Ever since 9/11 the United States has been in a frenzy to keep the country and its citizens safe. Precautions have been taken, laws have been made, and tactics have been used. Human rights organizations like the United Nations have revealed that many cases of torture have gone unreported by federal agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the 
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). While some uses of torture, or more commonly referred to as enhanced interrogation, have led to the imprisonment and even death of dangerous people, it ultimately has negative effects. Government issued enhanced interrogation in the United States is morally unethical and dangerous to the reputation of the US. 

Before delving deeper into the ethics of enhanced interrogation, it is important to know what makes it unethical. There are multiple torture techniques, some of which are legal and others unauthorized by the government. Some techniques used include rectal infusion, gun and drill, waterboarding, chaining, and nudity. Each technique is unique, and elicits a negative response in its victims. Rectal infusion, or feeding, is used to keep the detainees alive, without actually allowing them to eat. Although this does not seem terrible, it can come with consequences. These include damage to the digestive tract, food rotting in the digestive tract, and inflamed rectum. These can ultimately become life threating if not treated accordingly. According to the CIA Office of Inspector General (OIG), gun and drill is an unauthorized technique in which the detainee is blindfolded and beaten with a gun or a gun pointed at them. A new officer was trained these techniques. He used them on Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a Saudi Arabian citizen, who was thought to be the mastermind behind a bombing of US soldiers. The officer was later investigated for his crimes by the OIG. Another technique, waterboarding is what first comes to mind when torture is brought into conversation. Waterboarding is the act of tricking the body into thinking its drowning. Usually a rag is placed over the face and the head is tilted back while water is poured over the rag. This keeps the water from entering the lungs and makes the detainee feel as if they are drowning. Waterboarding elicits vomiting, heaving, and convulsions. In a recent interview, President Trump exclaimed he wants to legalize waterboarding again after former president Barack Obama banned it within his first year of presidency. Another less common form of torture is the blackout box. In a  BBC News video, reporter Hilary Andersson experiences first hand what the enhanced interrogation technique “blackout box” is like for those who are forced to experience it. Andersson reports that she is confined to a small space where she has trouble breathing because of the lack of airflow. After a few minutes, the men monitoring her begin to play sounds of a baby crying. This is supposed to elicit a response in the detainee and make them feel stressed. After only 12 minutes, Andersson asks to be let out, and describes how any longer would have been unimaginable. She then describes how just being confined in a small space can make anyone come to a breaking point and confess what they know to make the torture stop. The final two techniques work in unison. Chains and nudity do exactly as they sound, which is having the detainee being chained down nude, usually while being mocked or ridiculed. This also caused them to soil themselves and left further psychological damage to those affected by it. The list of techniques, legal and not, go on, but these are the main ones used by the CIA and DIA. 

Now that methods of torture have been discussed, it is important to know exactly what defines torture. Ultimately enhanced interrogation is a substitute for the word torture, used by the CIA and DIA. According to Dictionary.com, torture is defined as “the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.” It is important to note the last point made in this definition “for sheer cruelty.” When enhanced interrogation is used out of context and used for cruelty rather than to gain information, ethics become important. There is a widespread debate over the ethics and morality of using enhanced interrogation techniques. On one end of the spectrum there are people who believe there is no other choice and the only way to protect and guarantee safety is through torture. Others believe the use of any type of torture is inhumane and ultimately does not lead to further exploitation of knowledge. I agree with the latter, and will further assess why I believe so. 

A common phrase among many parents, teachers, and elders is “treat others the way you want to be treated.” This is usually said to children and teenagers when they begin to misbehave and hurt others. If asked, many adults would agree with this statement and try to live by it, but what happens when you change the subject of this statement? Instead of talking to a child, you are talking to a military soldier who has a detainee in custody ready for interrogation. Most likely this soldier would be opposed to receive the same treatment that he is about to administer. Torture not only damages a person physically, but also mentally. When asked, most Americans would agree that torture is necessary to the safety of the United States, and in some cases it has been. Even though enhanced interrogation has made way for milestones in the United States, it has also cause severe psychological damage to many of the men unfortunate enough to experience it. The government soon realized this issue and began to take drastic measures to make sure no one else would find out. An article published by James Risen in The New York Times states that many psychologists who were hired by the C.I.A. performed tasks that would hide what was actually happening behind closed doors. This included stating certain forms of “torture” were not torture at all, and that they had no psychological or physical effects on those they were performed on. The author uncovers how psychologists were able to avoid what was actually happening to the prisoners at these sites. While talking about a report made by the CIA, Risen states, “The association’s ethics office ‘prioritized the protection of psychologists — even those who might have engaged in unethical behavior — above the protection of the public.’” This is one of many examples where the government is aware of their situation and will do anything to cover their tracks. Risen exposes the true nature that psychologists have been hiding the actual mental health of many patients because of orders given by the C.I.A. He uses specific information about the C.I.A. and has many interviews about the relationship between the C.I.A. and psychologists who worked for them.

Matt Apuzzo, Sheri Fink, and James Risen, all which have Pulitzer Prize winning articles, published an article in the New York Times which debates the issue of ethics, specifically on the treatment of human beings. The authors interview over 100 former detainees of places like Guantanamo Bay and the Salt Pits. In these interviews the men explain how they are left with mental scarring of the events taken place in these government issued sites. Many men describe how they have trouble sleeping or being in public because of the acts committed toward them. They also discuss how many were wrongfully accused of terrorist actions and how this has affected their daily lives now. The authors describe how many of the men who were accused of terroristic actions now suffer from psychological problems such as PTSD, anxiety, depression, and insomnia. An example comes from Hussein al-Marfadi and states, “permanent headaches and disturbed sleep, plagued by memories of dogs inside a blackened jail” (Apuzzo et al). The article explains the psychological damage that haunts these men and aims to put an end to enhanced interrogation. Apuzzo et al. also write “’I am living this kind of depression,’ said Younous Chekkouri, a Moroccan, who fears going outside because he sees faces in crowds as Guantánamo Bay guards. ‘I’m not normal anymore.’” In just these two examples it is easy to see the effect torture has left on these men. Enhanced interrogation is morally unsound and unethical and leaves nothing but damage to those effected by it. The authors aim to show these psychological effects that enhanced interrogation have on prisoners and their families.

In scholarly article published in Ethics and Behaviors, writer William O’Donohue debates the ethics of torture. O’Donohue argues that torture can be considered ethical when in the correct context. This means that taking someone into custody based on little to no evidence does not elicit enough reason to use such enhanced interrogation techniques. On the other hand, using said techniques on someone who is affiliated with a terrorist group is ethical and even necessary. Using enhanced interrogation techniques have lead to huge milestones for the Unites States. The assassination of Osama bin Laden can be credited to the use of torture techniques. It was the use of waterboarding along with many other techniques used on bin Laden’s allies that ultimately lead to his capture and assassination. Many of these tactics are represented in the popular movie Zero Dark Thirty which was made in 2012. Although O’Donohue believes in the power enhanced interrogation can have, he also explains how it can have its faults. In another scholarly article written by William O’Donohue, along with Deborah Davis, enhanced interrogation is once more discussed, but in a new way. The authors explain how the overuse of enhanced interrogation can lead to false confessions. This poses as a problem because a false confession can lead to the imprisonment of another innocent man, as well as unneeded actions taking place. 

In the book The War on Terror And The Laws Of War: A Military Perspective, authors Geoffrey S. Corn and Michael W. Lewis discuss the War on Terror post 9/11 and examine how this has shaped Americas defense mechanisms to terrorists. In the introduction of the book, Corn and Lewis remark “…the United States government had invoked the power of war to address the challenge of transnational terrorism” (xiv). By this, the authors are stating that after the 9/11 attacks, the United States was more cautious about their decisions, and had a larger problem at hand considering the threat of war was on a concept rather than a country. Corn and Lewis then propose the idea of the book is “focused on the operational resolution of issues related to the application of military power by the United States” (xvi). This being said, the authors have created this book to enlighten their audience on the legality of the methods used in interrogation of detainees. In Chapter 4 of the book, Corn and Lewis state, “Neither did the code condone cruelty or torture” (127). This meant the intent of the soldiers was not to harm the men they captured, but to force out information in any way they could. The main idea Corn and Lewis are stating is that torture has a place and time. In their book they discuss how the public looks at torture through a broken lens, meaning they only see what the media wants them to see. It is argued not only by these authors, but many others that there is a great need for enhanced interrogation. In another book titled Interrogational Torture: Or How Good Guys Get Bad Information with Ugly Methods, John Schiemann, professor of Political Science at Fairleigh Dickinson University, addresses the issue of whether or not using torture tactics is effective and ethical in receiving important information. As well as discussing the ethical aspect of torture, Schiemann is also interested in the effectiveness of torture, and whether or not it will elicit a truthful or false confession of information. Schiemann also includes a picture depicting the use of torture as a sort of “playoff” and describes that whether or not a detainee is helpful decided which type of torture method would be received. Schiemann concludes that theoretically a truthful response is possible, but realistically false confessions are highly likely to occur. This source aids in both the argument and counter argument, because it mentions how, like in O’Donohue’s work, torture can be used in a ethical way, but also how it has its downfalls. 

Before looking at the solutions, it is important to assess what is currently being discussed about torture. An article written by James Kitfield that published in The New York Times begins with President-Elect Trump promising to bring back waterboarding and other techniques of enhanced interrogation. Later, it is explained how many men exposed to these treatments have been permanently damaged. Trump justifies that torture techniques are not harmful and are morally acceptable, adding that they leave no permanent damage, mentally or physically. The article then hones in on a specific man who received so many brutal beatings that he was unable to give any sort of helpful information to the CIA. The examples given in this article refute any possible argument Trump has tried or will try to make. President Trump sees enhanced interrogation as a way to keep the United States safe, but doesn’t take into consideration the effects it could have on innocent people. This topic is even more relevant now since Trump signed the travel ban. This shows that he sees the Middle East as a threat rather than wanting to help them through what they are facing, which is a major civil crisis as well as terrorist attacks of their own. The overall solution to this problem should be to ban all types of enhanced interrogation techniques. Although former President Obama put an end to many of these techniques, they still rein over the government. Many reports have been filed about the misuse of enhanced interrogation and the use of unauthorized methods. Even though it is not possible to stop all forms of enhanced interrogation, it is important to monitor what is happening at places like Guantanamo Bay and the Salt Pits, which are places notorious for using harsh techniques. Another solution to consider is to allow international agencies into these US prisons monthly. This would allow these agencies to monitor what is being done, even if that means going undercover as other guards. If something unauthorized is used, the agencies will be able to report them. This solution would work well for many US prisons around the globe. 

In conclusion the ethics behind enhanced interrogation and the psychological effects it has on its detainees is unethical. The debate on ethics has become a bigger problem since President Donald Trump was elected into office. Trump plans to bring back waterboarding and other harmful techniques to keep America safe from all outside threats, or terrorists as Trump puts it. With interviews of over 100 men who were falsely accused of a terrorist attempt and went through the interrogation process only to come out of it with psychological damage, it is hard to say enhanced interrogation is ethical. Other sources explain how the use of interrogation is ethical because false confessions of men show their true character and how they cannot be trusted, making the use of certain tactics justified. Enhanced interrogation only destroys lives, including those who have experienced it and those who have administered it. Many sources have described instances where those involved in enhanced interrogation have stopped and refused to partake in anything having to deal with it because it is not ethical. Overall, enhanced interrogation is no way ethical and the use of it should remain banned, as it has been for years.
