Examining the Legality of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques Used in the War on Terror

Enhanced interrogation techniques are highly controversial. However, it is important to discuss their role and utility in the post-911 security environment, where terrorist organizations are a threat to national and international security. The flaw in the current debate is the fact that enhanced interrogation techniques are discussed within the overall issue of detainee abuse. However, when analyzing the issue of enhanced interrogation techniques from the paradigm of strategic, operational and tactical perspectives it is possible to conclude that enhanced interrogation techniques are legal, appropriate and do not equate to torture. This thesis begins by examining strategic guidance provided by international and domestic law, which allows for clarification of detainee status and the precise guidelines for torture. Second, this thesis analyzes the Department of Defense and Central Intelligence Agency\u27s operation guidance to determine whether the overall United States guidance regarding enhanced interrogation techniques authorizes torture. Finally, this thesis then cites specific cases of detainee abuse to both illustrate tactical implementation of enhanced interrogation techniques and illustrate possible issues of concern. Utilizing this ‘strategic to operational to tactical implementation\u27 framework, I concludes that, under the proper guidance, the United States can implement an enhanced interrogation program that is legal and appropriate for use on detainees that do not qualify for prisoner of war status under the Geneva Convention