Saying No to Torture

April 25, 2009

by Daniel E. Levenson

JERUSALEM- There are many things about the recent revelation that the United States government, under the leadership of former President George W. Bush, used torture, that I find upsetting. Chief among them is the misguided notion that we could somehow preach to the rest of the world about respect for human life in the media and public statements, while so blatantly violating these principles ourselves behind closed doors. Let me be clear here, I am in no way suggesting that we go easy on terrorists – I hold no illusions about the incredibly dangerous nature of the world in which we live today – but I do want to state unequivocally that from every perspective - morally, politically and tactically, that using torture on suspected terrorists runs counter to the interests of the United States and our allies around the world.

From a Jewish perspective, the notion of engaging in torture is particularly troubling, if we believe that every human life is sacred and that we are made in the image of God, then the act of torture becomes a particularly gruesome violation of the sanctity of human life. This is one of the places where I believe that the values of American democracy and Judaism should be in perfect harmony, as well as any other religious or moral tradition that holds human life to be sacred. There is no question that every sovereign nation has a right to act in its own best interest and a moral obligation to protect its citizens, but I also believe that we are subject to moral imperatives that extend beyond national interest.

Western democracies, such as the United States, are in a particularly tough position when it comes to fighting groups like Al-queda, because conventional law enforcement or military tactics may have limited effectiveness, yet at the same time it is vital that we not ignore ethical imperatives which we so loudly espouse and preach to the rest of the world when these ideas come into conflict with our own self-interest.

The hypocrisy of such actions is thundering and the message it sends to the rest of the world is terrible. It tells other nations that as long as their public face is one that reflects respect for human rights, we don’t really care what happens out of sight. It is clear to me that this misguided message was at the heart of the diplomacy of a previous administration that was either so frightened or so immoral (or both) that they were willing not only to sell out our own ideals and beliefs in terms of respect for the sanctity and the dignity of every human life, but to undermine a core value which has been at the heart of American public diplomacy for the last 60 years.

Copyright Daniel E. Levenson 2009.