The Right Questions
Wagner鈥檚 peace psychology journal adds to the discussion about torture and interrogation
On Day 2 of his presidency, Barack Obama signed an executive order effectively banning controversial prisoner interrogation techniques 鈥� such as waterboarding 鈥� and emphasized the proper and effective way for military and CIA interrogators to do their job: by following the U.S. Army Field Manual.
The news felt like a victory of sorts for Professor Emeritus of Psychology Dick Wagner, co-editor of Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology. In November 2006, with support from Psychologists for Social Responsibility, Wagner helped convene a weekend meeting of four retired Army interrogators and seven research psychologists at Georgetown University. The two groups picked each other鈥檚 brains, candidly talking about interrogation, torture, and psychology.
鈥淲hat we also found out was that these guys felt that the whole interrogation system was broken.鈥�
The weekend鈥檚 findings were published as 10 articles in a special issue of Peace and Conflict called 鈥淭orture Is for Amateurs鈥� in late 2007. The articles, Wagner says, shed light on proper interrogation techniques and, importantly, added to the public discussion about torture during the pivotal months leading up to the 2008 presidential election.
The Army interrogators, who鈥檇 seen their profession take a beating especially after the Abu Ghraib scandal, came to the table in 2006 for a few reasons. Mostly, they wanted to reject torture as an interrogation technique (as does the Army Field Manual, very specifically).
鈥淲hat we also found out,鈥� says Wagner, 鈥渨as that these guys felt that the whole interrogation system was broken.鈥�
Beginning in the late 1980s and mostly due to cost-cutting, the military began to de-emphasize 鈥渉uman intelligence collection鈥� (interrogation and espionage) in favor of high-tech intelligence gathering through satellite imagery and communications interception. But after the 2003 Iraq invasion, the Army needed interrogators, fast, and began whisking 1,000 soldiers per year through a pared-down training program.
Young and immature interrogators are more likely to use 鈥渇ear-up鈥� tactics.
The trainee interrogators, typically 19-year-old high school graduates, were no longer chosen for intelligence and language ability and no longer received extensive mentoring. As a result, say Peace and Conflict co-editor Jean Maria Arrigo and former interrogator Ray Bennett (a pseudonym), these young and immature interrogators, with still-raging hormones and less-developed impulse control and psychosocial skills, are more likely to use 鈥渇ear-up鈥� tactics to scare information out of prisoners. Amateurs use such tactics, said the interrogators. Worse, they鈥檙e a step toward torture.
Instead, Army interrogators use non-abusive relational techniques that reflect the most basic theories of social psychology (persuasion, group dynamics). A prisoner 鈥渨ants to talk,鈥� said one interrogator. 鈥淚t鈥檚 my job to become the person he wants to talk to.鈥� Yet to apply these tactics skillfully, interrogators must have some degree of sophistication in 鈥渓inguistic expertise, cultural sensitivity, flexible thinking, self-mastery, and the capacity to empathize with foreigners and enemies,鈥� wrote co-editors Wagner and Arrigo.
Indeed, the older interrogators that Wagner met in 2006 were mature experts who knew how to charm the psychologists. 鈥淭hey are phenomenal at interpersonal relationships. They know exactly how to tune into you and make you comfortable,鈥� Wagner says.聽 鈥淭hey were wonderful. We liked them all.鈥�
