Interrogating terroristsFuture of interrogation methods of terrorists may depend on election

Published 2 October 2012

On the campaign trail, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have not said much about their approach to interrogating terrorists; but as the manner in which U.S. government agencies approach such interrogations, and the practices agents employ, may well depend on the outcome of next month’s election

On the campaign trail, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have not said much about their approach to interrogating terrorists; but as the manner in which U.S. government agencies approach such interrogations, and the practices agents employ, may well depend on the outcome of next month’s election.

The New York Times reports that in one of this first acts in office, President Obama issued an executive order which limited the list of approved interrogation tactics listed in the Army Field Manual. Obama was more aggressive in pursuing some counterterrorism tactics, such as the use of drones and Special Forces, but has maintained his no-torture policy throughout his first term.

The Times reports that Romney’s advisers are pushing him to announce that he would rescind and replace Obama’s executive order and permit “enhanced interrogation techniques against high-value detainees that are safe, legal and effective in generating intelligence to save American lives.”

“We’ll use enhanced interrogation techniques which go beyond those that are in the military handbook right now.” Romney said in a press conference in Charleston, South Carolina, in December 2011.

In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration approved enhanced interrogation techniques which included sleep deprivation, shackling prisoners into painful “stress” positions for long periods while naked and in a cold room, slamming prisoners into a wall, locking prisoners inside a small box, and suffocation tactic called waterboarding. Administration legal adviser opined that such tactics were permitted in order to break the will of detainees for the purpose of obtaining sensitive and timely terrorist-related information.

When these interrogation methods became public, critics, including some Republican senators such as John McCain of Arizona, criticized the administration, calling these interrogation methods both immoral and ineffective. Other lawmakers, both Republicans and Democrats, supported administration’s enhanced interrogation approach.

The Times reports that a September 2011 position paper written for Romney by campaign advisers, argues that that Obama’s approach has “hampered the fight against terrorism” by forbidding techniques “that we should feel, as a nation, that we have a right to use against our enemies.”

The position papers also criticizes Obama’s one-size-fits-all approach for interrogators. Its authors contend that the Obama administration’s approach may work in the case of ordinary soldiers, but not when dealing with high-level terrorist operatives.

Obama and Romney also have very different views on waterboarding. “Waterboarding is torture,” Obama said last November. “It’s contrary to America’s traditions. It’s contrary to our ideals. That’s not who we are. That’s not how we operate. We don’t need it in order to prosecute the war on terrorism. And we did the right thing by ending that practice. If we want to lead around the world, part of our leadership is setting a good example.”

When Romney was asked about the interrogation tactic at a town hall meeting last December, he said that he would “do what is essential to protect the lives of the American people.”

Romney also told a reporter after the news conference that he does not consider waterboarding to be torture.

Still, the Times notes that if Romney is elected, it is not clear whether he would wait to decide which additional interrogation methods to authorize until an important terrorism suspect is captured alive. Critics of the Obama administration have charged that at least in part, the intensification by the administration of the use of drones and Special Forces in the fight against militants was the result of administration’s refusal to confront the enhanced interrogation issue: The use of drones and Special Forces aims to kill terrorists, not capture them.

Last year Romney said he opposed “torture” but criticized Obama’s stance on interrogation. “I support the use of appropriate and necessary interrogation techniques to obtain information from high-value terrorists who possess knowledge critical to our national defense,” Romney said. “I do not believe it is wise for our country to reveal all of the precise interrogation methods we may authorize for use against captured terrorists, and I strongly condemn the actions taken by President Obama to do so.”