Abu Ghraib's Abuses a n d T o r t u r e s
3 2 9
carried out over months under horrendous conditions, instead of in our brief, rel-
atively benign simulated prison, I had seen what could happen to good boys when
they were immersed in a situation that granted them virtually absolute power in
dealing with their charges. In our study, the guards had had no prior training for
their roles and been given only minimal staff supervision to curtail their psycho-
logical abuse of prisoners, Imagining what could happen when all the constraints
that operated in our experimental setting were removed, I knew that in the Abu
Ghraib Prison, powerful situational forces must have been in play, and even more
dominating systemic forces had to have been at work. How could I ever know the
truth about the behavioral context in that far-off situation or uncover any truth
about the System that had created and maintained it? ft was apparent to me that
the System was now struggling mightily to conceal its own complicity in torture.
M A K I N G S E N S E O F S E N S E L E S S A B U S E S
The design of the Stanford Prison Experiment made it evident that initially our
guards were "good apples," some of whom became soured over time by powerful
situational forces. In addition, I later realized that it was I, along with my research
team, who was responsible for the System that made that situation work so effec-
tively and so destructively. We failed to provide adequate top-down constraints to
prevent prisoner abuse, and we set an agenda and procedures that encouraged a
process of dehumanization and deindividuation that stimulated guards to act in
creatively evil ways. Further, we could harness the System's power to terminate
the experiment when it began to spin out of control and when a whistle-blower
forced recognition of my personal responsibility for the abuses.
In contrast, in trying to understand the abuses that took place at Abu Ghraib,
we are starting at the end of the process, with documented evil deeds. Therefore,
we have to do a reverse analysis. We have to determine what these guards might
have been like as people before they were assigned to guard the prisoners on those
tiers of that Iraqi prison. Can we establish what pathologies, if any, the guards
might have brought into the prison in order to separate their dispositional tenden-
cies from what that particular situation might have brought out in them? Next,
can we uncover what the behavioral context into which they were thrust was
like? What was the social reality for the guards in that particular setting at that
particular time?
Finally, we must discover something about the power structure that is re-
sponsible for creating and sustaining the working and living conditions of all the
inhabitants of that dungeon—Iraqi prisoners and American guards alike. What
justification can the System provide for using this particular prison to house "de-
tainees" indefinitely without legal recourse and to interrogate them using "coer-
cive tactics"? At what levels was the decision made to suspend the safeguards of
the Geneva Conventions and the military's own rules of conduct regarding prison-
ers, namely, banning any actions that are cruel, inhuman, and degrading in the
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |