Oversight and Accountability: A Report on the Waterboarding Technique

This report provides a comprehensive overview of the waterboarding technique, a controversial interrogation method. It delves into the historical context, the method's application by the CIA, and its purported effectiveness in obtaining intelligence, particularly after the 9/11 attacks. The report explores the pros and cons of waterboarding, considering both the potential for obtaining life-saving information and the ethical implications of torture. It also examines the legal status of waterboarding, including current U.S. policy that prohibits its use. Furthermore, the report distinguishes between imitation torture and actual torture, highlighting the extreme measures employed by the CIA. The discussion includes references to key figures like Abu Zubaydah and emphasizes the debate surrounding national security versus human rights. The report concludes by summarizing the current legal stance and the ongoing ethical considerations related to the waterboarding technique.

1Running head: OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Oversight and Accountability
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

2OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Oversight and Accountability
Pros and Cons of Utilizing Waterboarding Technique
The term “waterboarding” is considered to be one of the recent concepts, but this
particular practice is one of the most primitive torture forms that existed for providing
heinous punishments to the captives. The essence of the “waterboarding” practice reflects a
person to be forcefully seized and then restrained. Right after that, the person is immobilized
with face directed upwards and head leaned downward. Following that, water is to be poured
into the captive’s breathing passages making him/her strive hard to take a breath. Even
though it is unclear if exact methods are lately being followed by the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA), but they have included the punishment of placing a plastic wrap or cloth in or
over the prisoner’s mouth and after that water is poured. Initially, this practice might seem to
be normal and less dangerous in comparison to other tortures. However, the impacts are
severe and dramatic as inhalation of the poured water directly initiates a gag reflex making
the victim sense that death is impending. On this basis, the pros and cons of this technique
need to be acknowledged (Kanstroom, 2009).
Certain aspects of “waterboarding” debate are considered to be extensively political
but at the same time, it also reflects on the normative underpinnings of law and human rights.
The pros of using the waterboarding technique involve the fact that it is the only alternative
way available to attain life-saving information from a terrorist. Furthermore, it needs to be
remembered that this particular technique is not at all used by the police or military, but only
by the CIA interrogators. This suggests that there is as such no way through which
indiscriminate use of the technique is possible. On the other hand, with regards to the cons, it
can be suggested that through the implementation of the “waterboarding” technique, attaining
information from the terrorist cannot be ensured. The reason for stating this is that the
terrorist who will be tortured with the stated technique might not have all the information

3OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
about the bomb that is being searched for by the investigators. Thus, this kind of torture
might not attain fruitful outcomes. Another con that involves herein, indicates the fact that
waterboarding imposes a negative impact that stays for a longer-term (Debate.org., 2019).
Utilization of Waterboarding in Attaining Intelligence
Utilization of “waterboarding” technique was largely brought into discussion in the
year 2008, with a large number of contradictory opinions arriving from the House of
Representatives. Specifically, Congress had tried to restrict the continuation of such practice
on the part of the CIA’s sustained utilization of enhanced interrogative processes. However,
President George W. Bush highly disagreed with the opinion presented by Congress as he felt
that avoiding the implementation of such torturous practices would significantly jeopardize
the security of the nation. He went on to assert that, ““It is vitally important that the Central
Intelligence Agency . . . conduct a separate and specialized interrogation program for
terrorists who possess the most critical information in the War on Terror [which] has helped
the United States prevent a number of attacks” (Wahlquist, 2009, p. 39). The significance of
waterboarding in gaining intelligence from the terrorists is noteworthy as at times torturing a
terrorist captive can provide details about future terrorist attacks. Thus, effective solutions
can be formulated. Therefore, the importance of sustained use of the waterboarding technique
is acknowledged from the above-stated details.
Legality, Moral, Ethical Considerations of the Waterboarding Technique and Its
Effectiveness
The national security that sustained in the United States had attained a tremor right
after the 9/11 attack. The said security system essentially wanted to avoid any other serious
attack to take place and this situation took direct precedence over pragmatic, legal and moral
objections. This objection directly refers to the efficacy and effects of tortures as presented in
varied studies with regards to attaining important information about the future. Apparently,

4OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
the officers of CIA had reported that ““countless more Americans will die” unless detainees,
such as Abu Zubaydah, disclosed information that interrogators believed he had about
imminent attacks. And in their view, despite the lack of evidence of its efficacy, that required
torture at times” (Boston University School of Law, 2018). According to the CIA, the sole
aim of implementing such torturous punishments is to ensure that evidence is attained with
regards to the suicidal attacks planned and executed by the terrorists. The effectiveness of
implementing waterboarding suggests the fact that extensive information about critical
terrorists planning was gained from “high-value detainee” Abu Zubaydah (Boston University
School of Law, 2018).
Current U.S. Policy on Using Waterboarding
Currently, the use of waterboarding in the United States is forbidden under the
implications of federal law. Specifically, the previous President, Barack Hussein Obama II
has prohibited its utilization in the form of an interrogation program in the year 2009.
Evidently, this particular ban was shortly codified in the country’s law by Congress. The
Army Field Manual, who is presently in charge of the interrogations that are conducted in the
U.S., forbids implementation of the inhuman, cruel, and degrading treatments (Tate, 2017).
Recent Consideration of Waterboarding Technique
Implementation of the waterboarding technique has its origin hundreds of years back,
but its recent application has started right after the 9/11 attack in 2001. At that time, the CIA
had to employ the said technique against the suspects so that the details about the terrorist
attack can be completely received. Specifically, the CIA had waterboarded Abu Zubaydah, a
supposed senior al-Qaeda member for about 83 times in the succeeding year of the attack
(i.e., 2002). This particular extreme situation was applied on the prisoners or the detainees so
that the terror that prevailed in New York and Washington right after the 9/11 attack could be
lessened to an extent. The CIA tried to gain adequate information from the detainee so that

5OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
any future terrorists’ attack that might have the probability of killing the American people can
be dealt with effectively (Hitchens, 2008).
The Distinction between Imitation Torture and Actual Torture
There is a great difference that sustains amidst imitation torture and actual torture
incidences. The reason for stating this is that the initial one attempts to threat the detainee of
torturing with extreme actions so that in fear of that the latter comes up with all the necessary
details that are demanded by the investigators. There are varied forms of tortures that can be
implemented by the CIA investigators with an intention of attaining life-saving credentials.
However, imitation attempts to only make a prisoner experience a situation that would appear
life-threatening (Laughland, 2015).
On the other hand, the actual tortures involve the fact that the CIA investigators
implement the punishments, such as usage of cold water to interrogate, box confinement,
rehydration, and rectal feeding, threats and beatings, stress positions and waterboarding.
Extreme steps are implied on the prisoners so that they can provide the needed information
out of extreme pressure. Often the convict’s children are also thrashed and killed before their
eyes so that the painful sight can force them to tell the truth. Specifically, through the
implementation of the actual tortures, the CIA tends to ensure that mass terrorist attacks are
prevented to a great extent. The terror that has been sustained among the people’s minds on
the basis of the 9/11 attack, it is quite apparent that prevention of such actions will need some
heinous actions. Apparently, after implementation of the actual tortures, many Americans
were saved from being brutally killed after waterboarding had been implemented on Abu
Zubaydah (Laughland, 2015). Thus, the implementation of the waterboarding technique had
illustrated some effectiveness in saving thousands of lives.

6OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
References
Boston University School of Law (2018). Professor discusses legal and ethical issues
revealed in report on CIA’s use of torture. Retrieved September 17, 2019, from,
https://www.bu.edu/law/2014/12/18/professor-discusses-legal-and-ethical-issues-
revealed-in-report-on-cias-use-of-torture/
Debate.org. (2019). Waterboarding should be legal in the United States. Retrieved
September 17, 2019, from https://www.debate.org/debates/Waterboarding-should-be-
legal-in-the-United-States./1/
Hitchens, C. (2008). Believe me, it’s torture. Retrieved September 17, 2019, from,
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/08/hitchens200808
Kanstroom, D. (2009). On Waterboarding: Legal interpretation and the continuing struggle
for human rights. BC Int'l & Comp. L. Rev., 32, 269- 287.
Laughland, O. (2015). How the CIA tortured its detainees. Retrieved September 17, 2019,
from, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/09/cia-torture-methods-
waterboarding-sleep-deprivation
Tate, J. (2017). Does waterboarding work? Seven questions about the controversial
interrogation technique. Retrieved September 17, 2019, from,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/01/25/does-
waterboarding-work-six-questions-about-the-controversial-interrogation-technique/?
noredirect=on
Wahlquist, J. A. (2009). Enhancing interrogation: Advancing a new agenda. Army War Coll
Carlisle Barracks Pa, 38-49.