Torture is Un-Asian

Ever since the “War on Terror” began in September 2001, I’ve read many letters in the media that have argued that in these “interesting” times, it is necessary and courageous to suspend civil liberties and concepts in our judicial system like, innocent until proven guilty beyond a shadow of doubt and more disturbingly, not admitting evidence obtained through torture. So, when I read Anthony Lagouranis’s article, “An Interrogator Looks Back in Shame,” (1 March 06) I felt a deep sense of relief.

The proponents of suspending civil liberties and justifying torture used a simple but highly believable argument, namely the fact that since terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda have no regard for human decency, we need to use every means we have at our disposal to defeat them. In Singapore, this argument is strengthened ingeniously, namely –the fact that we are an Asian society that values the general good of society over the rights of the individual. We seem to find comfort in these arguments when we watch shows like “24” and see the hero, played by Kiefer Sutherland, beat up suspects and gain life saving information.

Thanks to Mr Lagouranis, we now have a real life interrogator telling us that there is a reason why such shows are known as fantasy. Torture, as Mr Lagouranis says, degrades the society and individuals that do it and more importantly is counter-productive. While torture may stop a terrorist or two from getting a chance to hit their targets, torture ultimately fuels the recruitment drive of groups like Al-Qaeda.

Some might argue that because Mr Lagouranis is an American, he sees the issue of torture through a Western values system. I would challenge those using this argument to show me a values system that justifies the use of torture in any culture. Confucius, for one, had his golden rule of, “Do unto others what you want done unto you.” Another sage, who may be more relevant for war, was Sun Tzu. He argued that enemy prisoners should be treated kindly and turned against their former masters.

Let’s leave aside lofty concepts such as morality and concentrate on the practical mater of gathering intelligence. So far, the only public figures who have tried to justify torture for the purpose of gathering intelligence are US President George Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney. It’s noticeable that neither have served in the armed forced let alone in armed conflict. Neither has been on the receiving or delivering end of torture. On the other hand, we have US Senator, John McCain, who was tortured during the Vietnam War saying that someone who is tortured will say anything to stop the torture, thus proving that even if torture yields intelligence it is likely to be faulty. We have Mr Lagouranis who admits to using “torture techniques” saying that he never obtained real intelligence. Now, who is more credible, the people with no experience of torture or the people who experienced it first hand?

Singapore is a small and vulnerable island. It’s only natural that we should be frightened of global terrorism. It’s only right that we beef up security with extra cheeks and more personnel in uniform. But we should also remember that the strength of our society comes from the rule of law and the protection of individual freedoms. This is what makes us different from the terrorist, this is what will make us beat the terrorist and allow us to grow and prosper as a society. So until there is statistical and moral proof that torture will work against terrorism, Singaporeans should take pride in the fact that our government will never use it.

Copyright: Tang Li (C) 2006