Torture and Ethics: The dilemma of “Dirty Hands” at Guantanamo Bay

Introduction

After war on terror initiated in 2001, US government wanted to keep prisoners out of the country and
used its military bases as prisoner detention camps which included famous detention center known as
Guantanamo Bay (J. Yoo, 2006). This strategy later caused several controversies related to allegations of
mistreatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay like other detention centers. Several media reports at
the end of 2004 started initiated highlighting the illegal interrogation methods employed by US security Commented [RT1]: The words : Initiated highlighting
agencies at their detention centers. t Guantanamo Bay. These media reports were supported by release together doesn’t make sense ?
of various other documents under the influence of Congress’s approved Freedom of Information Act and Commented [RT2]: You don’t need to mention the
law suits filed by several human rights activists (Jeffrey & Eggen, 2004; Carol 2004; Neil, 2005; NYTimes, Guantanamo Bay all the time as it gets repetitive.
2005). The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) also published few details of their
observed illegal and abusive torture techniques that were being employed specifically at Guantanamo Commented [RT3]: ^
Bay (Neil, 2004; Barton & Jeffrey, 2004; Eggen & Jeffrey, 2004; Johnston 2005). Several reports till the Commented [DA4R3]: Here name is necessary as it was
beginning of 2005 exposed that female security officers employed sexually advanced and bold specific study
interrogative methods to shake the moral of prisoners whose majority happened to be Muslim Commented [RT5]: Change this line to explaining the
menmen. In their faith, it was unlawful to be indulged in such acts of sexual boldness. This method was morals and beliefs of here religious views which majority of
specially employed keeping in view the religious background, to enhance the mental torture by the prisoners are Muslims—how that affect them mentally ?
generating a feeling of committing forbidden acts. These reports also confirmed that at least two of such
female officials were scolded for utilizing these methods (NY Times, 2005; Carol, 2005).

In 2005, it was officially accepted by US authorities that during August 2003, at least twenty 20 people Commented [RT6]: If possible, can you use Grammarly
attempted suicide, however authorities called it an effort to sabotage staff operations (Wash. Post, app or an extension you can download to check all the
grammar on this paper. Thank you
2005; NY Times, 2005). Gregg & Jonathan (2005) along with the red cross accused medical staff of US
forces of having participated in the unmannerly interrogation process, they also accused these medical
professionals violated the standards of professional ethics and the Geneva Convention.

Case Study Focus

In the United States and world at large, the allegations sparked an intensive debate about the suitable
and effective interrogation methods that should be applied at prisoners of war. Furthermore, they
raised question marks whether these actions comprised were the overall US strategy of dealing with
prisoners or few “Dirty Hands Bad Apples” employed them in their individual capacities by their own? Commented [RT7]: I dony understand this statement and
However later investigations proved that Guantanamo Bay and other detention centers were reflecting is there a reference to the quote ‘bad apples’
US well administrated policy of torture against the war on terror prisoners (Karen and Joshua, 2005).
The purpose of this torture was to attain significant intel that could have proved beneficial for
authorities to destroy terrorist outfits. However, this had raised serious notions regarding US entirely Commented [RT8]: Is this basically the same sentence ?
accepting a policy of torture and applying it in all its detention center (Dana and Joe, 2004). Although, Commented [RT9]: ? bracket from where
US in general disapproves any type of violence and torture but it institutionalized torture at its detention
Commented [DA10R9]: Corrected missed bracket of
centers including Guantanamo Bay like all other countries which oppose such practices and on other citation
hand are involved in them (Green and Ward, 2004). Commented [RT11]: Better wording ?
The focus of this case study is to provide an ethical expression on such a torture policy keeping in view a
Christian dogma of ethical responsibility. Michael Walzer’s (1973) “Dirty Hands” argument, as described Commented [RT12]: Is this from a book or a article he
wrote is so maybe write Michael Walzers (1973) notioned a
in his article which stated that political entities sometimes can perform acts which are morally regretful book that mentions …’dirty hands’
but unnecessary, will be utilized to categorize politically the torture policy adopted by United States.
Commented [RT13]: What does that mean
Whilst the Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s (2005) conceptual theory of regret and responsibility will be used to Commented [RT14]: Maybe mention what they actually
morally discard the torture policy and to put on public trial those who were responsible the “Dirty did to morally abusive these prisoners because you haven’t
explained what they do to torture you just state that they
Hands”.
torture without any explanation on what they do
Commented [RT15]: Grammar of this sentence doesn’t
make sense
Research Question

There are two research questions this case study is focusing on;

1. How Michael Walzer’s (1973) “Dirty Hands” theory help us politically categorize the torture
policy of US government?
2. What does such a torture policy mean to Christian public in the light of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s
(2005) conceptual theory of regret and responsibility?

Methodology

This case study employs an “Extensive Strategy” which deals with configuring apparent outlines,
procedures and characteristics in a given background to develop, elaborate or test a theory (The
Encyclopedia of Case Study Research, 1987). This strategy doesn’t take specific details of cases to
special consideration rather it is more concerned in utilizing them as instruments to explore specific
phenomenon of interest (Eisenhardt, 2007). These explorations lead towards theoretical proposals
which are tested or generalized to the given context or theories (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008). Here Commented [RT16]: Cant start with a sentence with ehre
focus is more concentrated on extracting phenomenon than analyzing in detail the information niche. without stating what is there.
This case study research method investigates, explains and elaborates the center of interest Commented [DA17R16]: “Here” Referring to
phenomenon related to theory instead of highlighting the workings of cases (The main interest lies in Commented [RT18]: Information niche doesn’t make
investigating, elaborating, and explaining a phenomenon that is often theory related, not in sense
understanding the workings of the cases themselves (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 1997). “Extensive Strategy” Commented [RT19]: Don’t need all these verbs
empowers existing theory by enabling the knowledge obtained through cases to contribute in the theory
Commented [RT20]: Doesn’t make sense
by testing or elaborating it in a special context. It can also facilitate developing new theoretical
propositions by utilizing the knowledge extracted through cases. Commented [RT21]: This whole sentence doesn’t make
sense – I think you should take about cohen denial theory
on how they denied there allegations of torture and maybe
This technique was adopted by specially keeping in view the nature of research questions the study is
talk about how the world and media viewed this case after
based upon. Observations from torture reports are utilized to categorize them in the context of Michael it was announced
Walzer’s (1973) “Dirty Hands” and Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s (2005) theories of political and ethical
conducts. The significance of this study is to highlight moral standing of America’s torture policies at
Guantanamo Bay and other detention centers in Christian world. At first, political and legal reasons of
Unites States are briefly discussed coupled with prevailing thoughts which triggered creating torture Commented [RT22]: Don’t need coupled
policy at Guantanamo Bay. Next, Michael Walzer’s (1973) “Dirty Hands” philosophy will be considered Commented [RT23]: Triggered what ?
for politically describing the torture policy. Lastly, torture policy will be dealt with Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s
conception of regret and responsibility.

Theories

1.1 The “Dirty Hands” Theory

US Government wanted to adopt a strong position against Guantanamo Bay prisoners, so they were not
considered war convicts but rather “Foe Warriors” (Greenberg and Dratel, 2005), having zero rights
potentially granted under Geneva Convention to war convicts (Seymour, 2004; 2005). Geneva
convention (1929) specifies in section three that all types of torture, personal humiliation, degradation
and threat to life are completed banned. However, American administration considered it’s self-excused
(Greenberg and Dratel, 2005). Al Qaeda was considered a non-state external entity which had not rights Commented [RT24]: Do you mean no rights ? because
of protection under rulings specified by war crimes law. It was denied by US officials like Deputy not rights deonst make sense
Attorney J. Yoo that Al Qaeda is protected by section three of Geneva convention on the grounds that Commented [RT25R24]:
even Geneva convention is not applicable on war against terrorism. He also stated that Al Qaeda Commented [RT26]: Mention Cohen (2001) denial theory
terrorists do not qualify to be treated as was captives (Ibid., 49; 50). Similarly, Deputy Attorney declared
Taliban groups collectively as militia having close affiliations with Al Qaeda and Afghanistan as a failed
country. On these grounds he declined Afghanistan’s right to be covered under Geneva Convention
regulations (Ibid.). Mr. Yoo expressed the legal opinion that shaped America’s hostile attitude towards
war convicts, however he completely flawed by ignoring section five of Geneva Convention. Section five Commented [RT27]: Add connective
states that wherever the doubt is raised regarding legal status of a person or group of persons to be Commented [RT28]: Don’t need of persons just group is
covered under categories mentioned in section four of Geneva convention. such person or group of fine
persons will be considered liable for protection under this regulation until the time their status is legally Commented [RT29]: Change to an individual or group
determined by a competent judicial bench (Geneva Convention, 1929). Later, when article five appeared
to completely negate the deputy attorney’s whole narrative, assistant attorney J. S. Bybee tried to
compensate it by stating that president had powers to decide that all war convicts do not come under Commented [RT30]: Which president
section 4 of Geneva convention (Greenberg and Dratel, 2005). The motive behind these justifications
was to provide US government and its military enough room to get engaged in activities that were
necessary for attainment of intelligence information to protect America from another attack like those
happened in September 11,2001. However, this objective demands a moral investigation as it violated Commented [RT31]: Be specific because as a reader we
international regulations of war. don’t know “another attack means” so mention from
preventing a terrorist attack to occur such 9/11
The dilemma of “Dirty Hands”, as depicted by Michael Walzer in his writing “Political Action: The
problem of Dirty Hands” describes that it is hard for politicians to maintain their innocence for the
decisions they have to make. Earlier the term was used by Jean Paul Sartre in his play where a Commented [RT32]: State which play
revolutionary character goes against his consent of committing an evil to shape the world into an Commented [RT33]: Evil act
improved home (Jean Paul Sartre, 1955). Walzer (1973) argued that he does not hold an opinion that
either he or those who govern individual can sustain in leading innocently even if they are considered
the elites. However, it is possible that the politicians who act right in given circumstances end up feeling
guilty of an ethically wrongdoing thus, the innocent politicians are no longer considered innocent. Max Commented [RT34]: Explain a short sentence why they
Weber (1946) argued that innocent governing requires a politician to drop several objectives and are not innocent ? maybe by there peers
responsibilities to keep his hands clean and politicians should serve in the better interests of public
rather than their own. However, Walzer (1973) made another point, on the irony of political system is
they can only perform better if they adopt what Machiavelli described as “how not to be good.”
(Machiavelli, 1469-1527). He further goes on that it is acceptable, in given circumstances the success of
political struggle demands one must get his or her hands dirty, so how it is objectionable to do what is
categorically right? Or, how can we expect to make dirty hands while what we do was right, and
situation demanded it? By raising these questions Michael Walzer provided a political justification to
wrong acts of politicians, including torture, killing or violence, committed in pursuit of good effects such
a hindering the acts of Terrorism. However, he recognized that doers will be recognized as guilty and
responsible. Commented [RT35]: This sentence is great thank you

1.2 Theory of Regret and Responsibility

In similar circumstances, Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1972) expressed his views based on the principles of
regret and ethical responsibility dilemmas. Although Bon was dealing with question of treason, not
torture but an identical concern can be observed in one of his letters now part of his work “After Ten
years” and “Ethics”. In this letter he expressed how Nazism had corrupted all walks of life including calls
for freedom, virtue and reasoning however he argued that there should be placed limitations on
“Freedom” as a moral classification. He stated that freedom comes with accountability and
responsibility that one must accept for the actions he or she commits. Bon regarded responsibility as
“mediated demonstrative act” in which one acts on behalf of individuals. By representing others, these
representatives act in the betterment of others, while responsibility merges with freedom resulting in
acceptance of being guilty and regretful (Ibid). Bon built his argument over Jesus Christ who took Commented [RT36]: Make this sentence a bit more
responsibility, acted on behalf of human beings and accepted their guilt and regrets. He further said academic readable such as built his argument through the
influence of Jesus..
that, anybody who acts in responsible way becomes guilty and those who try to evade guilt go off track
from divine justification of Jesus’s act and ultimate objective of human existence. Bon analyzed Commented [RT37]: ? may ?
freedom, responsibility and regret in the context of Jesus Christ and provided a new base of Christian
conception to visualize hostile acts like torture and murders. Bon accepted that sometimes in given
circumstances one can reach a point where certain actions touch the limits of moral boundaries, and he
called such circumstances as “borderline scenarios”. On such instances, responsible status of persons Commented [RT38]: Better vocab maybe an a elite with
allows them to cross these moral boundaries to act necessary yet terribly as the moral boundaries still high amount of responsibility
exist and one cannot reset them. He writes that if a person crosses these moral limits he will be guilty of
doing so and if he doesn’t cross them he will be guilty of irresponsible behavior. Bon centers his
argument that in any instance, the morality of Jesus Christ teaches us to accept the accountability and
inherent regret (Ibid).

Bon developed a purely theological conception of having “Dirty Hands”, accepting the consequences
and responsibility as God stands with Humans in their Guilt. His theological approach and Walzer’s
relatively secular approach point out that the intended good in committing bad actions can only be Commented [RT39]: Make into a clearer sentence
realized when responsibility and consequences of such actions are realized. When people try to cover
their actions by necessity, helpfulness or correctness significance and objectivity of purpose is Commented [RT40]: Too many words use two
destroyed, and this phenomenon was regarded as “Bad Faith”, by Bon (Ibid).

Coming back to our discussion on United States torture policy in Guantanamo Bay, Bon’s theory of
regret and responsibility (Ibid) help us fairly recognize it being rooted in “Bad Faith”. US government
mocked morality and accountability in several ways. Its legal department interpreted the Geneva
Convention and other relevant laws in the same manner as American government wanted (Dratel,
2005). It had reduced the scope of torture by redefining it comprising only extreme act of injuries which Commented [RT41]: Use better word that connects the
can cause death or tissue fiasco and excluding rest of all damages that cause pain to a person (Elshtain, sentence
2004). These excluded damaging methods were always regarded as “Torture Lite” a term described by
Mark Bowden (2003) to express minimal torture. These torturing techniques included, practice of water
pouring on the face of a static inmate to reflect drowning known as “water boarding” (Alfred McCoy,
2006), sleeplessness, extended positioning of a person in “Stress positions” etc., (Ibid). These arguments
opened way of cruelty transgressing beyond the boundaries that in words of Bon serve as “Borderlines”
of an ethical and moral attitude. Commented [RT42]: Short sentence adding how it
effected the prisioners make making feel like animals or
Conclusion inhuman like. –mention media how they represented
In this case study, it was highlighted that US policy of torture which was facilitated and adopted by state
organs found violating international treaties related to war inmates. It was established that such a
torture policy can only be considered as legitimate if perpetrators of it accept legitimacy of
responsibility, accountability and consequences of their actions. Both Walzer and Bon realized that there
is certain moral uncertainty involved when innocent governing politicians or people cross the morally
permitted border lines in fulfillment of their generic responsibilities towards the people on behalf they
act, where the normal categorization of moral standards is subdued. Both agreed that there is a
proportion of guilt and regret on moral grounds that arise when wrong acts are done for the good
objective and “Dirty Hands” can only be given favor of reasonability of actions amid torture policy if they
are willing to accept their responsibility and resultant guilt of crossing ethical boundaries.

US Government represented Bad Faith in devising its torture policy at Guantanamo Bay and other
detention centers by forging their own moral standards which legitimated their torture techniques and a
belief that by employing such nasty and non-vicarious techniques they can obtain vital information and
details that can be helpful against enemies in war on terror. Under both discussed theories, all these
suppositions are not justifiable. And US government’s endeavors to misrepresent war regulations and
internal agreements reflect that despite of how much dirty its hands become, it will go to any lengths to
evade all possibilities of washing and making them clean.