Torture: Does It Make Us Safer? Is It Ever Ok?: A Human Rights Perspective

by Kenneth Roth

12 essays by leading thinkers and experts range over history and continents, offering a nuanced exploration of this wrenching but timely topic. Intended for a general audience, some of the key questions addressed include how to define torture, whether torture is ever effective, and whether it is ever acceptable.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Philosophy

218 pages, Paperback

First published February 2, 2005

Reviews

[Benjamin Stahl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Admittedly I chose this out of morbid curiosity, so when I noticed the additional "Human Rights Perspective" subtitle on the inner page, I felt a tiny bit disappointed. Barring that initial regret that this wasn't to be a toe-curling account of the history and variations of torture, but rather an academic argument against its growing justification - (understandably, they win the argument) - I found this very convincing and informative. Containing a collection of essays written by academics and activists from Israel to Argentina, some of whom were tortured themselves, this book deals with a range of both foreign and U.S.-sanctioned incidents. Not nearly as disturbing as some might fear, it takes instead a fair and humanistic look at one of the darker, less reconcilable corners of our fallen nature. Honestly, I think torture is one of the most horrible things one can enact on another, so much so that I hate it even when it is presented as righteous or "satisfying" even in Hollywood movies where a bad person experiences it (i.e. vigilante crap like Law Abiding Citizen).

[Gill · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Good review of the law and practices regarding torture. The debate we're having now, like our politics, is at a very childish level. Opponents of torture argue "it doesn't work". Well, then there's no problem, just people too stupid to see that it isn't working. As soon as you point that out to them, presumably they'll stop.

Of course that is not the issue. The moral dilemma is that it does work in certain respects but it is abhorrent. Ends and means.

Torture is very effective in terrorizing large populations with small numbers of operatives and forcing confessions for propaganda purposes where the truth of the confession is irrelevant. When it comes to getting information from people unwilling to provide it voluntarily, then it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't.

Whether or not it works, it has the side effect of making you a torturer, which creates enemies, puts your people at greater risk of being tortured by others, and creates a secret society of torturers that always gets out of control and conducts more violence on a wider range of victims than was originally intended. It also perverts medical research and honorable service in the military and police by involving people in these revolting activities. It's like censorship. Monday you censor child pornography, by Wednesday it's Shakespeare.

Just to be clear, I'm on the prohibitionist side of this, but I understand that means that I am willing to see innocent people die on occasion, even in very large numbers, who might have been saved. I don't kid myself that if we're really vigilant and smart and use non-invasive, psychologically brilliant interrogations that the results will always be the same. They won't be. There are people who can't be tricked or cajoled into talking who will respond under torture.

What the book really brings out clearly is that the world has made some progress in eliminating torture and we Americans are reversing that.

[Theresa · Rating 3 out of 5]

Probably a 3.5. This is a series of essays about torture around the world and consequently is a rather depressing book. It was not my choice to read, but was required for a course that I am tutoring at the Mount. Some of the essays were actually interesting - like how many techniques of torture were developed by the French after their experiences in Southeast Asia and then exported from France to Africa and South America, with some extensive training of U.S. forces in the mix. There was intersting commentary on the Abu Gharab (sp?) prison scandels, the issue of responsibility, and the perceived "necessity" of torture for national security. I can't say I enjoyed the book, but it was informative.

[Ed · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book would be a great example for a "not bad" or "average" tag. It is a the equivalent of a paint-by-numbers image of how Human Rights Watch defines, opposes and publicizes torture by sovereign nations. All the essays are short, some are simplistic, some quite good--not surprising is that one of the best is by Hector Timerman who is the son of Jacobo Timerman. Jacobo Timerman was almost tortured to death by the Argentinian junta and wrote "Prisoner without a Name, Cell without a Number".

There was not point, however, for "A History of Torture" by James Ross who tries to hit the high (low) points in fifteen pages, an impossible task.

OK if you are interested in the work of Human Rights Watch or in a basic primer on torture in the past couple of decades.

[Matthew · Rating 5 out of 5]

A sad and harrowing look at the industry of torture, official denial around the globe (except in the USA, where we openly proclaim policies and declare that Geneva Conventions are quaint and out of date). There are chapters by investigators, survivors, those who treat the victims' psychological aftermath, and others.

[Golbarg · Rating 3 out of 5]

kenneth roth is great but some of the articles are lame...

[Kristen Kim · Rating 3 out of 5]

A comprehensive look at the ethics of torture, but I must say I was as confused about the topic by the end of it as I had been going into it.