Donald Trump says that “torture works” and that if elected president, he will bring back waterboarding.
In fact, he says he will allow techniques “a hell of a lot worse” than waterboarding and use them regardless of effectiveness on terrorist organizations like ISIS because they “deserve it.”
By advocating that the United States brings back torture, Trump again demonstrates his astute understanding of the American electorate. Fifty-three percent of Americans say that torturing terrorists can be justified. Polling only Republicans, the slice of the electorate Trump is trying to charm in this primary season, the number is even larger, over 70%.
One reason behind these large numbers can be gathered from psychological studies in which individuals support the use of torture when the subject is categorized as a terrorist, regardless of its intelligence value.
It may be smart politics to support torture, but Trump’s eye-for-an-eye approach to defeat terrorist networks will make the United States less, not more, safe and the American electorate needs to know why, before more ballots are cast.
In fact, today most government officials, regardless of party affiliation, experts and scientists agree with Republican Sen. John McCain that torture “compromised our values, stained our national honor, and did little practical good.”
Importantly, there is also widespread agreement that American use of torture serves as a recruitment magnet for the world’s terrorist networks. Several high ranking government officials note how al Qaeda use Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay as symbolic recruiting tools to reinforce anti-American sentiment and grow their numbers.
In short, Trump’s torture policy will fuel the same terrorist organizations that he wants to destroy.
In 2009, President Barack Obama issued an executive order banning waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques — the methods Trump says he would reinstall if elected. Instead Obama favors methods that glean intelligence without sacrificing America’s ideals, such as a rapport-building approach that is far more likely to elicit good and earlier intelligence than torture.
When issuing the executive order, the President said that enhanced interrogation methods “serve as a recruitment tool for terrorists and they increase the will of our enemies to fight us, while decreasing the will of others to work with America. … They did not advance our war and counterterrorism efforts — they undermined them.”
Trump is not alone in wanting to bring back torture to the U.S. foreign policy toolkit. Though perhaps not as vocal, other Republican candidates consider a return to the use of torture if elected. Marco Rubio defends the Bush administration’s authorization of torture, while Ted Cruz claims that waterboarding doesn’t qualify as torture.
The United States has a dark recent past on torture and loose talk by Republicans — particularly Trump as the party’s frontrunner — on torture damages the country’s ability to repair its reputation abroad. More importantly, there are direct links between torture and making America less safe. The policy and talk thereof should hence be returned to the abyss that it was buried in by President Obama over seven years ago.
This piece originally ran in CNN, February 23, 2016
Human Security & Governance, Human Security & Governance
Share:
Donald Trump says that “torture works” and that if elected president, he will bring back waterboarding.
In fact, he says he will allow techniques “a hell of a lot worse” than waterboarding and use them regardless of effectiveness on terrorist organizations like ISIS because they “deserve it.”
By advocating that the United States brings back torture, Trump again demonstrates his astute understanding of the American electorate. Fifty-three percent of Americans say that torturing terrorists can be justified. Polling only Republicans, the slice of the electorate Trump is trying to charm in this primary season, the number is even larger, over 70%.
One reason behind these large numbers can be gathered from psychological studies in which individuals support the use of torture when the subject is categorized as a terrorist, regardless of its intelligence value.
It may be smart politics to support torture, but Trump’s eye-for-an-eye approach to defeat terrorist networks will make the United States less, not more, safe and the American electorate needs to know why, before more ballots are cast.
In fact, today most government officials, regardless of party affiliation, experts and scientists agree with Republican Sen. John McCain that torture “compromised our values, stained our national honor, and did little practical good.”
Importantly, there is also widespread agreement that American use of torture serves as a recruitment magnet for the world’s terrorist networks. Several high ranking government officials note how al Qaeda use Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay as symbolic recruiting tools to reinforce anti-American sentiment and grow their numbers.
In short, Trump’s torture policy will fuel the same terrorist organizations that he wants to destroy.
In 2009, President Barack Obama issued an executive order banning waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques — the methods Trump says he would reinstall if elected. Instead Obama favors methods that glean intelligence without sacrificing America’s ideals, such as a rapport-building approach that is far more likely to elicit good and earlier intelligence than torture.
Trump is not alone in wanting to bring back torture to the U.S. foreign policy toolkit. Though perhaps not as vocal, other Republican candidates consider a return to the use of torture if elected. Marco Rubio defends the Bush administration’s authorization of torture, while Ted Cruz claims that waterboarding doesn’t qualify as torture.
The United States has a dark recent past on torture and loose talk by Republicans — particularly Trump as the party’s frontrunner — on torture damages the country’s ability to repair its reputation abroad. More importantly, there are direct links between torture and making America less safe. The policy and talk thereof should hence be returned to the abyss that it was buried in by President Obama over seven years ago.
This piece originally ran in CNN, February 23, 2016
Recent & Related
Bushehr, Barakah, and the Future of Nuclear Security in the Persian Gulf
Is Congress Losing Its Grip On The Nation’s Purse Strings?
What Would Militia Disarmament in Iraq Actually Mean and Can It Be Achieved?
The Silent Infrastructure of Survival in Iran
Renewing the UN’s Toolbox for Peace and Security
Is the Iran War Worth It?
Culture is Currency Between Trump and Xi
The Sino-Moroccan Green Partnership in the Shadow of the Iran War
The United Arab Emirates and Pakistan: Weaponizing Interdependence
Takeaways from the Quad Foreign Ministers’ Meeting
Parallel Talks with Israel are Reshaping Syria-Lebanon Relations
The Arab Maghreb Union Didn’t Stall. It Collapsed.
การทำเหมืองแร่โดยไม่ได้รับการควบคุมตามแนวแม่น้ำในแผ่นดินใหญ่ของเอเชียตะวันออกเฉียงใต้
ການຂຸດຄົ້ນ-ປຸງແຕ່ງແຮ່ທີ່ບໍ່ຖືກຕ້ອງ ຢູ່ຕາມແມ່ນໍ້າສາຍຕ່າງໆ ຢູ່ແຜ່ນດິນໃຫຍ່ອາຊີຕາເວັນອອກສຽງໃຕ້ Unregulated Mining Along Rivers in Mainland Southeast Asia (Lao Language)
Current Geopolitics Shift Deep-Sea Mining Debates
Navigating Seabed Mining in the Cook Islands: A Conversation with John Parianos
การทำเหมืองแร่โดยไม่ได้รับการควบคุมตามแนวแม่น้ำในแผ่นดินใหญ่ของเอเชียตะวันออกเฉียงใต้
Mining in Mainland Southeast Asia – River Basins Dashboard
Unregulated Mining Along Rivers in Mainland Southeast Asia
Trump’s Critical Minerals Search in Africa Won’t Tip the Scales Against China
The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Violence Against Women and Girls
Implications of Chinese Influence Operations for South Korea and the US-ROK Alliance
Find an Expert
Home to more than 100 scholars and global affiliates, the Stimson Center is proud to be a magnet for the world’s leading experts on the most pressing foreign policy and national security issues of our time. Explore our experts and their work.