Torture is in the news. Bush-era memos justifying the use of violence against detainees have just been released. The Bush people that wrote or acted on these memos justify such violence in the name of stopping terrorism. The claim is that the violence led the detainees to give up information that allowed the authorities to foil terrorist attacks in the planning stages.
As many have pointed out in recent days, it's difficult to know with any certainty that this is the case. It's possible that the detainees would have given up the intel even if gentler techniques of questioning had been used (as professional interrogators for the FBI and other agencies have long claimed). It's also possible that the authorities would have found about the impending attacks from other sources, or that the attacks would have been called of for any number of reasons. So the debate is stuck in a circle, with supporters of the methods claiming they worked, and opponents saying that they did not.
One partial solution is to look at different types of data. In particular, do countries that practice torture heavily experience less terrorism? The answer is pretty clearly "no." Here's how I arrived at this conclusion:
My colleague Jim Piazza and I have a paper coming out in Comparative Political Studies that analyzes the influence of human rights abuses on terrorism. We find that, for a wide range of data sources, control variables, and statistical specifications that governments that abuse rights actually experience more terrorism.
But what about torture? Torture is only one of the broader range of human rights we looked at in the paper. Is the relationship of torture to terror different? It might be, since far more countries engage in torture than in other forms of violent human rights abuses. To answer this question, I re-analyzed the data from the paper. Details are in the following paragraph; skip down if you just want the punchline.
I re-estimated the three models described in the paper that use the MIPT measure of terrorism as the dependent variable. This counts the number of terrorist attacks in each country from 1998 to 2004 committed by domestic and transnational groups, and also combines these into a measure of all terrorism. I used a negative binomial regression with robust standard errors clustered on countries and the same independent variables as those reported in the paper (political participation, constraints in the executive, regime durability, international war, civil war, and the logs of population and GDP per capita). I replaced the independent variable measuring human rights with two new variables. The first is a measure of torture from the CIRI project. The second is the measure of human rights used in the paper minus torture. This is meant to capture the possibility that torture and other human rights abuses are substitutes for each other; a regime might not torture, say, but could still have a bad record of respecting other rights.
Torture has a negative and statistically significant relationship to terrorism in all three models. In other words, countries that engage in more torture (and thus have a lower score on the torture variable) consistenly experience more, not less, of both domestic and transnational terrorism. This mirrors the more general finding reported in the paper that respect for human rights is associated with less terror as well.
What are the implications for the debate in the US today? The clearest is that torture does not work, at least in reducing terorism. It's another nail in the coffin for those who justify torture as a tool of counterterrorism. It also suggests that we don't need to worry about how revealing the details of the US torture program will provide terrorists with the skills to avoid providing information to interrogators. Intead, it suggests that a suprisingly easy and morally unambiguous counterterrorism strategy is to be nice to people. Being mean (like, say, torturing) seems to annoy some victims, who go on to become or serve as examples to new terrorists.
23 comments:
Not sure if your math accounts for this, but could causality be the opposite of what you're implying? That is, countries that experience a higher degree of terrorism be more likely to engage in torture? That seems more intuitive to me, but I'm like five years removed from my basic statistics class.
This is an important point. I think it's unlikely to be the case, but it's not a open and shut case. The best way to address this with statistical data would be to use a two stage least squares or instrumental variable model. We've tried this but had difficulty coming up with an appropriate instrument. In the paper that's referenced in the initial post we used a second best strategy of lagging terrorism by a few years. Our main findings held up, which suggests that the abuse is driving the terror and not the other way around. But this is a question that's begging for a more definitive answer.
I'm not sure what the current state of argument is regarding Pape's "Dying to Win" where he argues that occupations are a key driver of terrorism. I don't know to what extent the international war/civil war variables capture this dynamic.
I'm not sure it's possible to differentiate occupations from other civil wars. Perhaps only count those cases in which one side wishes to break-away or achieve autonomy rather than simply vying for control of a unified country.
On the international war dimension it may be possible to differentiate those cases that involve holding of populated territory from other sort of clashes, but I'm not sure if anyone has already done that.
Perhaps civil wars/international wars already suffice and don't need further breakdown. In that case it might just be worthwhile to note colonies and countries with prominent foreign military bases. These might be drivers of strife that doesn't reach the civil war threshold but is still worth controlling for.
Sorry for not providing strong operational definitions here, I'd like do better if I'd actually read Pape's book rather than seeing many a summary and article written about it.
Dear Mr. Walsh:
I came across your paper elsewhere then tracked you down here; found the paper fascinating. But of course instantly wanted to know about direction of causation. Using time lag of course helps. But you also say:
"in a related paper (Author, 2009) we used different statistical techniques—ordered
logistic regression—to determine if terrorist attacks drive governments to engage in more
repression. ...We recognize, though, that the data we use in this paper make it
difficult to address this issue definitively."
I didn't find the referenced 2009 paper in the bibliography, and I really wanted to see that statistical analysis because without it I can't solidly address the causation issue, so I hesitate to post about the study.
Is that analysis available in a form that would be presentable and useful to others?
Blogger won't notify me of new comments here and I might fail to return, so I wonder if you might ping me if you reply here?
iznotforever at gmail
Thanks,
Steve Roth
http://asymptosis.com
The paper I referenced is available here:
http://www.politicalscience.uncc.edu/jwalsh/isq2.pdf
Thanks very much, Jim. That pretty effectively rules out the terrorism-causes-torture conclusion (at least on the one-year-lag basis), which (given that a correlation does exist with a one-year lag in the opposite direction) gives weight to the opposite conclusion, that torture causes terrorism.
But here's one piece I'm missing: the first paper only shows correlation for the total index, not for the individual components (i.e. torture). So I'm missing the first piece of the syllogism re: torture:
A. Torture in one year correlates (strongly/significantly) with terrorism in the ensuing year.
B. Terrorism in one year does not correlate with torture in the ensuing year.
C. Hence, the direction of causation is probably "torture causes terrorism."
The one-year lag is also an issue for me--thinking long-term and strategic. A strong argument for me would be:
We find that torture correlates most strongly with ensuing terrorism with an x-year lag. Figure xx shows the correlations for various lagging periods.
I realize that's not the paper you were writing, but I'd be happy to hear about any papers by you or others that could give strong support for such a statement.
Fundamentally, the question I'm trying to answer is "do a country's torture practices affect the long-term likelihood of a citizen (i.e. one of my daughters) experiencing a (foreign) terrorist attack?"
It seems like your data set and model could give an answer to that question, and that the answer might be quite persuasive even to those who advocate a policy of torture.
Thanks for listening,
Steve
http://asymptosis.com
Oh, and another strongly persuasive statement would be:
We found no correlation between terrorism and ensuing torture using any lagging period. See graph of correlations for various lagging periods.
Or whatever the results are, of course.
What was the problem with using 2SLS?
2.5 said: "What was the problem with using 2SLS?"
I'm not very statistically knowledgeable. But I wasn't aware that 2SLS as normally employed reversed the lags in the equation (or addressed the issue of multiple possible lags). Isn't that (one important reason) why isq2.pdf is interesting and necessary? Am I clueless? (This is certainly possible.)
Sorry, I was referring to Dr. Walsh's paper. He said he wasn't able to instrument, but why was there a problem using 2SLS?
Walsh addresses the issue separately in another paper, and I see on page 141 of that study that terrorism has no effect on torturing. But that fails to control for the causal arrow in the torture->terror direction.
The only way to resolve the issue is to use simulatenous equations, which Walsh says he was not able to do. I just like to know why.
uk viagra
buy viagra uk
generic viagra uk
viagra online uk
tanks for all!!!
thanks for all!!!
retirement homes in costa rica
In 130 countries around the world, each piece of Omega was sold by first-class dealers is the young generation's ideal Omega Watches in modern times.as well as pursue the Omega Watches sale . In American, cheap Omega Watches is the most popular and dicount Omega Watches and the best Omega replica Watches. The combination of Omega Watch and the Omega Watch sale make Fake cheap Omega Watch the leader in the watchesindustry. dicount Omega Watch in moden times is very popular and Omega replica Watch must give you a new life!
I really liked your article. Keep up the good work.
Projector Lamp :Focused Technology has Great Prices on Video Projectors, Projection Screens and Projector Lamps.
waterproof vibrators : waterproof vibrators
Nike trainers
Car BadgesAutomobilia Planet, purveyors of rare and exceptional items of motor sport, formula 1, motor racing memorabilia, petroliana and automobilia.
Harddisk Recovery:-Data Recovery in the Netherlands offers professional assistance in data loss. Data Recovery for all media - all brands - all operating systems.
Harddisk Recovery:-Data Recovery in the Netherlands offers professional assistance in data loss. Data Recovery for all media - all brands - all operating systems.
Post a Comment