Dirty Hands, Clean Conscience? The CIA Inspector General's Investigation of "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" in the War on Terror and the Torture Debate
Dirty Hands, Clean Conscience? The CIA Inspector General's Investigation of "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" in the War on Terror and the Torture Debate
复制标题
手脏，良心清白？
DOI：
10.1080/14754835.2011.619406
复制
发表时间：
2011
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Blakeley R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Blakeley R
反恐战争引发了关于酷刑作为挫败恐怖主义威胁的一种手段的激烈辩论。持功利主义立场的人和主张绝对禁止酷刑的人之间的论点两极分化。在功利主义阵营中，有些人认为，酷刑虽然不道德，但应该合法化，用于打击恐怖主义，以便更好地控制和管理。这篇文章将提供新的见解，通过其分析中央情报局监察长的2004年特别审查反恐，拘留和审讯活动，在2009年解密。这为反驳当代酷刑辩护者的关键假设提供了重要证据。具体而言，监察主任的调查结果强化了以下论点：酷刑无效，在受控条件下使使用酷刑合法化的努力是徒劳的，即使在上级当局允许酷刑的情况下，对肇事者的指责仍可能随之而来。此外，酷刑往往不是为了阻止迫在眉睫的威胁。中情局在反恐战争中使用它也不例外。无论如何，它几乎没有得到任何不可能通过合法手段获得的证据。
The War on Terror has generated fierce debate on torture as a means of thwarting terrorist threats. The argument is polarized between those who take a utilitarian position and those who seek to uphold the absolute prohibition on torture. Within the utilitarian camp, there are those who argue that torture, while immoral, should be legalized for use in the fight against terrorism, so that it can be better controlled and regulated. This article will provide new insights through its analysis of the CIA Inspector General's 2004 Special Review of Counterterrorism, Detention and Interrogation Activities, declassified in 2009. This offers important evidence that counters the key assumptions of contemporary torture apologists. Specifically, the Inspector General's findings reinforce the argument that torture is not effective, that efforts to legalize its use under controlled conditions are futile, and that, even where torture is permitted by higher authorities, recriminations against the perpetrators are still likely to ensue. Furthermore, torture tends not to be aimed at thwarting imminent threats. Its use by the CIA in the War on Terror is no exception. In any case it has yielded little evidence that could not have been obtained through legitimate means.