As a person who feels uneasy with easy moral tales, I feel this is one of the single most important books to have come out of South Africa in recent times. I do think it likely that a tortured being could become obedient putty in the hands of those who had tortured him, taking to obedience with a relish for pleasing the master that broke him. do we blame dogs who attack criminals as they've been trained to do by police? no we accept that they are dogs.
nevertheless, I am quite critical off Dlamini's treatment as he seems convinced that humans always have a moral centre, while I think morality is a construct, as is the self, and when a self becomes shattered through torture, it's possible that any moral compass can be damaged beyond repair. from my readings of the court cross examinations of askaris, it seems to me that askaris had lost this compass, they couldn't even make sense off questioning around it, because they couldn't explain it to themselves. yes it could be read as simple deflection, but I think it quite possible that these men were so broken as not to be able to understand questions of motive. furthermore it would be true, that if say their motive was to protect threatened family members, they wouldn't have said this in court as this would have destroyed that protection.
so, I take issue with some aspects of Dlamini's analysis, but I also think he deliberately creates space for that. his approach, in this and other works, is to leave space open for the reader to reflect on morality, ethics etc, without providing comfortable pat answers. this space that he creates for his readers is a unique strength in his writing. he doesn't claim authority which one almost expects of an author ... he openly makes clear that he is no more of a moral authority than the reader...
the empty space he leaves for the reader is uncomfortable - and I think deliberately so, because we shouldn't be too comfortable when reflecting on ethical questions... there should always be that open space of uncertainty, otherwise we become narrow minded and shrill in our claims to know right from wrong.