The debate around the report on CIA torture is focusing very much on its “effectiveness”. Even in that respect, most current discussions are very misleading while crucial and more urgent aspects of torture are ignored in this debate.
First of all, the Senate Intelligent Committee examined only the CIA and, most likely, only part of it. This is the tip of the iceberg. After all, this debate was fueled by the torture that took place at the Abu Gharib prison some ten years ago. That prison was under the control of the military, not the CIA. US agencies, whether the CIA, the military or others, used to run, and still may run, a large number of clandestine prisons around the world. Clandestine prisons are, by definition, places were torture and executions take place.
Second, international laws ban torture to protect the innocent in the first place. The report states that 21 percent of the detainees, who were most likely tortured, were, in fact, innocents. Two informants were also jailed and tortured ‘by mistake’. So, it is safe to assume that many more innocents were jailed and tortured.
Third, there seems to be a high level of corruption involved in these activities. It was reported that the CIA contract with a company formed by two psychologists that advised on torture amounted to more than $180 million. The contractors received $81 million prior to contract termination in 2009. Moreover, in 2007, the CIA provided a multi-year indemnification agreement to protect the company and its employees from legal liability arising out of the program. The CIA has since paid out more than $1 million for such liability protection.
Fourth, terrorists are prepared for torture. So, when they are arrested their organization usually implements changes such that any compromised information is rendered useless. Moreover, torture may cause a suspect to confess, even if he/she is not a terrorist at all, so what is the use of such confession?
Finally, the moral superiority that the US claims is forever gone. No President of the USA will be able to lecture other statesmen on human rights without sounding ridiculous.