DOCSLIB.ORG

Boisi Center Interviews No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Boisi Center Interviews No the boisi center interviews no. 57: September 12, 2011 glenn carle served twenty-three years in the Clandestine Services of the Central Intelligence Agency, working in a number of overseas posts on four continents and in Washington, DC. He is the author of The Interrogator: An Education (2011). He spoke with Boisi Center associate director Erik Owens before participating in a panel on interrogation policy after Osama bin Laden. owens: One of the things that struck stances. There are some steps one can times during the day, or you really need me while reading your book was your take to maintain a sense of self and some to. You have to drink something and you view that interrogating a suspect was in integrity. It was very useful training. will sleep for a certain period every 24 most ways similar to cultivating an intel- hours. Well, not necessarily. If someone Having gone through that interrogation ligent asset. But of course there are a few takes away these reference points, you be- training, it was clear that the methods crucial differences. Could say a bit more come completely disoriented, shockingly we were applying [to al Qaeda suspects] about the two endeavors? fast, and you go half-crazy. carle: I think they are exactly the same: The theory, as briefed to us, was that Both are about human relationships. I’m this psychological dislocation makes a an operations officer; my job is to spot, subject more malleable and willing to access, develop, recruit and handle people provide information, and that the effect who commit treason for the United is not lasting. If they say the definition of States. When I was given the assignment torture is “any pain, physical or physio- [to interrogate a “high value” al-Qaeda logical, that is severe and lasting,” then suspect] I had never interrogated any- [psychological dislocation] is therefore not body. I was briefed on what came to be torture because they say its effects are not called the Enhanced Interrogation Tech- lasting. I always thought that “lasting” niques, but early on in the program no is a very elastic concept, but I had been such thing existed. It was a much more interrogated with these methods during amorphous—figure it out as you go, and my training and within two hours after be creative and aggressive. But I knew being released I was fine, despite having from the first second, as I wrote in the been half-crazy shortly before. So, I book, that I just would not have anything thought, maybe [Enhanced Interrogation to do with any physical coercion. It was Tactics] isn’t torture. just wrong, I just flat wouldn’t do it. were based on the same principles and But when I started to be involved in the approach to which I had been subject. The psychological measures, however— actual interrogation of the detainee, I The goal is to “psychologically dislocate” that I had been trained in, I was more quickly repudiated that position and the detainee. Things that we don’t think ambivalent about. Since CIA case officers opposed all of the enhanced measures. about consciously define our sense of self are at risk of being kidnapped and What I found, both in discussions with and how we perceive ourselves in relation tortured, our training included interro- colleagues who had interrogated people to the world and actions around us. gation: you are put in a horrible situation and in thinking about (and later doing) to protect information if you can, and to Gravity pulls us down. The ground is this myself, is that everything an inter- keep your sanity, when you’ve lost all con- always below, the sky is up. The sun rises rogator should do is fundamentally the trol about anything about your circum- in the east, once a day. You eat several same as that of a case officer. Or what a 1 the boisi center interview: glenn carle boy should do when trying to seduce a society—and then find out, as I did, that examples of how you faced those author- girl: it is to establish a rapport, to under- your conviction was wrong. ities and conventions and tried to find stand the person sitting across from you. your way across to right and wrong. But Now, turning the tables, that sense of What are that person’s hopes and fears, without the guidance of authority and awful tension is precisely what an intel- quirks, motivations, sense of humor, convention, where then do you find your ligence officer looks for in his targets, intellectual limits, biases, vulnerabilities? sense of right and wrong? in the people that we try to induce to All these things that make a person an commit treason. I spent twenty-three carle: I’m not sure there’s an answer individual. You get to know them, and years saying to the person sitting across to the question. It’s one of the ultimate you talk. Based on that you can obtain from me, “You have a chance to do right. questions of life, which is of course why information. That’s it. There is no other Very few people ever have a chance to you are studying it. This book describes way. make a difference. But because you are an incredibly acute, months-long dilem- owens: Of course as you write in a man of integrity, the contradiction is ma that distilled this exact issue for me, the book, and others have argued, this in a practical way. Is there a natural law? sounds awfully “soft” to a lot of people Is there a higher law? Is there a religious who think that being aggressive in other law? I personally think not; I’m more of ways is the appropriate way to glean “Incredibly for a naturalist. But there is a clear sense of information. morality that evolves from human nature. Americans in We attribute it to higher laws, to one reli- carle: Fear and manipulation are legiti- gion or another, but the results are more mate tools in an interrogation. All human my position, or less the same. That underpins most of relations are based on manipulation. You our formal laws, but is, I think, separate can do it as an honest person—someone the tables were from them sometimes. In the dilemma I with integrity—or with the clear end frankly turned faced, they did diverge. of manipulating for national security purposes, or to extract information from because what we My parents died just before the publica- a detainee. I think it’s not just useful but tion of my book. My father did many fine probably necessary to manipulate and were ordered to things in his life, but I think probably play upon all the emotions a person will secretly his proudest achievement was to have. do subverted the have been voted the 1943 Boston Uni- versity Class Iconoclast. It was for him a But the argument that it’s too soft is principles that we moral and intellectual duty to challenge just, I think, simplistic, and the view of everything: never accept anything, be- someone who reflexively equates tough- believed we were cause then you are not thinking. You are ness and intimidation with efficiency defending.” not an individual if you do not access, to and strength. And they are not the same the best of your ability, the facts, and then thing at all. You want to be smart; you reach a conclusion independently. And don’t want to be a brute. that obtains for your instructions and owens: You mentioned that your duty clear between your formal obligations to your morals. So perhaps that’s why peo- as an intelligence officer was to help oth- your country and what you know is your ple in my professional life have found me ers commit treason against their coun- higher and deeper duty. I can help you be consistently friendly but insubordinate. tries, to the service of our own national an honest man by committing treason.” owens: Aristotle argued that we need interest. At what point does your duty to Incredibly for Americans in my position, to find what he calls a good man—what humanity at large intrude upon, or even the tables were frankly turned because we might call a mentor—to model the trump, your duty to our country? what we were ordered to do subverted proper way of life, to help live practically carle: My book is an exploration on the principles that we believed we were in a world of ideas and actions. I wonder almost every sentence of exactly this di- defending. It’s a terrible dilemma. if there was someone or some group of lemma. It’s an acute and awful dilemma people who served that function for you, owens: In your book’s dedication page when you take an oath and work with the who helped you find your balance? Or did I was struck by the way you thank your strong conviction that your government you feel untethered at this time of crisis? parents for teaching you that “right and embodies in its laws and practices the wrong are independent of authority carle: Not untethered, but certainly in values that protect individuals in this or convention.” The book is rife with crisis because of the divergence between 2 the boisi center interview: glenn carle orders, convictions, structures, and my undermine American interests. That rule would not allow me to make my detainee sense of right. While it’s conventional to is fine.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Open Hearing: Nomination of Gina Haspel to Be the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency
    S. HRG. 115–302 OPEN HEARING: NOMINATION OF GINA HASPEL TO BE THE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY HEARING BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 9, 2018 Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 30–119 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018 VerDate Sep 11 2014 14:25 Aug 20, 2018 Jkt 030925 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 C:\DOCS\30119.TXT SHAUN LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE [Established by S. Res. 400, 94th Cong., 2d Sess.] RICHARD BURR, North Carolina, Chairman MARK R. WARNER, Virginia, Vice Chairman JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California MARCO RUBIO, Florida RON WYDEN, Oregon SUSAN COLLINS, Maine MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico ROY BLUNT, Missouri ANGUS KING, Maine JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia TOM COTTON, Arkansas KAMALA HARRIS, California JOHN CORNYN, Texas MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky, Ex Officio CHUCK SCHUMER, New York, Ex Officio JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona, Ex Officio JACK REED, Rhode Island, Ex Officio CHRIS JOYNER, Staff Director MICHAEL CASEY, Minority Staff Director KELSEY STROUD BAILEY, Chief Clerk (II) VerDate Sep 11 2014 14:25 Aug 20, 2018 Jkt 030925 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 C:\DOCS\30119.TXT SHAUN LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER CONTENTS MAY 9, 2018 OPENING STATEMENTS Burr, Hon. Richard, Chairman, a U.S. Senator from North Carolina ................ 1 Warner, Mark R., Vice Chairman, a U.S. Senator from Virginia ........................ 3 WITNESSES Chambliss, Saxby, former U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Dueling Absurdities
    Dueling Delusions: Terrorism and Counterterrorism in the United States Since 9/11 John Mueller Ohio State University and Cato Institute Mark G. Stewart University of Newcastle November 9, 2011 Prepared for presentation at the Program on International Security Policy University of Chicago, November 15, 2011 John Mueller Senior Research Scientist, Mershon Center for International Security Studies Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio 43201, United States Cato Senior Fellow, Cato Institute 1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001, United States polisci.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller +1 614 247-6007 [email protected] Mark G. Stewart Australian Research Council Professorial Fellow Professor and Director, Centre for Infrastructure Performance and Reliability The University of Newcastle New South Wales, 2308, Australia www.newcastle.edu.au/research-centre/cipar/staff/mark-stewart.html +61 2 49216027 [email protected] ABSTRACT: A preliminary, if rather lengthy, set of ruminations on our ten years, and counting, of absurdity and delusion on the terrorism issue. It seems increasingly likely that the reaction to the terrorism attacks of September 11, 2001, was massively disproportionate to the real threat al- Qaeda has ever actually presented either as an international menace or as an inspiration or model to homegrown amateurs. But the terrorism/counterterrorism saga trudges determinedly, doggedly, and anti-climactically onward: people profess fear of another attack, funds continue to be expended irresponsibly, and killing continues, all in the name of the fabled tragedy of 9/11. A warning: the paper includes reference to the Wizard of Oz and to The Emperor’s New Clothes and may not be suitable for all audiences.
    [Show full text]
  • Extraordinary Rendition and Torture What the Narratives of Victims Reveal and Require
    Extraordinary Rendition and Torture What the Narratives of Victims Reveal and Require UNC School of Law Joshua R. Bennett Isabelle Chammas Siya Hegde Hillary Li Jeffrey S. Nooney Matt Norchi Seth Proctor Tyler J. Walters Deborah M. Weissman Reef C. Ivey II Distinguished Professor of Law Faculty Advisor http://www.law.unc.edu/documents/academics/humanrights/narrativethemes.pdf November 2017 Extraordinary Rendition and Torture What the Narratives of Victims Reveal and Require Table of Contents I. History of the Extraordinary Rendition Program 1 II. Torture and its Long-Term Effects 7 III. The Role of Islamophobia in the Extraordinary Rendition and Torture Program 15 IV. The Cost of Torture 23 V. The Link Between Domestic Criminal Justice Reform and International Human Rights 28 VI. Government Contractor Liability 37 VII. The United States’ Legal and Moral Obligations to Provide Fair and Adequate Compensation for Released Detainee 43 VIII. Relief for Torture Victims and its Barriers 52 I. History of the Extraordinary Rendition Program Extraordinary rendition, as it was practiced post-September 11, 2001, and as it is described in the pages that follow, connotes the latest iteration of a program that has a much longer history. Before briefly surveying the program’s history, it is helpful to consider its definition. According to the Open Society Justice Initiative, no official U.S. government definition of the program exists,1 despite the fact that it is the U.S. government that was responsible for designing and implementing it. The Open Society formulated its own definition as “the transfer—without legal process—of a detainee to the custody of a foreign government for purposes of detention and interrogation.”2 1 OPEN SOCIETY JUSTICE INITIATIVE, GLOBALIZING TORTURE: CIA SECRET DETENTION AND EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION 13 (2013), https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/globalizing-torture-20120205.pdf.
    [Show full text]
  • The Islamic State Phenomenon
    THE ISLAMIC STATE PHENOMENON John Mueller Ohio State University and Cato Institute Mark G. Stewart University of Newcastle, Australia January 22, 2017 Prepared for presentation at the National Convention of the International Studies Association, Baltimore, MD, February 25, 2017 John Mueller Senior Research Scientist, Mershon Center for International Security Studies Adjunct Professor, Department of Political Science Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43201 Cato Senior Fellow, Cato Institute, 1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001 polisci.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller +1 614 247-6007 [email protected] Mark G. Stewart Professor and Director, Centre for Infrastructure Performance and Reliability The University of Newcastle, New South Wales, 2308, Australia www.newcastle.edu.au/research-centre/cipar/staff/mark-stewart.html +61 2 49216027 [email protected] ABSTRACT: In 2014, a militant group calling itself the Islamic State, or ISIS, burst into official and public attention with some military victories in Iraq and Syria—particularly taking over Iraq’s second largest city, Mosul. At first the American public saw it as minor problem. But alarm greatly escalated a few months later when the group performed and webcast several beheadings of defenseless Western hostages, and by 2016, 77 percent said on polls that they deemed it to present “a serious threat to the existence or survival of the US.” This paper examines this phenomenon, comparing it with that generated a decade and a half earlier by al- Qaeda. The exercise suggests that, although the vicious group certainly presents a threat to the people under its control and in its neighborhood, and although it can contribute damagingly to the instability in the Middle East that has followed serial intervention there by the American military, it scarcely presents a challenge to global security.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights Watch
    1630 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 500 Washington, DC 20009 Tel: 202-612-4321 Fax: 202-612-4333; 202-478-2988 Kenneth Roth, Executive Director Deputy Executive D i r e c t o r s March 23, 2018 Michele Alexander, Development and Global Initiatives Nicholas Dawes, Media Iain Levine, Program The Honorable Mitch McConnell Chuck Lustig, Operations Bruno Stagno Ugarte, Advocacy Senate Majority Leader, US Senate Emma Daly, Communications Director Dinah PoKempner, General Counsel James Ross, Legal and Policy Director The Honorable Chuck Schumer Division and Program Directors Senate Minority Leader, US Senate Brad Adams, Asia Nicole Austin-Hillery, United States Mausi Segun, Africa José Miguel Vivanco, Americas The Honorable Richard Burr Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia Chairman, US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Shantha Rau Barriga, Disability Rights Peter Bouckaert, Emergencies Zama Neff, Children’s Rights The Honorable Mark Warner Richard Dicker, International Justice Bill Frelick, Refugees’ Rights Vice Chairman, US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Arvind Ganesan, Business and Human Rights Liesl Gerntholtz, Women’s Rights Steve Goose, Arms Diederik Lohman, Health and Human Rights Re: Nomination of Gina Haspel to be CIA Director Marcos Orellana, Environment and Human Rights Graeme Reid, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights Advocacy Directors Dear Majority Leader McConnell, Minority Leader Schumer, Chairman Burr, Maria Laura Canineu, Brazil Louis Charbonneau, United Nations, New York and Vice Chairman Warner: Kanae Doi, Japan John Fisher, United Nations, Geneva Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia We write on behalf of Human Rights Watch to express our opposition to the Bénédicte Jeannerod, France Lotte Leicht, European Union impending nomination of Gina Haspel to be Central Intelligence Agency Sarah Margon, Washington, DC David Mepham, United Kingdom director.
    [Show full text]
  • Richard Fecteau, Who Were Held Prisoner in China, at CIA Award Ceremony, November 2013
    Association of Former Intelligence Officers From AFIO's The Intelligencer 7700 Leesburg Pike, Suite 324 Journal of U.S. Intelligence Studies Falls Church, Virginia 22043 Web: www.afio.com, E-mail: [email protected] Volume 23 • Number 3 • $15 single copy price BU PEOPLE Alumni III. HISTORICAL CONTEXT Many BU alumni have made and continue to make important contributions to the US Intelligence Com- munity. Their dedicated efforts and unique achieve- ments seldom receive public recognition because of the highly classified nature of their work. Since begin- ning my teaching at BU, I have been heartened to see several of my BU students, who will remain nameless, embark on intelligence-related careers. Several BU Terriers’ good names, honorable ser- vice, and brave deeds have been made public. These alumni deserve to have their stories told. Similarly, other BU alumni have been either accused of com- mitting espionage or have been the target of US Gov- A Spy’s Guide to Boston University ernment surveillance. Their experiences also deserve recounting. by John D. Woodward Jr JD INTRODUCTION came to Boston University as a professor in July 2015, after a long career with the Central Intelli- I gence Agency, most of it serving in the CIA’s clan- destine service. Among the classes I teach, my favorite is “The Evolution of Strategic Intelligence,” which is essentially about the history of espionage. My students especially enjoy our class field trip to see Boston’s John Downey (left) and Richard Fecteau, who were held prisoner in China, at CIA award ceremony, November 2013. intelligence-related sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Prepublication Review in the Intelligence Community
    TILL DEATH DO US PART: PREPUBLICATION REVIEW IN THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY Kevin Casey* As a condition of access to classified information, most employees of the U.S. intelligence community are required to sign nondisclosure agreements that mandate lifetime prepublication review. In essence, these agreements require employees to submit any works that discuss their experiences working in the intelligence community---whether writ- ten or oral, fiction or nonfiction---to their respective agencies and receive approval before seeking publication. Though these agreements constitute an exercise of prior restraint, the Supreme Court has held them constitu- tional. This Note does not argue fororagainsttheconstitutionality of prepublication review; instead, it explores how prepublication review is actually practiced by agencies and concludes that thecurrentsystem, which lacks executive-branch-wide guidance, grants too much discretion to individual agencies. It compares the policies of individual agencies with the experiences of actual authors who have clashed with prepublication-review boards to argue that agencies conduct review in a manner that is inconsistent at best, and downright biased and discriminatory at worst. The level of secrecy shrouding intelligence agencies and the concomitant dearth of publicly available information about their activi- ties make it difcult to evaluate their performance and, by extension, the performance of our electedofcials in overseeing such activities. In such circumstances, memoirs and other forms of expression
    [Show full text]
  • The Ethics of Interrogation and the Rule of Law
    The Ethics of Interrogation and the Rule of Law A Report by the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law Release Date: February 24, 2017 Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law (CERL) Report February 2017 CERL Report on The Ethics of Interrogation and the Rule of Law I. Introduction On January 25, 2017, President Trump repeated his belief that torture works1 and reaffirmed his commitment to intensify the treatment of detainees in American custody.2 That same day, CBS News released a draft Trump Administration executive order which would order the Intelligence Community (IC) and Defense Department to review the legality of torture as well as the potential for a revision to the Army Field Manual which would open up the possibility for harsh interrogations.3 Were the new administration to attempt to bring back enhanced interrogation, its point of entry might be the issuance of the draft executive order, or a stronger executive order authorizing torture and directing a revision of the Army Field Manual. This Report contains an evaluation of the current legal status of torture, along with an analysis of the anticipated legal steps that might be taken to revive the enhanced interrogation program. Recent commentary, as well as the draft executive order, have received harsh criticism from lawmakers. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said, “The President can sign whatever executive orders he likes. But the law is the law,” he continued by saying, “We are not bringing back torture in the United States of America.”4 The President appears for the moment to be leaving the ultimate judgment on whether to revive the use of torture in interrogations to his national security chiefs, namely Central Intelligence Agency Director (DCIA) Mike Pompeo and Secretary of Defense James Mattis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of State-Sponsored Torture for National Security
    Rollins College Rollins Scholarship Online Honors Program Theses Spring 2019 The seU of State-Sponsored Torture for National Security: A Debate on the Permissibility of Torture in the Name of Public Safety Matthew iF sher [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.rollins.edu/honors Part of the Political Theory Commons Recommended Citation Fisher, Matthew, "The sU e of State-Sponsored Torture for National Security: A Debate on the Permissibility of Torture in the Name of Public Safety" (2019). Honors Program Theses. 85. https://scholarship.rollins.edu/honors/85 This Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Rollins Scholarship Online. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Program Theses by an authorized administrator of Rollins Scholarship Online. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Use of State-Sponsored Torture for National Security A Debate on the Permissibility of Torture in the Name of Public Safety Matthew Fisher Honors Degree Program Thesis, Rollins College Spring 2019 Department of Political Science Faculty Advisor: Dr. Julia Maskivker Abstract Can the United States government’s use of state-sponsored torture ever be justified for national security purposes? This question is a taboo subject that frequently elicits passionate responses from individuals who argue both for and against its use in upholding national security. This vigorous debate challenges moral, ethical, legal, and even pragmatic ideals in seeking to determine if state use of torture can ever be a part of America’s national security strategy. These considerations, and others, have inspired this research project and the specific research question which seeks to determine whether the United States government’s use of state-sponsored torture for national security purposes can ever be justified.
    [Show full text]
  • Chasing Ghosts: the Policing of Terrorism
    MISOVERESTIMATING ISIS: COMPARISONS WITH AL-QAEDA John Mueller Ohio State University and Cato Institute Mark G. Stewart University of Newcastle April 20, 2016 Prepared for presentation at the conference, Constructions of Terrorism: Confronting the Challenges to Global Security Created by Daesh/Islamic State sponsored by TRENDS Research & Advisory, Abu Dhabi, UAE, The Orfalea Center for Global and International Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara, and The Stimson Center, Washington DC Stimson Center, Washington, DC, April 27-28, 2016 John Mueller Woody Hayes Senior Research Scientist, Mershon Center for International Security Studies Adjunct Professor, Department of Political Science Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio 43201, United States Cato Senior Fellow, Cato Institute 1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001, United States politicalscience.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller +1 614 247-6007 [email protected] Mark G. Stewart Professor and Director, Centre for Infrastructure Performance and Reliability The University of Newcastle New South Wales 2308, Australia www.newcastle.edu.au/research-centre/cipar/staff/mark-stewart.html +61 2 49216027 [email protected] ABSTRACT: An examination of the ISIS phenomenon, comparing it with that generated a decade and a half earlier by al-Qaeda. Although the vicious group certainly presents a threat to the people under its control and although it can contribute damagingly to the instability in the Middle East that has followed serial intervention there by the American military, it scarcely presents a challenge to global security. As with al-Qaeda, however, the unwarranted fear and alarm ISIS has generated is likely to persist even if it is effectively extinguished as a physical force in the Middle East.
    [Show full text]
  • SSCI Letter Template
    February 25, 2014 Dear Senator: We write to you as current and former professional interrogators, interviewers, and intelligence officials regarding the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence’s (SSCI) 6000-plus page study of the CIA’s post-9/11 rendition, detention, and interrogation program. We understand that the SSCI may soon take up the issue of whether to pursue declassification and public release of the study. In the interest of transparency and furthering an understanding of effective interrogation policy, we urge you to support declassification and release of as much of the study as possible, with only such redactions as are necessary to protect national security. Since the CIA program was established over a decade ago, there has been substantial public interest in, and discussion of, the fundamental efficacy of the so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” (EITs). Despite the employment of these methods, critical questions remain unanswered as to whether EITs are an appropriate, lawful, or effective means of consistently eliciting accurate, timely, and comprehensive intelligence from individuals held in custody. Based on our experience, torture and other forms of abusive or coercive techniques are more likely to generate unreliable information and have repeatedly proven to be counterproductive as a means of securing the enduring cooperation of a detained individual. They increase the likelihood of receiving false or misleading information, undermine this nation’s ability to work with key international partners, and bolster
    [Show full text]
  • National Security and Double Government ______Michael J
    2014 / Double Government 1 ARTICLE National Security and Double Government _________________ Michael J. Glennon* In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. —James Madison1 Abstract National security policy in the United States has remained largely constant from the Bush Administration to the Obama Administration. This continuity can be explained by the “double government” theory of 19th-century scholar of the English Constitution Walter Bagehot. As applied to the United States, Bagehot’s theory suggests that U.S. national security policy is defined by the network of executive officials who manage the departments and agencies responsible for protecting U.S. national security and who, responding to structural incentives embedded in the U.S. political system, operate largely removed from public view and from constitutional constraints. The public believes that the constitutionally-established institutions control national security policy, but that view is mistaken. Judicial review is negligible; congressional oversight is dysfunctional; and presidential control is nominal. Absent a more informed and engaged * Professor of International Law, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. Thanks to Artin Afkhami, Ashley Belyea, Julia Brooks, Mike Eckel, Ian Johnstone, Robert Hillman, William Martel, John Perry, Luca Urech, and Fletcher political science workshop participants for comments on an earlier draft; to Beaudre Barnes, Claudio Guler, and Cecilia Vogel for research assistance; and to innumerable Trumanites and Madisonians, past and present, with whom I have worked and spoken over the years.
    [Show full text]