Torture and CIA Black Sites Dr Vincent Charles Keating Center for War Studies University of Southern Denmark 17 June 2017 Donald Trump on Torture Would Donald Trump use torture if elected President ID: 625762
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Trump" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Trump, Torture, and CIA Black Sites
Dr. Vincent Charles KeatingCenter for War StudiesUniversity of Southern Denmark17 June 2017Slide2
Donald Trump on Torture
Would Donald Trump use torture if elected President?Probably: made statements in support of torture many times during the campaignDefense based onEffectiveness of tortureRelative barbarity of the enemy
2Slide3
Pro-Torture Statements
I would bring back waterboarding, and I'd bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding. We're like a bunch of babies, but we're going to stay within the laws. But you know what we're going to do? We're going to have those laws broadened. They say, what do you think about waterboarding? I said I like it a lot. I don't think it's tough enough. You have to fight fire with fire (Feb 2016)
We have to play the game the way they're playing the game. You're not going to win if we're soft and they're, they have no
rules (Mar 2016)
I’m not saying it changed my mind. Look we have people that are chopping off heads and drowning people in steel cages and we’re not allowed to
waterboard
.(Dec 2016)
3Slide4
From Idea to ExecutionWill Donald Trump be able to use torture if elected President
?Just because a president wishes to support a policy does not mean it will happen (Obama on Guantanamo)Relevant factorsDomestic
audience
Bureaucratic audience
International
audience
How strong was the cooperation in the CIA black site program?
4Slide5
CIA Black SitesSeveral states cooperated with the CIA to host black sites
PolandRomaniaLithuaniaThailandAfghanistanWhat
does this say about the anti-torture
norm, and therein Trump’s ability to bring torture back?
5Slide6
State of the Research
Rendition research generally focussed on Legal implications of the programDomestic politics of decision makingPlight of the individual detainees
When cooperation mentioned, focus on either ethical culpability or Western hypocrisy
‘European politicians, faced with the classic dilemmas of conducting counter-terrorism in a liberal society, have dealt with this by playing to public opinion with their criticisms of American covert activity; meanwhile they have approved discreet cooperation with the very same programmes.’ (Aldrich, 2009)
6Slide7
Central ArgumentUnited States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report (2014)
provided further evidence that cooperation did occurDefection of states, particularly liberal democratic states, suggests a problem with the anti-torture norm
Senate Report actually shows serious problems in cooperation, suggesting anti-torture norm had causal effects
7Slide8
Analysis of Documents
Revolves around two questionsWhat evidence is there that the anti-torture norm hindered cooperation?Was there a difference between when the program was secret?Looking particularly forCoercion/bribery for complianceAwareness of political problems associated with violating norms
8Slide9
Coercion/Bribery
CIA spent tens (hundreds?) of millions of dollars to initiate cooperation and keep it going‘to encourage governments to clandestinely host CIA detention sites, or to increase support for existing sites, the CIA provided millions of dollars in cash payments to foreign government officials.’ – Senate reportRomania‘identify ways to support the [REDACTED] in Country [REDACTED] to ‘demonstrate to [REDACTED] and the highest levels of the [Country [REDACTED]] government that we deeply appreciate their cooperation and support’ for the detention program
.’ – CIA HQ to CIA Station
9Slide10
Coercion/BriberyLithuania
CIA ‘also offered $[REDACTED] million to the [REDACTED] to “show appreciation” for the [REDACTED] support for the program,’ which ultimately led to the approval of the expansion of the CIA facility.‘the CIA and [REDACTED] developed complex mechanisms to [REDACTED] in order to provide the $[REDACTED] million to the [REDACTED].’
Coercion/Bribery not sufficient to say that human rights norms led to this outcome
10Slide11
Black Site Host Reactions
PolandWanted a Memorandum of Understanding covering roles and responsibilities of CIAWere given more money insteadThailandWidespread political opposition to site that required constant political intervention and fiscal support
11Slide12
CIA ReactionsCIA legal was concerned that other states might
‘take a different view of the detention and interrogation practices employed by [the CIA],’ Suggested that some states should be avoided because of thisWorry that probability of exposure could ‘inflame public opinion against the host government’ – Director of Counterterrorism to Director of Central Intelligence
Possibility of seriously damaging bilateral relations
12Slide13
Effect of the Torture Scandals
CIA in 2005 starts looking for exit strategy, citing ‘unstable relations with host governments and its difficulty in identifying additional countries to host CIA detention facilities.’ Increased fear from hosting states of revelation‘Our liaison partners who host these sites are deeply concerned by [REDACTED] press leaks, and they are increasingly
skeptical
of the [U.S. government’s] commitment to keep secret their cooperation…. A combination of press leaks, international scrutiny of alleged [U.S. government] detainee abuse …. Is eroding our partners’ trust in U.S. resolve to protect their identities and supporting roles.’
13Slide14
Effect of the Torture Scandals
CIA expectation that most host states will request closure of the facilities due to the ‘huge risk’ attached to themAt very least, unlikely to take on additional detainees‘continuation of status quo will exacerbate tensions in these very valuable relationships and cause them to withdraw their critical support and cooperation with the [U.S. government].’ – CIA memo to CIA
diriector
14Slide15
Effect of Revelation of Program
Published in Washington Post in November 2005Immediate official protests from two hosting statesIncreased worry from CIA about political fallout‘if another shoe were to drop,’ then there would be ‘considerable ramifications for U.S. relations with [REDACTED] on a number of issues that depended on U.S. credibility in the area of human rights
.’ – CIA cable
Some cooperating states immediately ended cooperation
Those that remained placed heavy restrictions on movement of detainees, particularly for medical attention
No new states could be found to make up for losses
15Slide16
ConclusionCooperation was costly and unstable even when the program was secret
Cooperation became nearly impossible once the program was revealedNuanced optimism: does not ignore that states cooperated for torture, but important to note that anti-torture norm still has serious effects
16Slide17
17