By Katie Van Adzin '11
Staff Writer
President Bush, in his ninth veto to date, blocked the passage of a bill that would have denied the CIA the use of physical force against prisoners during interrogations. The bill was supported by congressional Democrats, who maintained that it banned tactics whose effectiveness was already under question ("Veto of Bill on CIA Tactics Affirms Bush's Legacy," The New York Times (online), March 9, 2008).
Most of these tactics are considered "classified," and therefore what they entail remains a mystery to the public. This aspect is the most frightening of all. If the public does not know what the bill sought to ban, then one wonders what is currently permitted. What we do know is that the bill would have banned methods such as simulated drowning, or "waterboarding."
These interrogation techniques have been viewed with skepticism for some time now, due to their tendency to provide intelligence agencies with false information extracted under duress. Regardless of whether or not a person is involved in a terrorist plot, such tactics are likely to produce one of two equally counterproductive results: they will lie in an effort to save themselves or refuse to yield any information, strengthening their cause through martyrdom. In both instances, the misinformation they provide endangers the lives of U.S. soldiers and citizens.
The practical problems that the use of these techniques pales in comparison to the political issues at stake. America is hardly at its pinnacle of popularity in the international community. The last thing it needs right now in the wake of the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison is to have its president endorse the use of torture. Detainees are still being held at Guantanamo Bay. President Bush appears not to care that the rest of the world may now logically suspect that they are also being tortured. A consistent theme of the Bush administration has been its failure to recognize the consequences of its policies and actions. Refusing to guarantee the humane treatment of untried prisoners will only further inflame the wrath of anti-American groups and swell their ranks. The upsurge in anti-American sentiment will spark more terrorist attacks, and Americans who are captured by enemy groups will have even less chance of survival and suffer greater cruelty.
Between the ineffectiveness and moral reprehensibility of its use and the further damage it will do to America's credibility in the world, there is no justification for torture. These methods have been criticized by the FBI and other interrogation experts as needless and detrimental. The President's defense for their use has predictably and unconvincingly been that the threat of terrorism warrants them. It seems ironic that benign scare tactics are put into practice to defend those of a more menacing nature.
While it seems at times as though America's image in the world could get no worse, it is still possible "Waterboarding" was employed by the likes of the Spanish Inquisition and the Khmer Rouge ("President George Bus vetoes Congress ban on CIA use of waterboarding", Times Online, March 10, 2008).
To have America's president publicly endorse the same antiquated and inhumane method will strip America of what little legitimacy it was managed to still retain.