Challenging Psychologists on Their Involvement in Torture
NY.Trans...@blythe.org
Hash: SHA1
Challenging Psychologists on Their Involvement in Torture
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Counterpunch - Jun 7, 2007
http://www.counterpunch.org/soldz06072007.html
Part 1: A Q&A on Psychologists and Torture
The Pentagon's IG Report Contradicts What the APA Has Said About
the Involvement of Psychologists in Abusive Interrogations
By STEPHEN SOLDZ, STEVE REISNER and BRAD OLSON
What is the OIG Report and Why is it Important?
On May 18, the Department of Defense (DoD) declassified an August
2006 report by the departments' Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
entitled Review of DoD-Directed Investigations of Detainee Abuse. In
this report is conclusive evidence from the oversight division of the
DoD confirming that psychologists played a central role in the
development of the regime of psychological torture used at the US
detention facilities at Guantánamo and in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The OIG report further substantiates numerous press reports
published over the last several years that the military's Survival,
Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) program had been
"reverse-engineered" to develop the harsh interrogation techniques used
in our country's detention facilities housing terrorist suspects.
Since 2004, as these reports emerged, the leadership of the
American Psychological Association (APA) ignored or disparaged them; in
each case reiterating the APA policy statement, that "psychologists
have a critical role in keeping interrogations safe, legal, ethical and
effective."
This briefing paper documents and explains the content of the OIG
report and its refutation of the claims of APA leadership, including
those made by Dr. Stephen Behnke, Director of APA Ethics Directorate,
and Past Presidents Gerald Koocher and Ronald Levant. At the end of the
document is a list of urgent action steps the APA must take to
immediately reform its flawed ethics policy and restore the reputation
of our profession as a force that defends human rights, promotes core
principles of health professional ethics, and acts to protect the
well-being of the individual, regardless of political, ethnic, or
religious distinctions.
What is SERE?
SERE is the military's Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape
program that trains US Special Operations forces, aviators and others
at high risk of capture on the battlefield to evade capture and to
resist 'breaking' under torture, particularly through giving false
confessions or collaborating with their captors. During SERE training,
trainees are subjected to harsh and abusive treatment modeled upon the
cold war-era psychological torture techniques used by the Chinese, the
North Koreans, and the former Soviet Union. SERE-type techniques, when
used by other countries, have been described as torture by the United
States government in State Department human rights reports for decades.
Reports of the treatment of detainees in US custody as part of the
global war on terror have paralleled techniques known to have been used
as part of SERE training: prolonged isolation, prolonged sleep
deprivation, sensory deprivation, extremely painful "stress positions,"
sensory bombardment (such as prolonged loud noise and/or bright
lights), forced nudity, sexual humiliation, cultural humiliation (such
as disrespect to holy books), being subjected to extreme cold that
induces hypothermia, the exploitation of phobias, and simulation of the
experience of drowning (waterboarding). Experience with torture
survivors and the medical and psychological literature document that
these techniques can have profound long-term negative effects upon
individuals, including psychosis, depression, suicidal ideation and/or
post-traumatic stress disorder. Many SERE program graduates have
complained of these symptoms.
Do SERE Techniques Violate the Geneva Conventions? YES.
"SERE training incorporates physical and psychological pressures,
which act as counterresistance techniques, to replicate harsh
conditions that the Service member might encounter if they are held by
forces that do not abide by the Geneva Conventions" (OIG Report, p. 23)
"The Commander, Joint Personnel Recovery Agency, explained that he
understood that the detainees held by TF-20 [in Iraq] were determined
to be Designated Unlawful Combatants (DUCs), not Enemy Prisoners of War
(EPW) protected by the Geneva Convention and that the interrogation
techniques were authorized and that the JPRA team members were not to
exceed the standards used in SERE training on our own Service
members." (OIG Report, p. 28)
The OIG Report cites the description in the Army Field Manual
34-52, which makes clear that SERE-type interrogation techniques
constitute "physical or mental torture and coercion under the Geneva
conventions":
"Physical or mental torture and coercion revolves around
eliminating the source's free will and are expressly prohibited by GWS
[Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Wounded and Sick in
Armed Forces in the Field], Article 13; GPW [Geneva Convention Relative
to the Treatment of Prisoners of War], Articles 13 and 17; and GC
[Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in
Time of War], Articles 31 and 32. Torture is defined as the infliction
of intense pain to body or mind to extract a confession or information,
or for sadistic pleasure. Examples of physical torture include--
electric shock, forcing an individual to stand, sit, or kneel in
abnormal positions for prolonged periods of time, food deprivation, and
any form of beating. Examples of mental torture include-mock
executions, abnormal sleep deprivation, and chemically induced
psychosis. Coercion is defined as actions designed to unlawfully induce
another to compel an act against one's will. Examples of coercion
include-threatening or implying physical or mental torture to the
subject, his family or others to whom he owes loyalty." (OIG Report,
pp. 3-4)
Are SERE Techniques Regarded as Torture by SERE Psychologists? YES.
PENS Task Force member Captain Bryce Lefever, a former SERE
psychologist for the Navy SEALs, describes his SERE duties in his PENS
biography as including the supervision of "personnel undergoing
intensive exposure to enemy interrogation, torture, and exploitation
techniques."
Were SERE Techniques Taught and Utilized at Guantánamo? YES.
The OIG report documents in detail that Ft. Bragg SERE
psychologists provided training to interrogators at Guantánamo for the
purpose of using SERE techniques to break down detainees:
"Counterresistance techniques taught by the Joint Personnel
Recovery Agency [the agency responsible for SERE training] contributed
to the development of interrogation policy at the U.S. Southern Command
[i.e., Guanatanamo]." OIG Report, p. 24)
"[These] Counterresistance techniques were introduced because
personnel believed that interrogation methods used were no longer
effective in obtaining useful information from some detainees." (OIG
Report, p. 24)
"JTF-170 [the command overseeing interrogations at Guantánamo]
requested that Joint Personnel Recovery Agency instructors be sent to
Guantánamo to instruct interrogators in SERE counterresistance
interrogation techniques. SERE instructors from Fort Bragg responded to
Guantánamo requests for instructors trained in the use of SERE
interrogation resistance techniques" (OIG Report, p. 26).
Were Psychologists Involved in the Transformation of SERE Training
Techniques into Interrogation methods? YES.
"On September 16, 2002, the Army Special Operations Command and the
Joint Personnel Recovery Agency co-hosted a SERE psychologist
conference at Fort Bragg for JTF-170 interrogation personnel. The
Army's Behavioral Science Consultation Team [BSCT] from Guantánamo Bay
also attended the conference. Joint Personnel Recovery Agency personnel
briefed JTF-170 representatives on the exploitation techniques and
methods used in resistance (to interrogation) training at SERE schools.
The JTF-170 personnel understood that they were to become familiar with
SERE training and be capable of determining which SERE information and
techniques might be useful in interrogations at Guantánamo. Guantánamo
Behavioral Science Consultation Team personnel understood that they
were to review documentation and standard operating procedures for SERE
training in developing the standard operating procedure for the
JTF-170, if the command approved those practices. The Army Special
Operations Command was examining the role of interrogation support as a
'SERE Psychologist competency area.'" (OIG Report, p. 25, emphasis
added.)
How did SERE Techniques Become Transformed into Abusive Interrogation
Techniques?
On October 11, the Commander of JTF-170 forwarded a memorandum
requesting approval of harsh, SERE-based technique. From the memorandum:
"...the following techniques and other aversive techniques, such as
those used in U.S. military interrogation resistance training or by
other U.S. government agencies, may be utilized in a carefully
coordinated manner to help interrogate exceptionally resistant
detainees." (OIG Report, p. 26)
"[T]he U.S. Southern Command's request led to the issuance of
Secretary of Defense, December 2, 2002, memorandum [authorizing the use
of many harsh, abusive techniques]. In response to Service-level
concerns, a Working Group was formed to examine counterresistance
techniques, leading to the Secretary of Defense, April 16, 2003,
memorandum that approved counterresistance techniques for U.S. Southern
Command." (OIG Report, p. 26)
Did the Interrogation Methods Considered by the Pentagon's "Working
Group" and Authorized by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld Originate With
SERE Psychologists? YES.
"[T]he U.S. Southern Command's request led to the issuance of
Secretary of Defense, December 2, 2002, memorandum." (OIG Report, p. 26)
"I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4
hours?" (Rumsfeld Memorandum Dec. 2, 2002)
"In response to Service-level concerns, a Working Group was formed
to examine counterresistance techniques, leading to the Secretary of
Defense, April 16, 2003, memorandum that approved counterresistance
techniques for U.S. Southern Command." (OIG Report, p. 26)
"Application of these interrogation techniques is subject to the
following general safeguards: (i) limited to use only at strategic
interrogation facilities; (ii) there is a good basis to believe that
detainee possesses critical intelligence; (iii) the detainee is
medically and operationally evaluated as suitable (considering all
techniques to be used in combination); (iv) interrogators are
specifically trained for the techniques; (v) a specific interrogation
plan (including reasonable safeguards. limits on duration, intervals
between applications, termination criteria and the presence or
availability of qualified medical personnel) has been developed; (vi)
there is appropriate supervision; and, (vii) there is appropriate,
specified senior approval for use with any specific detainee(after
considering the foregoing and receiving legal advice)."
(Rumsfeld's "Memorandum for the Commander, US Southern Command.
Subject: Counter-Resistance Techniques in the War on Terrorism (S).
April 16, 2003, p. 5.)
Were the SERE Techniques Used in Iraq and Did Psychologists Play a Role
in Bringing Them There? YES.
"The Joint Personnel Recovery Agency [responsible for SERE] was
also responsible for the migration of counterresistance interrogation
techniques into the U.S. Central Command's area of responsibility [Iraq
and Afghanistan]. In September 2003, at the request of the Commander,
TF-20 [the special forces group hunting Saddam Hussein and other former
Baath and top insurgency leaders], the Commander, Joint Personnel
Recovery Agency sent an interrogation assessment team to Iraq to
provide advice and assistance to the task force interrogation mission.
The TF-20 was the special mission unit that operated in the CJTF-7 area
of operations" (OIG Report, p. 28).
Did SERE Techniques Migrate to Afghanistan? YES.
"The Afghanistan SOP was influenced by the counterresistance
memorandum that the Secretary of Defense approved on December, 2, 2002
(see Appendix U), and incorporated techniques designed for detainees
who were identified as 'unlawful combatants.' Subsequent battlefield
interrogation SOPs included techniques such as yelling, loud music,
light control, environmental manipulation, sleep
deprivation/adjustment, stress positions, 20 hour interrogations, and
controlled fear (muzzled dogs)" (OIG Report, pp. 15-16).
Did the OIG Find the Use of SERE Techniques to be Inappropriate? YES.
"We are not suggesting that SERE training is inappropriate for
those subject to capture; however, it is not appropriate to use in
training interrogators how to conduct interrogation operations" (OIG
Report, p. 29).
"We recommend that the Commander, U.S. Joint Forces Command, Office
of Primary Responsibility for Personnel Recovery and Executive Agent
for all Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape training implement
formal policies and procedures that preclude the introduction and use
of physical and psychological coercion techniques outside the training
environment." (OIG Report, p. 30, emphasis removed)
Were Psychologists Central to the Development and Promulgation of
Abusive Interrogation Techniques? YES.
As the OIG report documents, SERE psychologists instructed military
intelligence, Special Operations forces, psychologists serving as part
of the Behavioral Science Consultation Teams (BSCTs), and other
interrogation personnel on how to use SERE techniques during
interrogations. Additionally, BSCT psychologists understood that they
were to utilize SERE methods in "developing the standard operating
procedure for the JTF-170 [GTMO interrogators]," pending command
approval (OIG Report, p. 29). BSCT psychologists also were directly
involved in implementing the SERE tactics during interrogations,
according to multiple reports. One well-known example is the
involvement of military psychologist Major John Leso in the
interrogation of Muhammed Al-Qatani.
Did Leading SERE Psychologists and Other Psychologists Engaged in
Interrogations Co-author the PENS Task Force Report and
Recommendations? YES.
In response to reports of psychologists' and other health
professionals' involvement in abusive interrogations, the APA convened
a Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security
(PENS) in 2005. Six of the nine voting members were from the DoD and
the US intelligence community, most with direct involvement in national
security interrogations at Guantánamo, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Perhaps
most problematic, it is clear from the OIG Report that three of the
PENS members were directly in the chain of command translating SERE
techniques into harsh interrogation tactics. Although we cannot know
exactly what each of these individuals did, their presence in the chain
of command is deeply troubling.
Colonel Morgan Banks "is the senior Army Survival, Evasion,
Resistance, and Escape (SERE) Psychologist, responsible for the
training and oversight of all Army SERE Psychologists. He provides
technical support and consultation to all Army psychologists providing
interrogation support, and his office currently provides the only Army
training for psychologists in repatriation planning and execution,
interrogation support, and behavioral profiling" (PENS Task Force
member biographies). Since 2005, several reporters have implicated
Colonel Banks in the "reverse engineering" of SERE techniques for
interrogation purposes.
Colonel Larry James "was the Chief Psychologist for the Joint
Intelligence Group at GTMO, Cuba" (PENS Task Force member biographies)
starting in January 2003, immediately after Secretary Rumsfeld
authorized the use of the most brutal SERE-based techniques as
Guantánamo. He was in command of psychologists at GTMO at the time
these abusive policies and practices were in effect with the direct
involvement of military psychologists.
Captain Bryce Lefever had been a SERE psychologist (from 1991-1993)
where he supervised "personnel undergoing intensive exposure to enemy
interrogation, torture, and exploitation techniques." He "was deployed
as the Joint Special Forces Task Force psychologist to Afghanistan in
2002, where he lectured to interrogators and was consulted on various
interrogation techniques" (PENS Task Force member biographies). That
is, he had the requisite SERE background and it appears that he was
involved in interrogations in Afghanistan at the time, as the OIG
report makes clear, that the abusive SERE-based techniques were being
utilized by Special Operations forces and others.
While we do not know exactly what each of these PENS Task Force
members did in their settings and how their roles influenced the
SERE/BSCT migration process, the OIG report makes it clear that the
commands that these psychologists held or served under played a lead
role establishing and implementing the policies that adapted SERE
tactics use in interrogations during the time the events described in
the OIG report occurred. This conflict of interest was already raised
in the press at the time of the PENS process by the release of the ICRC
report; it is confirmed by the OIG report. This conflict raises the
strong possibility that the selfsame psychologists who wrote the APA
policy permitting participation in US national security interrogations
were part of the process generating the policies and procedures that
made the abusive SERE techniques standard operating procedure
throughout all three primary theaters of US combat and human
intelligence operations as part of the War on Terror.
In addition to the PENS Task Force members apparently involved in
DoD interrogations, one member, R. Scott Shumate, was the chief
operational psychologist in the CIA Counter Terrorism Center and later
for DoD counterintelligence operations. The CIA's so-called "enhanced
interrogation methods," as described in several media reports, are
strikingly similar to the SERE tactics:
R. Scott Shumate's PENS Task Force biographical statement reads:
"He has worked for the federal government in highly classified
positions that have required him to travel extensively and live
overseas. He has performed many of his duties under highly stressful
and difficult circumstances. In May of 2003, Dr. Shumate accepted a
senior position in the Department of Defense as the Director of
Behavioral Science for the Counterintelligence Field Activity ["CIFA"].
Currently, he has 20 psychologists and a multimillion dollar budget as
he provides operational psychological support to several Defense
Agencies though CIFA."The biographical statement goes on: "He was the
chief operational psychologist for the Counter-Terrorism Center from
2000 to 2003 and has interviewed many renowned individuals associated
with various terrorist networks."
A more recent biographical statement posted on a website for a
conference where Shumate was scheduled to speak states that, "Dr.
Shumate worked as an undercover officer for the Central Intelligence
Agency where he worked against a wide array of targets including the
Middle Eastern, Russian, and Chinese. From April 2001 until May of 2003
he was the chief operational psychologist for the CIA's Counter
Terrorism Center (CTC). He has been with several of the key apprehended
terrorists."
Shumate, it appears, was "with several of the key apprehended
terrorists," in his capacity as chief operational psychologist for the
CIA's Counter Terrorism center or while CIFA Behavioral Science staff
were offering guidance for the questioning of Guantánamo detainees. The
legality of the interrogation practices used by these units will be the
subject of imminent hearings by the Senate Armed Services Committee and
the Senate Intelligence Committee.
What has the APA Said About Psychologists Participation in National
Security Interrogations [emphases added unless otherwise noted]?
The APA leadership has repeatedly said that psychologists'
participation in interrogations helps keep them "safe, legal, ethical
and effective." This language, it turns out, is nearly identical to
that used by Department of Defense officials, including former Army
Surgeon General Lt. General Kevin Kiley, involved in protecting what we
now know were abusive interrogation techniques that violate the Geneva
Conventions. The following quotes demonstrate how the statements of APA
leadership directly contradict the findings of the OIG report:
"APA derives its position from Principle A, "Do No Harm," in the
Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2002), and
from Principle B, which addresses psychologists' responsibilities to
society. By virtue of Principle A, psychologists do no harm; by virtue
of Principle B, psychologists use their expertise in, and understanding
of, human behavior to aid in the prevention of harm. A corollary to
this first rule is that psychologists may not participate in
interrogations that rely on coercion." (APA Director of APA's Ethics
Office, APA Monitor on Psychology, July/August, 2006)
"It is consistent with the APA Code of Ethics for psychologists to
serve in consultative roles to interrogation- or information-gathering
processes for national security-related purposes. While engaging in
such consultative and advisory roles entails a delicate balance of
ethical considerations, doing so puts psychologists in a unique
position to assist in ensuring that such processes are safe and ethical
for all participants." (PENS Report)
"The task force concluded psychologists have a critical role in
keeping interrogations safe, legal, ethical and effective." (Olivia
Moorehead-Slaughter, Chair of the PENS Task Force, emphasis in original)
"I wish I had the assurance that Jane Mayer and that Dr. Reisner
apparently have that there are APA members doing bad things at
Guantánamo or elsewhere, because any time I have asked these
journalists or other people who are making these assertions for names
so that APA could investigate its members who might be allegedly
involved in them, no names have ever been forthcoming." (2006 APA
President Gerald Koocher on Democracy Now! radio June 16, 2006)
"APA has a strong interest in the role that psychologists are
playing in national security investigations as part of the Joint Task
Force and wishes to continue to help advise our members and DoD to
ensure that such work by psychologists is safe, legal, ethical, and
effective." (2005 APA President Ronald Levant in Military Psychology,
2007)
"Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) training for
BSCTs was discussed. SERE training has been provided to BSCTs so that
they can learn the perspective of persons in captivity. General Hood
stated that the purpose was not so that they would learn how to use
SERE techniques in interrogation." (2005 APA President Ronald Levant in
Military Psychology, 2007)
"The Association's position is rooted in our belief that having
psychologists consult with interrogation teams makes an important
contribution toward keeping interrogations safe and ethical." (2007 APA
President Sharon Brehm, Letter to the Editor, Washington Monthly,
January 9, 2007).
"A number of opportunistic commentators masquerading as scholars
have continued to report on alleged abuses by mental health
professionals." (2006 APA President Gerald Koocher, APA Monitor on
Psychology, February, 2006)
"colleagues have expressed concerns that behavioral scientists have
helped interrogators create aversive interrogation techniques as noted
in press accounts (e.g., sleep deprivation, social isolation, extreme
temperature changes or degrading and embarrassing interventions). Such
concern ignores the fact that the use of such strategies hardly
constitutes a recent development, and did not originate as the ideas of
psychologists." (2006 APA President Gerald Koocher, APA Monitor on
Psychology, July/August, 2006)
"In the purest sense, the mission of the BSCT is to provide
forensic psychological expertise and consultation in order to assist
the command in conducting safe, legal, ethical, and effective
interrogation and detainee operations." (Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley,
Surgeon General of the Army "Final Report: Assessment of Medical
Operations for OEF, GTMO, and OIF "Section 18-21, p. 13.)
"Students [military intelligence] are trained about the roles of
the BSCT staff, which include: checking the medical history of
detainees with a focus on depression, delusional behaviors,
manifestations of stress, and 'what are their buttons.' Students are
alaso trained that BSCT staff will greatly assist them with: obtaining
more accurate intelligence information, knowing how to gain better
rapport with detainees, and also knowing when to push or not to push
harder in the pursuit of intelligence information." (Lt. Gen. Kevin C.
Kiley, Surgeon General of the Army "Final Report: Assessment of Medical
Operations for OEF, GTMO, and OIF" Section 19-14, p. 19-7.)
What Should the APA Do Now?
With the release of the OIG report, the APA's argument for
psychologist participation, that it keeps these interrogations "safe,
legal, ethical, and effective," has been definitively proven false. The
APA should immediately take several steps to correct its flawed policy:
1. APA should immediately rescind the PENS Task Force Report
because it was based upon a flawed process and was written by senior
DoD and intelligence personnel involved in the chain of command that
oversaw the very ethical abuses it was constituted to investigate.
2. Prior to the upcoming August Council Meeting, the APA Board of
Directors and the Ethics Committee should endorse the resolution
entitled, "A moratorium on psychologist involvement in interrogations
at US detention centers for foreign detainees," introduced by Neil
Altman and scheduled for a vote at the August Council of
Representatives. The Council of Representatives should pass this
resolution. Passing the Moratorium will immediately establish that
psychologists no longer belong in the interrogation rooms where, as the
OIG report documents, they helped to create the procedures for, and
supervise the methods of, abusive SERE interrogations. Such a step
would do much to bring the APA in line with the positions adopted some
time ago by the American Psychiatric Association, the American Medical
Association, and the American Nurses Association.
4. APA should modify Ethics Code Standard 1.02, which allows
psychologists to disregard the APA Ethics Code when following a law or
military regulation, thus removing what amounts to the "Nuremberg
Defense" from the APA Ethics Code.
5. The APA Board of Directors should commence a neutral third-party
investigation of any conflicts of interest between the APA and the
Executive Branch of the US Government that influenced the PENS process
and the APA's position on this important issue.
It is necessary to uncover why and how the APA has steadfastly
continued its commitment to its current policy despite the continually
emerging evidence that psychology and psychologists have been involved
in detainee abuse. An independent investigation conducted by a panel
of experts in international, military and US law, health professional
ethics, human rights, and other related fields would shed much-needed
light on the APA's formulation of policy in this area. as well as
structural, cultural, and other issues that contributed to the APA's
policy development process.
Among the issues this investigation must examine are:
a) the numerous procedural irregularities alleged to have occurred
during the PENS process;
b) the role of the military and intelligence agencies in the
formulation and functioning of the PENS Task Force;
c) the reasons why the APA and its leadership have systematically
ignored the accumulating evidence that psychologists participating in
interrogations are contributing to torture or cruel, inhuman, or
degrading treatment, rather than helping to prevent it; and
d) the overall nexus of close ties between the APA staff/leadership
and the military and intelligence agencies, and whether that nexus
contributed to the APA policy on interrogations, and further, to the
failure of the APA to substantively investigate allegations of mass
ethical abuses by psychologists in the military and intelligence
services.
Contact Information:
Stephen Soldz, Director, Center for Research, Evaluation, and Program
Development & Professor, Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis;
University of Massachusetts, Boston. He can be reached at:
sso...@bgsp.edu
Steven Reisner is Senior Faculty and Supervisor, International Trauma
Studies Program, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University;
Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, New York
University Medical School: SRei...@psychoanalysis.net
Brad Olson is an Assistant Research Professor, at Northwestern
University: b-o...@northwestern.edu
***
CounterPunch - Jun 7, 2007
http://www.counterpunch.org/apa06072007.html
Part 2:
On Psychologists and Torture:
An Open Letter to Sharon Brehm, President of
the American Psychological Association
By STEPHEN SOLDZ, STEVE REISNER and BRAD OLSON, et al.
June 6, 2007
Sharon Brehm, Ph.D., President
American Psychological Association
Dear President Brehm:
We write you as psychologists concerned about the participation of our
profession in abusive interrogations of national security detainees at
Guantánamo, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and at the so-called CIA "black
sites."
Our profession is founded on the fundamental ethical principle,
enshrined as Principle A in our Ethical Principles of Psychologists and
Code of Conduct: "Psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they
work and take care to do no harm." Irrefutable evidence now shows that
psychologists participating in national security interrogations have
systematically violated this principle. A recently declassified August
2006 report by the Department of Defense Office of the Inspector
General (OIG) Review of DoD-Directed Investigations of Detainee
Abuse-describes in detail how psychologists from the military's
Survival, Evasion Resistance, and Escape (SERE) program were instructed
to apply their expertise in abusive interrogation techniques to
interrogations being conducted by the DoD throughout all three theaters
of the War on Terror (Guantánamo, Afghanistan, and Iraq).
SERE is the US military's program designed to train Special Forces and
other troops at high risk of capture to resist "breaking" during harsh
interrogations conducted by a ruthless enemy. During SERE training,
trainees are subjected to extensive abusive treatment, including
sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation, isolation, cultural and sexual
humiliation, and, in some cases, simulated drowning ("waterboarding").
By SERE's own admission, these techniques are classified as torture or
cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.
The OIG report details a number of trainings and consultations provided
by SERE psychologists to psychologists and other personnel involved in
interrogations, including those on the Behavioral Science Consultation
Teams (BSCT), generally composed of and headed by psychologists. The
OIG confirms repeated press accounts over the last two years that SERE
techniques were "reverse engineered" by SERE psychologists in
consultation with the BSCT psychologists and others, to develop and
standardize a regime of psychological torture used by interrogators at
Guantánamo, and in Iraq and Afghanistan. The OIG report states:
"Counterresistance techniques [SERE] were introduced because personnel
believed that interrogation methods used were no longer effective in
obtaining useful information from some detainees."
The OIG report also clearly reveals the central role of psychologists
in these processes:
"On September 16, 2002, the Army Special Operations Command and the
Joint Personnel Recovery Agency [the military unit containing SERE]
co-hosted a SERE psychologist conference at Fort Bragg for JTF-170 [the
military component responsible for interrogations at Guantánamo]
interrogation personnel. The Army's Behavioral Science Consultation
Team from Guantánamo Bay also attended the conference. Joint Personnel
Recovery Agency briefed JTF-170 representatives on the exploitation
techniques and methods used in resistance (to interrogation) training
at SERE schools. The JTF-170 personnel understood that they were to
become familiar with SERE training and be capable of determining which
SERE information and techniques might be useful in interrogations at
Guantánamo. Guantánamo Behavioral Science Consultation Team personnel
understood that they were to review documentation and standard
operating procedures for SERE training in developing the standard
operating procedure for the JTF-170, if the command approved those
practices. The Army Special Operations Command was examining the role
of interrogation support as a 'SERE Psychologist competency area'" (p.
25, emphasis added).
It is now indisputable that psychologists and psychology were directly
and officially responsible for the development and migration of abusive
interrogation techniques, techniques which the International Committee
of the Red Cross has labeled "tantamount to torture." Reports of
psychologists' (along with other health professionals') participation
in abusive interrogations surfaced more than two years ago.
While other health professional associations expressed dismay when it
was reported that their members had participated in these abuses and
took principled stands against their members' direct participation in
interrogations, the APA undertook a campaign to support such
involvement. In 2005, APA President Ron Levant created the PENS Task
Force to assess the ethics of such participation. Six of the nine
voting psychologist members selected for the task force were uniformed
and civilian personnel from military and intelligence agencies, most
with direct connections to national security interrogations. Perhaps
most problematic, it is clear from the OIG Report that three of the
PENS members were directly in the chain of command translating SERE
techniques into harsh interrogation tactics. Although we cannot know
exactly what each of these individuals did, their presence in the chain
of command is troubling.
One such task Force member is Colonel Morgan Banks who, according to
his Task Force biography
"is the senior Army Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape
(SERE) Psychologist, responsible for the training and oversight of all
Army SERE Psychologists, who include those involved in SERE
training.... He provides technical support and consultation to all Army
psychologists providing interrogation support.... His initial duty
assignment as a psychologist was to assist in establishing the Army's
first permanent SERE training program involving a simulated captivity
experience. In November 1991 [sic: 2001], he deployed to Afghanistan,
where he spent four months over the winter of 2001/2002 at Bagram
Airfield, supporting combat operations against Al Qaida and Taliban
fighters."
Thus, according to the OIG report, Colonel Banks had direct command
responsibility for the SERE psychologists training, consulting, and
participating in interrogations and provided "support and consultation"
to other psychologists involved in abusive interrogations. In fact,
reading the OIG report renders it difficult to imagine that Colonel
Banks was not himself directly involved in developing and/or
implementing these abusive activities. The OIG report appears to
confirm what has been suspected at least since the publication in July
2005 of Jane Mayer's New Yorker article "The Experiment": that Colonel
Banks was intimately involved in the teaching and development of the
abusive interrogation tactics documented by the International Committee
of the Red Cross, and now by the Department of Defense, as being used
at Guantánamo.
Colonel Larry James, a second PENS member, "was the Chief Psychologist
for the Joint Intelligence Group at GTMO, Cuba" (PENS Task Force member
biographies) starting in January 2003. Col. Larry James has often been
cited by Gerald Koocher, Stephen Behnke, and others, as the one who
'cleaned up' Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib. The OIG report, however, makes
it clear that Guantánamo BSCTs played an essential role in transforming
SERE techniques into standard operating interrogation procedure; that
the Commander of Guantánamo detainee operations requested official
approval for the use of these torture techniques in October, 2002; and
that permission was granted by Defense Secretary Rumsfeld in December
2002. Additionally, as stated in his PENS biography, in 2003 James "was
the Chief Psychologist for the Joint Intelligence Group at GTMO, Cuba."
In 2004, James was Director, Behavioral Science Unit, Joint
Interrogation and Debriefing Center at Abu Ghraib. It should be noted
that that in 2004, according to many sources, Gen. Geoffrey Miller,
Guantánamo Commander, too, went from Guantánamo to Iraq, and brought
the SERE techniques with him. James was the commander of the BSCTs at
the time the FBI and other law enforcement agents were reporting that
severe abuses were occurring at Guantánamo. The FBI and other Criminal
Investigative Task Force agents reporting these abuses referred to them
as "SERE" and "counter-resistance" tactics in documents obtained by the
ACLU under the Freedom of Information Act.
Yet another task Force member, Captain Bryce Lefever, had previously
been a SERE psychologist where he supervised "personnel undergoing
intensive exposure to enemy interrogation, torture, and exploitation
techniques." He "was deployed as the Joint Special Forces Task Force
psychologist to Afghanistan in 2002," presumably replacing Col. Banks
who had previously held that role. Capt. Lefever "lectured to
interrogators and was consulted on various interrogation
techniques" (PENS Task Force member biographies). That is, he had the
requisite SERE background and it appears that he was involved in
interrogations in Afghanistan at the time that, as the OIG report
reveals, the abusive SERE-based techniques were being utilized through
Special Forces units.
In addition to these three members who were directly in the military
chain of command responsible for employing the SERE techniques as
interrogation tactics, another member of the PENS Task Force, Scott
Shumate, stated in a conference biographical statement that "From April
2001 until May of 2003 he was the chief operational psychologist for
the CIA's Counter Terrorism Center (CTC).... He has been with several
of the key apprehended terrorists." The CTC, according to press
reports, is responsible for managing the CIA's Black Site facilities
where the top 14 Al Qaeda operatives in US custody were initially held
and interrogated. The "key apprehended terrorists" that Shumate refers
to are very likely those Al Qaeda operatives subjected to the CIA's
brutal "enhanced interrogation techniques." Thus, the available
evidence strongly suggests that the PENS Task Force included a number
of individuals who oversaw or directly participated in torture or other
cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment that is allegedly banned by the
APA.
Not surprisingly, given its membership, the PENS Task Force report
concluded that "[i]t is consistent with the APA Code of Ethics for
psychologists to serve in consultative roles to interrogation and
information-gathering processes for national security-related
purposes...." The Task Force report further echoed the Department of
Defense cover story for employing BSCT psychologists: "While engaging
in such consultative and advisory roles entails a delicate balance of
ethical considerations, doing so puts psychologists in a unique
position to assist in ensuring that such processes are safe and ethical
for all participants."
Since the release of the PENS report, numerous articles in the press
have documented that psychologists at Guantánamo and elsewhere have
utilized abusive SERE techniques on detainees. (Jane Meyer's New Yorker
article appeared one week after the PENS report.) All the while, the
APA leadership has ignored the mounting evidence to the contrary and
reiterated this flawed PENS premise, as you yourself did in response to
such an article in the Washington Monthly: "[t]he Association's
position is rooted in our belief that having psychologists consult with
interrogation teams makes an important contribution toward keeping
interrogations safe and ethical."
Every report of horrific abuses occurring at Guantánamo and elsewhere
has not only cast doubt upon this basic premise of APA policy, these
reports have repeatedly highlighted psychologists' abuse of
psychological knowledge for purposes of cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment. Yet the APA has never made any public attempt to investigate
such reports. Even if certain psychologists attempted to "keep
interrogations safe and ethical," the OIG report demonstrates once and
for all that BSCT and SERE psychologists, among others, were
responsible for the development, migration, and perpetration of abuses.
It is time for the APA to acknowledge that the central premise of its
years-long policy of condoning and encouraging psychologist
participation in interrogations is wrong. It has now been revealed by
the DoD itself that, rather than assuring safety, psychologists were
central to the abuse. This remains true even if some psychologists made
efforts to reduce such harm during their involvement in these
interrogation contexts at some point in time. It is critical that APA
take immediate steps to remedy the damage done to the reputation of the
organization, to our ethical standards, to the field of psychology, and
to human rights in this age where they are under concerted attack. The
following steps will begin the process of correcting this egregious
error by the organization and its leadership. We urgently recommend
that:
1. The President of the APA acknowledge errors and abuses and chart
a new direction re-emphasizing human rights. In light of the recent
revelations, you, as President of the APA, should issue a clear public
statement that acknowledges the errors made by APA, in both policy and
public statements, and abuses perpetrated by psychologists; you should
call on the association to go in a new direction, giving primary
emphasis to human rights concerns in forging policy around ethics and
national security.
2. The APA Board of Directors and Ethics Committee endorse the APA
Moratorium on psychologist participation in interrogations of foreign
detainees. It is critical to immediately disengage psychologists from
any direct or supervisory participation in interrogations of individual
detainees. Such a step would do much to bring the APA in line with the
positions adopted some time ago by the American Psychiatric
Association, the American Medical Association, and the American Nurses
Association. Thus, the APA leadership should support and the Council of
Representatives must, at the August Convention, pass the Moratorium on
Psychologist Involvement in Interrogations at US Detention Centers for
Foreign Detainees proposed by Dr. Neil Altman and scheduled for a vote
at Council.
3. The APA Board of Directors encourage, support, and cooperate
with the Senate investigations of detainee treatment. It is essential
that the APA support and cooperate fully with the announced
investigation of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) into the
role of SERE in the creation of abusive interrogation strategies, as
well as the Senate Intelligence Committee's announced investigation
into the CIA's handling of detainees in their custody. In fact, the APA
Board of Directors should do what it can to expedite this and other
external, non-partisan investigations of all localities that utilize
BSCT psychologists.
4. The APA Board of Directors commence a neutral third-party
investigation of its own involvement, and that of APA staff, in
APA-military conflicts of interest. It is essential that the APA
membership and the concerned public develop an in-depth understanding
of how and why the APA accepted a rationale for psychologist
involvement in interrogations that has been revealed to have been
advanced by involved psychologists, and which permitted their continued
participation and supervision of abusive interrogation processes. The
concept of "legal, ethical, safe, and effective" has been exposed as a
euphemism for psychologist oversight of abuse; these activities can
only be considered "ethical" because the APA Ethics Code (Standard
1.02) was rewritten in 2002 to define complying with any law or
military regulation as "ethical."
The membership has a right to know why, in the face of continually
emerging sets of tangible evidence suggesting that the its policy was
flawed and that psychologists were systematically employing expert
psychological knowledge for purposes of abuse, the APA leadership
refused to investigate, and continued to give cover for these abuses.
(According to APA Ethics Director, Dr. Stephen Behnke, the BSCTs attach
a copy of the PENS report to their training manuals.) Therefore, it is
critical that an independent investigation be launched conducted by
individuals well-known for their commitment to human rights into the
development of APA policy in this area, and into the broader issues
that likely contributed to a series of suspicious procedural
activities. Among the issues this investigation must examine are:
a) the numerous procedural irregularities alleged to have occurred
during the PENS process;
b) the role of the military and intelligence agencies in the
formation and functioning of the PENS Task Force;
c) the reasons the APA and its leadership have systematically
ignored the accumulating evidence that psychologists participating in
interrogations are contributing to torture or cruel, inhuman, or
degrading treatment, rather than helping to prevent it;
d) the overall nexus of close ties between the APA staff/leadership
and the military and intelligence agencies, ties that may have
contributed to a climate that permits undo influence of military and
intelligence agencies in the creation of these policies and that
encourages turning a blind eye to abuse;
e) the transformation of the APA Ethics Code, from one that
protects psychologists' ethical conduct when such conduct conflicts
with law and military regulations to one that protects psychologists
who follow unethical law and military regulations.
Only such an investigatory process can restore the faith of the
membership and the broader public in the APA and in the profession of
psychology. To fail to act now would be to continue an organizational
policy that maintains and protects psychologists' roles as the
architects of what can only be interpreted as a torture paradigm; one
that has intentionally violated the Geneva Conventions, our nation's
values, and our professional ethics.
We look forward to your affirmation, acceptance, and action in regard
to this call for immediate steps to remedy this saddening situation for
our organization and our discipline.
Sincerely*,
Stephen Soldz, Director, Center for Research, Evaluation, and Program
Development & Professor, Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis;
University of Massachusetts, Boston
Brad Olson, Assistant Research Professor, Northwestern University
Steven Reisner, Senior Faculty and Supervisor, International Trauma
Studies Program, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University;
Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, New York
University Medical School
Mike Wessells, Former Member, PENS Task Force; Columbia University
Rhoda Unger, Brandeis University
Uwe Jacobs, Director, Survivors International, San Francisco
Ed Tejirian, New York
Bernice Lott, University of Rhode Island
Jeffrey Kaye, San Francisco
Elliot Mishler, Professor of Social Psychology in the Department of
Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School
Ghislaine Boulanger, Steering Committee, withholdapadues.com
Morton Deutsch, E.L. Thorndike Professor Emeritus of Psychology,
Director Emeritus of the International Center for Cooperation and
Conflict Resolution (ICCCR) Teachers College, Columbia University
Faye J Crosby, Psychology Department, University of California, Santa
Cruz
Marc Pilisuk, Professor Emeritus, the University of California;
Professor, Saybrook Graduate School and Research Center
Marybeth Shinn, Professor of Applied Psychology and Public Policy, New
York University
Stephan L. Chorover, Professor of Psychology, MIT
Mary Brydon-Miller, Director, Action Research Center, Associate
Professor, Educational Studies and Urban Educational Leadership,
College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services, University
of Cincinnati
M. Brinton Lykes, Associate Director, Center for Human Rights &
International Justice, Associate Dean, Lynch School of Education,
Boston College
Ben Harris, Department of Psychology, University of New Hampshire
Barbara Gutek, PrEller Professor of Women and Leadership, Department of
Management and Organizations, University of Arizona
Frank Summers, Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and the
Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University Medical School
Kevin Lanning, Wilkes Honors College, Florida Atlantic University
Alice Shaw, San Francisco
Lila Braine, Professor Emerita, Barnard College, Columbia University
Stuart Oskamp, Professor Emeritus of Psychology, Claremont Graduate
University
Linda M. Woolf, Professor of Psychology and International Human Rights,
Webster University
Arlene Lu Steinberg, President, Division 39 Section IX, APA:
Psychoanalysis for Social Responsibility
Lew Aron, Director, New York University Postdoctoral Program in
Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy
Scot D. Evans, Community Psychology, Wilfrid Laurier University
Susan Torres-Harding, Roosevelt University
Allen L. Roland, Sonoma, CA
Emily K. Filardo, Director, Women's Studies, & Associate Professor,
Department of Psychology, Kean University
Maram Hallak, Borough of Manhattan Community College; the Association
for Women in Psychology (AWP)
Anthony J. Marsella, Professor Emeritus, Department of Psychology,
University of Hawaii
Barbara Eisold, New York Medical College
Kathleen Malley-Morrison, Department of Psychology, Boston University
Chrysoula K.E. Fantaousakis, Kean University
Karen Rosica, Faculty, Psychoanalytic Institute of Northern California;
Director of Special Projects, SalusWorld.org
Hal S. Bertilson, University of Wisconsin-Superior
Ibrahim Kira, Access Community Health and Research Center, Dearborn, MI
Lynne Layton, Harvard Medical School
Allen M. Omoto, School of Behavioral and Organizational Sciences,
Claremont Graduate University
Richard V. Wagner, Bates College
* Affiliations listed for identification purposes only.
Note: Additional signatories will continue to be recruited.
Contact:
Stephen Soldz
sso...@bgsp.edu
Steven Reisner
SRei...@psychoanalysis.net
Brad Olson
b-o...@northwestern.edu
*
================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
Search Archives: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/htdig/search.html
List Archives: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
Subscribe: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFGaIl8iz2i76ou9wQRAvf6AJ49glSSxmihyW1oz8wZ8IstXXx8JgCeLi1y
Qu7zRFhf1dHi765HMdlWIT8=
=huwX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----