Russia And The Ukrainian Government

“The one lesson we 've learned from history is that we have not learned any of history 's lessons” (Unknown Author, n.d.). The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the use of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EITs) such as “waterboarding” and extraordinary rendition (aka “black sites”) by CIA agents for American intelligence interests and to analyze the drastically apposing views of the legalities, morality, and effectiveness of these methods. Is the CIA’s use of EITs and extraordinary rendition equivalent to torture, and therefore, acts in violation of international law? The definition of “torture” under statute 18 U.S.C. 2340 states, “torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control” (United States Code, 2011). This definition expands with specific identifying characteristics of an act and varies to include humiliation of an individual. Of course, pain and suffering is a subjective experience. The worlds historical practice of “torture” reinforces lessons that human’s imaginative capacity for inflicting pain and terror on our fellow human is disgracefully boundless; yet, parallel behaviors of violence and humiliation reemerge with disturbing regularity (Smith, 2013).

The War on Terror has produced several different viewpoints on the utilization of torture and its effectiveness as a means to elicit information. A main argument has been supplied that torture is ineffective in its purpose to gather information from the victim. The usefulness of torture has been questioned because prisoners might use false information to elude their torturers, which has occurred in previous cases of torture. It has also been supposed that torture is necessary in order to use the information to save many lives. Torture has been compared to civil disobedience. In addition, the argument has been raised that torture is immoral and inhumane. Lastly, Some say that the acts are not even regarded as torture.

Three weeks in solitary confinement. Confused, distressed and disorientated, only for tear gas to engulf your cell. —Despite what you may be imagining, these scenes described are not from the infamous torture detention camp Guantanamo Bay, but are in-fact only a few examples of the outrageous abuse of human rights encountered in the Northern Territory’s Don Dale Youth Detention Centre. You heard me right, this is occurring in our own country, to young, impressionable teenagers. Our own backyard, if you may. Yet only recently have such allegations reached the public eye. What’s worse, the government and head of child protection services have known about such claims, yet turned a blind eye on the cases, and ultimately turned a blind eye on the lives of the abused detainees.

Torture and Democracy written by Darius M. Rejali, delves into the complexity of torture that exists and has existed throughout the world. Published in 2007 by Princeton University Press in New Jersey, the book is an excellent resource for not just educators but, students and individuals interested in political science alike. Torture and Democracy, ISBN: 978-0-691-14333-0, is priced at $48.43 on Amazon.com for a paperback edition. The book has 849 pages that include appendixes in the latter section for readers to review references, notes, index, and other pertinent information that may have needed further explanation throughout the text. Darius Rejali is an accredited professor of political science at Reed College located in Oregon (Rejali 2007). Through his exquisite work and evaluation of torture records, Rejali is recognized as an expert on modern torture internationally (Rejali 2007). In Torture and Democracy, Rejali develops his thesis that torture in democratic states are prevalent even though it seems nonexistent. He argues that through techniques that are performed in such a way that leaves no marks on the

In the United States, one of the major methods in obtaining crucial information has been through the use of Guantanamo Bay. While many have condemned of the torture that is believed to occur there, not only does Guantanamo Bay comply with national and international standards, but it also complies with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions (Meese 1) which states

With today’s world, we often see a lot countries attempt to justify their use of torture through loopholes, denial, or security concerns. In places such as Abu Ghraib, prisoners were forced to endure sexual humiliation, physical harm, starvation, exceedingly large amounts of stress, and even mental manipulation. Institutions use tactics such as “moral disengagement” to support the use of torture. With a mindset revolved around the idea of “otherness” , one is able to justify any act of horrific violence on any scale. (Costanzo & Gerrity, 2009) It was precisely this idea of moral disengagement that drives ethnic conflict between groups of people. In general, the pure immorality behind such acts should be enough for the masses to realize that torture should no longer hold a place in our

The evolution of definitions used in international and domestic communities is critical to acknowledging modernization and willingness to act fairly. Although the Justice Department authorized questionable techniques used for intelligence collection and CIA agents ensured that professionals were present during interrogation sessions, a strong question of ethics used and how this was viewed in relation to crimes against human rights during the interrogation sessions has persisted for years as unanswerable. After extensive research for the final definitions decided upon for this paper, the lack of international and national consensus on multiple topics, even down to definitions, was obvious. The modern-day U.S. definition for torture was redefined

While many people may have strong feelings about what to do about terrorist regimes they do not know or understand what is currently being done. One of those such things is extraordinary rendition. A process that when successful can lead to valuable information that saves lives but when it fails can result in the torture of innocent bystanders. It is a process which creates a discussion about torture on a global scale and the morality of it. It is a debate between morality and safety that is not as black and white spectators might perceive. It is also an act which causes global powers to rethink they way they perceive each other and their actions.

Credible sources are indicating that TPLF’s security forces are using Pharmacological Torture against Amhara youths held en mass at Birr Sheleqo concentration camp and other concentration camps. The detainees, mostly teenagers, are being given “ a Strange injection” by security forces; family members that tried to pay visitation reported. There is no doubt that this is Pharmacological torture, the most commonly used drugs being injectable Psychotropics. The drugs will do TPLF’s intended tricks in the following ways

This book talks about the horrendous experience of an innocent Syrian-born Canadian citizen, Maher Arar who was detained and tortured under the anti-terrorism act. This book will further strengthen my stance as to why this bill is not mandatory or efficient in today’s globalized society.

Around the world and around the clock, human rights violations seem to never cease. In particular, torture violations are still rampant all over the world. One regime, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, establishes a strong elaboration of norms against torture. Despite its efforts, many countries still outright reject its policies against torture while other countries openly accept them, but surreptitiously still violate them. The US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia all have failed to end torture despite accepting the provisions of the Convention.

Freedom is the ultimate luxury, a luxury every man and woman of these world lust for, even though there is no rational reason for freedom. Some government understand why people wants freedom, but they also desire the power and control without opposition, so instead they give partial freedom to the people, but still retains most of the security to ensure no one can rebel against their authority. Unfortunately for them, this is usually not the case. One example is Ukraine, the once pronounced free country that has turned into a point of conflict and bloodshed. As stated in “Radio Liberty: Amnesty International notes worsening of human rights situation in Ukraine”, Ukraine human rights has been deteriorating starting from the election of Viktor Yanukovych in 2011, as suppression of freedom of expression increased dramatically. Matters did not improve during the next two years, with the opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko and two of her former political allies serving a seven years sentence while being alleged of ill-treatment in prison, LGBT activists facing violence and harassment from national group, and with national broadcasters that openly criticizing the government to be denied of a license. All these facts are provided by “World Report 2013: Ukraine”, which shows how security have taken over freedom in Ukraine after

For the last two decades, human rights advocacy and the documentation of human rights abuse have embodied naming and shaming, a tactic that attempts to subvert notorious human rights abusers as well as coerce local state powers into acting and condemning the abuse taking place within their state or region. Initially, the tactic proved to be remarkably effective, resulting in a “global outrage” towards human rights abuse and an increased pressure on governments to challenge the abuse taking place within their borders or within their actual political institutions (Zakaria 2014). “Naming and shaming” produced an increased proliferation in global awareness and constructed real accountability. But, as we have observed with the increased

Iraqi prisoners subjected to torment and abuse at Abu Ghraib jail may keep on suffering from critical physical and mental results of their mishandle. This article reports two instances of Iraqi people supposedly tormented at Abu Ghraib. Itemized legal assessments were led around one year after their man touch as per worldwide rules. The discoveries of these assessments substantiate their charges of torment and affirm the significant wellbeing results of torment. Moreover, these cases bolster attestations that man grip of detainees was not restricted to being executed by watchmen, but rather additionally happened efficiently with regards to cross examinations.

In an international legal nature, the concept of a ‘political prisoner’ still remains undefined. In most times political prisoners consist of journalists, activists and government critics that have been punished either for supporting their beliefs or for revealing a non profitable for the government truth and who find themselves helpless before the law. In few words the political leadership silences the government critics or those who are possible for creating the social riot, by imprisoning them or censoring them in order to sustain its supremacy. Amnesty International campaigns for the release of prisoners of conscience – people who have been jailed because of their political, religious or other conscientiously-held beliefs, ethnic origin, sex, color, language, national or social origin, economic status, birth, sexual orientation or other status, provided that they have neither used nor advocated violence.