ALEX KERR | staff writer
Torture. It’s an ugly word with a slew of even uglier feelings attached to it. We associate it with enemies; wild monsters who couldn’t possibly share our moral codes or standards.
We like to think torture only happens in the dark rooms of tiny towns in distant countries, far from the light of American democracy.
Interrogation, on the other hand, often stirs up images of suit–clad CIA agents, staring down their subjects, safely separated by a steel table and a good defense lawyer.
President Obama has begun the process of closing down Guantánamo Bay prison, amid allegations of its inmates from the “war on terror” experiencing harsh interrogation, abuse, and even torture.
Though Obama’s legislation has only limited the use of force in interrogation to previously approved techniques within the Army Field Manual, while prohibiting waterboarding, forced nudity and mock executions, some opposition calls for its removal all together.
In a society which now deems embarrassment and sleep deprivation as torture—Susan J. Crawford, convening authority of military commissions being a prime spokesperson, does—critics have long called the government’s handling of Guantánamo Bay prisoners unacceptable. Demanding better treatment for inmates, a Newsweek article on January 22 titled the prison’s closure as “The End of Torture” and an “act of bravery.”
In the article, “What To Do With The Prisoners,” Newsweek writer Grenville Byford said the best reason for closing Guantánamo was removing “one of our enemies’ best arguments for hating us.”
Byford goes on to say, “even if the released terrorist achieves his ends, what is the chance of any one of us being a victim? It is very small. If those we release from Guantánamo pull off a new 9/11 in each of the next 10 years, they would kill slightly over 1/100 of one percent of American citizens.”
1/100 of one percent. 30, 382 Americans. That’s 26,146 more people than have lost their lives fighting in the Iraq War, and nearly as many as the Korean War.
Guantánamo Bay currently houses approximately 250 inmates, all of whom are held in relation to the attack on our nation in 2001, and subsequent detainees from the war on terror. Would an “act of bravery” which releases these prisoners truly represent our ideals if it sacrifices unwitting American lives?
“In the world of international terrorism, there are certain times where more than conventional interrogation techniques are needed,” junior business economics major Brett Friesen said. “I believe that protecting our country should be the first priority even if this means using force.”
Those who demand the end of forceful interrogation and the release of Guantánamo prisoners must acknowledge that though we may choose to act without force, violence or aggression towards prisoners of war, the prisoners themselves have not.
While every individual has the right to choose a peaceful or even pacifist view of war, it is a government’s responsibility and duty to protect its citizens.
The individuals who participated in attacks on our nation willingly acted of their own accord, and chose to give or risk their lives to accomplish their goal, as evidenced by four jets our nation lost that September day.
It is not the government’s place, however, to decide for its civilian citizens when and how they should give their lives to avoid giving our enemies “arguments for hating us.” Though every attempt should be made to attain and preserve peace, the very essence of war negates our ability to pacify it.
“I dont believe that force or torture are things that should be used in all or even a majority of cases,” Friesen said. “However, I think that the option should be left open for a situation where such action is deemed as being beneficial.”
While torture itself is both inhumane and often ineffective, the removal of all force from detainee interrogation is about as effective as lecturing an infant. The radicals who struck our nation seek our demise, not an apology. They do not think in terms of discussion or resolution, they acknowledge only action.
When violence, aggression and death is your only language, verbal coercion is far from effective. Forceful interrogation is a sad byproduct of war, but one that has served its purpose.
