Adam Serwer makes an excellent point in response to Jay Nordlinger’s high praise for the underpants bomber’s father, Alhaji Umaru Mutallab, who had the strength of character to report his son’s activities to U.S. authorities despite the possible legal repercussions for his son. Nordlinger says that Alhaji Umaru Mutallab should be father of the year.
I don’t necessarily disagree with Nordlinger’s sentiments, but Serwer raises an interesting point considering Nordlinger’s likely views on torture:
Of course, Mutallab did indeed do a brave thing by contacting U.S. authorities. But I’m assuming Nordlinger shares the views of his colleagues at the National Reviewthat his son Abdulmutallab should be tortured for information. I doubt many parents would come forward with concerns that their children are being radicalized if they think the United States is going to stick them in a secret prison somewhere and waterboard them [ed note: or worse]. On the contrary, the realistic fear that people apprehended by American authorities might be tortured could help createthe kind of toxic relationship with counterterrorism units that we see between urban communities and the police in the U.S., which would contribute to radicalization, rather than mitigate it.
At any rate, there’s something disingenuous about the folks at NR empathizing with Mutallab’s “pain” on the one hand and calling for his kid to be waterboarded on the other.
This highlights one of the more problematic aspects of torture: the U.S. is trying to garner cooperation, both domestically and abroad, from Muslims and other innocent bystanders in connection with reporting criminal jihadists in their midst. Intelligence and law enforcement are the most effective means of countererrorism, and in connection therewith, cooperation from the underlying population is invaluable.
However, in order to maximize on that cooperation, the United States must maintain the moral high ground, and stick to its principles. It must warrant sympathy, and command respect if it wants to convince citizens to turn-in would be criminals in their midst – an uncomfortable deed under any circumstances. But a United States that tortures, abandons due process, profiles Muslims indiscriminately and pursues a wildly belligerent foreign policy will have the opposite effect.
Alienated Muslims that feel guilty for nothing other than being Muslim are less likely to cooperate with U.S. authorities in thwarting plots. Parents, siblings and friends will not be as quick to intercede if they think their loved one will be brutalized, psychologically scarred beyond repair and denied basic rights. Innocent victims of military strikes will be radicalized as enemies, not converted to allies.
Yet, despite the stakes, certain pundits would have us sacrifice potentially life-saving assets for the sake of maintaining a torture regime - a morally reprehensible practice in its own right, one that corrupts prisoner and questioner alike, and that produces inferior, unreliable intelligence regardless. Not only do they want to keep employing these self-defeating policies that sully our principles, they intend to demagogue the issues relentlessly. Dick Cheney and the GOP leadership – as well as their media enablers – use Obama’s refusal to torture and profile as political cudgels when, in reality, the blows will they attempt will fall most heavily on the American people in the end.
Related posts:
recent comments