Abu Ghraib, Torture, and American Culture's Human Rights Failure

Introduction: Abu Ghraib and American Culture

Americans were shocked when they learned about the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib — or were they? Certainly, the media reported shock and outrage on the part of the public at the unpleasant revelations. But that outrage, if it truly existed, has not proved lasting. The White House response to photos of young military personnel sexually assaulting and humiliating prisoners was to imply that only a few poorly supervised, bad-apple MPs would do such things. President George W. Bush said, "These acts do not represent the values America stands for." However, many Americans did not abhor the treatment of those prisoners at all. In fact, some thought there should be more of it. "They do it to us" is commonly heard in restaurants where ordinary people discuss current events. Republican Congressman James Inhofe of Oklahoma dismissed the entire matter by saying, "These prisoners — they're murderers, they're terrorists... Many of them probably have American blood on their hands." Inhofe did not apologize for his comments, which implies he believed he spoke for a large segment of the voting population in his state — one that applauded such behavior.

An article in World Watch ("What a Nation Values," 2004) points out that the soldiers who were tormenting the prisoners were very young — perhaps only a year or two out of high school — and were products of public schools where playground bullying, a time-honored American institution, has escalated to horrendous proportions in recent years. A boy beating up and humiliating other boys is a tradition and "a big part of the American experience." The writer suggests that the abuses at Abu Ghraib reflect what happens every day in American schools. If the soldiers had thought what they were doing was wrong, he argues, they would have tried to hide their actions; instead, they photographed themselves.

In movies, television, and video games, young people have witnessed tens of thousands of violent acts, often performed by the heroes: "Kick ass is what a hero does," at least according to the message of violent video games, which repeat narratives found throughout the broader media landscape. These games offer an exciting and seductive portrayal of so-called real men and the opportunity to play at being that kind of man: "Many of these texts [games] align masculinity with power, with aggression, with victory and winning, with superiority and strength — and, of course, with violent action" (Alloway & Gilbert, 1998, p. 97). Just as girls who play with Barbie learn to be caregivers, boys play violent video games for learning purposes and learn to be men. We live in a culture that allows such distorted and destructive messages about manhood to be sold to boys and young men for enormous profits. Media violence and real violence are not the same thing, of course, but in a culture where entertainment is the biggest and most lucrative industry, media experience shapes reality. A certain hard-edged mentality develops. What do 10,000 civilian deaths matter, or a few hundred destroyed buildings, if the bad guy goes down?

In fact, the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib does reflect the values of the Bush administration. There are, of course, Americans whose values are not aligned with torture, violence, war, and the destruction of civil liberties and human rights — people like Dennis Kucinich and Marianne Williamson, who were working to create a U.S. Department of Peace; religious groups like Unitarians and Quakers; the Union of Concerned Scientists; Human Rights Watch; and those who carry forward the legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr. ("What a Nation Values," 2004). But in general, these people were not the voting bloc that supported George W. Bush. Those who supported Bush, his values, and his policies included voices like Ann Coulter, who wrote in the National Review that America should strike back at Muslim terrorists — "invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity." The National Review reported receiving a flood of agreeing emails from readers who urged that we "nuke" Mecca. In this kind of retaliatory cultural climate, it is worth asking why we were so surprised when American soldiers tormented, degraded, humiliated, and tortured prisoners of war.

The Bush Administration's Torture Policy

Although President Bush publicly stated, "The United States reaffirms its commitment to the worldwide elimination of torture... freedom from torture is an inalienable human right, and we are committed to building a world where human rights are respected and protected by the rule of law," his administration actively fostered and encouraged torture. Harold Koh (2005) argues that after the September 11 attacks, the administration had an opportunity to establish a democratic, long-range plan for controlling terrorism. Instead, it looked for shortcuts, and torture became one of them — "a substitute for multilateral police work; the uncertainties of intelligence gathering; the expense of guarding ports, reservoirs, and transportation centers; and the financial regulation necessary to cut off the funding of terrorist groups" (p. 7).

Koh testified before the Senate that torture — an international crime — was being conducted with government authorization. Members of the Bush administration developed a torture policy, and a legal rationale for it was constructed. In his message to the Senate, Koh stated: "Torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment are both illegal and totally abhorrent to our values and constitutional traditions. No constitutional authority licenses the president to authorize the torture and cruel treatment of prisoners, even when he acts as commander-in-chief" (p. 8). He further argued that mistreatment of prisoners also violated the Geneva Conventions, under which American troops themselves were entitled to protection from similar treatment.

Information and confessions obtained by torture are notoriously unreliable. People will say anything to escape pain. Torture tactics have included holding a person's head underwater, boiling limbs, and wiring a man's hands, legs, and genitals to deliver electric shocks. The people subjected to such treatment are not necessarily guilty of any crime — many had not even been charged. When Congress reviewed 1,800 slides and several videos (totaling three hours) from Abu Ghraib Prison, they witnessed American soldiers sexually assaulting prisoners with chemical light sticks and laughing at the abused and mutilated bodies of Iraqis (Barry et al., 2004). Newsweek reported that "U.S. soldiers and CIA operatives could be accused of war crimes. Among the possible charges: homicide involving deaths during interrogations" (p. 26). It was also evident that some of the torture methods had been taught — ordinary American soldiers did not invent them independently. "Who taught them? Almost certainly it was their superiors up the line" (p. 27).

References

Ackerman, B. (2004). States of emergency. American Prospect, 15(9), 40.

Alloway, N., & Gilbert, P. (1998). Video game culture: Playing with masculinity, violence and pleasure. In S. Howard (Ed.), Wired up. London: UCL Press.

Barry, J., Hirsh, M., Isikoff, M., Hosenball, M., Gutman, R., Gegax, T. T., Scelfo, J., Liu, M., Nordland, R., & Dehghanpisheh, B. (2004). The roots of torture. Newsweek, 143(21), 26–34.

Cohen, D. (2003). The American national conversation about (everything but) shame. Social Research, 70(4), 1075–1108.

Collins, M. (2005). The American character. Contemporary Review, 284, 72–76.

Cooper, G. (2004). The censors: New patterns in opinion control. Columbia Journalism Review, 43(2), 58–59.

Goldberg, B. (2002). Bias: A CBS insider exposes how the media distort the news. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing.

Hirsh, M., Hosenball, M., Barry, J., Grey, S., & Theil, S. (2005). Aboard Air CIA. Newsweek, 145(9), 32–34.

Isikoff, M., Klaidman, D., & Hirsh, M. (2005). Torture's path. Newsweek, 145(2), 54–55.

Koh, H. H. (2005). Legal principles and torture. Dissent, 52(2), 7–10.

Matloff, J. (2005). Covering kidnap victims: The case for restraint. Columbia Journalism Review, 43(5).

McGovern, R. (2005). 'Our' Uzbek massacre. Sojourners, 34(8), 9.

Ross, J. (2005). Bush, torture and Lincoln's legacy. America, 193(4), 10–13.

Stossel, J. (2004). Give me a break: How I exposed hucksters, cheats, and scam artists and became the scourge of the liberal media. New York: HarperCollins.

What a nation values. (2004). World Watch, 17(5), 3–4.