Military Interrogation in the Modern Age
Some Call Armed Forces Questioning Techniques "Torture"
Sep 7, 2008
Torture is more commonly associated with physical pain, however psychological suffering can include anxiety, fear, and guilt. Such torture tactics are more commonly used when conducting military interrogations today. This has come to light with the controversies in Abu Gharaib and Guantanamo camps that house suspected terrorists. Cohen and Corrado (State torture in the contemporary world, Journal of Comparative Sociology, 46, 2005, 104) view this state-endorsed torture as nothing more than a political war crime.
Human Engineering
In the early 20th century, coercive military torture tactics gave way to a more experimental approach known as “human engineering” (Weiss, The American culture of torture: A review essay, Social Justice, 33, 2006, 132). Behaviorists like Ivan Pavlov, who used animal and human experiments, promoted this new approach. These behaviorist ideas were expanded upon in the 1930s and 1940s by researchers at major universities, who created new behavioral control methods, which were focused on “aversive conditioning” (Weiss, 132). Many of the coercive techniques used in psychological torture were adopted by the United States military such as the “’preparatory set’—a state of tense and anxious readiness in anticipation of a coercive stimulus (shock of pain)” (Weiss, 133).
Mind Control
In the 1950s, the CIA began to study mind control in projects between 1950 and 1962 called “Operation Bluebird, Project X, Operation Paperclip, and Operation Artichoke,” in which CIA scientists used LSD, psychosurgery, sensory deprivation, and electroshock “to break the resistance of involuntary subjects” (Weiss, 133).
As time went on, the CIA used methods of psychological torture that employed self-inflicted pain and punishment in order to induce self-blame and psychological weakening in the torture subject. In the 1960s, this became the preferred method of torture by the military using a two-phase psychological tactic combining stress and time disorientation with sensory deprivation. This remained the preferred military torture method until the Carter Administration turned the tide in the 1970s.
Renewed Interest in Coercive Techniques
After the events of “9/11,” psychological military torture tactics have gained renewed interest by both the government and the public. This is due to the fear that most Americans felt after that fateful day, yet it has also been deemed by the government as necessary.
Senior intelligence officials have mused that jihadists are unlike any other military prisoners the U.S. has ever dealt with. Prior to this, “insurgents were ‘more understandable,’ and they responded to ‘love of family’ as an interrogative manipulation. The family technique fails with Islamists” and General Richard Myers has stated, “Let’s not forget the kind of people we have down there [Guantanamo Bay]. These are the people that don’t know any moral values” (Weiss, 134). This is reminiscent of racist ruminations of days gone by when General Westmoreland observed the “’oriental doesn’t value life in the same way as a westerner’” (Weiss, 134).
Bush Claims Torture Tactics Curtailed
President Bush contends that all types of military “torture” have been radically curtailed, yet the actions of this Administration have generated global outrage and “contributed to the United States’ plummeting esteem, particularly in the countries most likely to generate a terrorist threat against the United States” (Roth, Torture in the war on terror: Kenneth Roth reviews protecting liberty in an age of terror, Harvard International Review, 28,2006, 81).
Military tactics that were once forgotten have now been brought to the forefront to be dealt with in the court of public opinion. It can only be hoped that this will spark new discussion and discourse on the subject of methods of military interrogation during political confinement.
