brainer" that benefits everyone. Instead, although I have no doubt that some people come to enjoy torturing their victims, torture has been used down through history because it often does "work". So instead of accepting the easy "scientific" out, we should instead decide that even if torture is effective, it will not be used in the absence of specific judicial decisions about single, closely defined questions asked of specific individuals. If it is ever used outside these limits, the United States should stand ready to bring those involved before international courts.
The torture complementing our mistakes has received enough publicity. My feeling is that it was due to a combination of low morale, overwork, a culture of disrespect, ignorance, confusion as to who was in charge, and an attempt by the "culprits" to satisfy repeated orders to "soften them up". The culprits "on the front line" had apparently received little or no training in what they were to do, although at least one had already had experience in U.S. prisons and a previous record of brutality in his marriage. One woman claims to have not heard of the Geneva Conventions. In any event, they clearly were not seriously exposed to such information. We are told now the purpose of taking the pictures was to have something to show to new prisoners when they were brought in, to give them more of a reason to cooperate. Whether the pictures were used this way or not, I do not know. But if it was understood that this was the purpose, it would help explain some of the poses — and would certainly implicate people much higher in the chain of command than the actors.
One point that has not been made is the extreme gap between what young Americans today understand as proper sexual behavior and that accepted by conservative Iraqis. The culprits knew they were humiliating the Iraqis, indeed that is what they thought was wanted. But they did not understand that their behavior would be seen, or said to be seen, as depraved and evil. Exposed to a culture that regards sadistic sexual play, including tying up one another, as just another alternative way to enjoy life, it would have been difficult for some of them to see what they did as "so bad", especially when others suggested and abetted the practices. I certainly hope these front-line "culprits" are not the ones who receive the brunt of the punishment for their actions.
I also read by today's paper that many "experts" say that torture, including such measures as the above, "never pays", that the information that is obtained in this way is generally worthless because unreliable. To me, this is just too neat. It would imply that rigorously following the Geneva Conventions is a "no brainer" that benefits everyone. Instead, although I have no doubt that some people come to enjoy torturing their victims, torture has been used down through history because it often does "work". So instead of accepting the easy "scientific" out, we should instead decide that even if torture is effective, it will not be used in the absence of specific judicial decisions about single, closely defined questions asked of specific individuals. If it is ever used outside these limits, the United States should stand ready to bring those involved before international courts.
Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
