Trivialising torture
On first hearing about plans for a television programme that attempts to recreate the conditions of Guantanamo Bay, I was both concerned and dubious as to its potential merits. The Guantanamo Guidebook, a oneoff reality show to be shown on Channel Four at the beginning of next month, subjected seven consenting male volunteers to 48 hours of treatment similar to that experienced by prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.
Mocked up in an East London warehouse, the programme subjects its ‘prisoners' to various practices deployed in the infamous detainee camp, including sleep deprivation, extremes of temperature, non-injurious physical contact and enforced nudity. My initial reaction was that the programme seemed to be an attempt to trivialise torture – implying that it could provide a source light entertainment for the masses.
Yet it is part of a four-part series that seeks to investigate the wider uses and abuses of torture by the US authorities at home, in penitentiaries, and abroad in the ‘War on Terror'. So entertainment it may be, but the the advantage of the show is that it looks likely to raise the profile of the plight suffered by Guantanamo detainees. Many an Oxford student has suffered from sleep deprivation at one point, whether thanks to an essay crisis or an early lecture the morning after a heavy night.
But to have it enforced over an extended period of time at such intensity is obviously something else entirely. It takes a lot to imagine the sort of physical and mental stresses that are incurred as a result of tortuous treatment over days, weeks, months and, for some prisoners, up to three years of being interned. This programme at least looks likely to shed some light on this treatment. Nevertheless, concerns cannot quite be dispelled completely.
The programme was originally advertised for men seeking to know “how hard” they were. Presented in the format of a reality television show, this project encourages a view that torture can provide a source of entertainment. This detracts seriously from the informative and educational possibilities it could offer to the general public regarding the terrible real-life experiences of Guantanamo interns.
Yet in the programme's defence, reality television does at least provide an accessible format for a subject that many may otherwise find unpalatable to study. Granted, for the programme makers the primary concern must be viewing figures – but on such a serious issue it is still paramount that producers keep a sense of gravity and perspective when there are people really suffering the types of abuses documented.
It is important too that the programme seeks to present the evidence that lies at the heart of this issue. Such evidence is available in abundance, with many leaked documents circulating – including those from FBI agents explaining the use of torture in Guantanamo. An email obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union through the Freedom of Information Act describes how an FBI agent found “a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food, or water.
Most times they had urinated or defacated [sic] on themselves and had been left there for 18, 24 hours or more.” On one occassion the air conditioning had been turned down so far that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold. It is vital that Channel Four reflects this type of evidence, which has been given in testimonies from agents and and detainee alike. Although Guantanamo Bay is now infamous as the ‘icon of lawlessness' (a phrase coined by Amnesty), it is by no means unique.
Its reputation was supplanted by Abu Ghraib, and there is a distinct possibility that The Guantanamo Guidebook will fail to emphasise the extent to which the type of torture it features is now being practicised. The case of Mamdouh Habib shows how Guantanamo is just one of many human rights abuses currently being perpetrated. Habib was secretly taken to Egypt, where he was allegedly subjected to electric shocks, water torture, physical assaults, suspension from hooks, and threats with dogs.
The programme emphasises only one brand of the torture methods deployed by US authorities; to go further would surely make for a more informative show. Of course there would be serious problems with allowing anything beyond what might be termed ‘torture lite'. But even in the Channel Four experiment one man was forced to withdraw after seven hours due to hypothermia.
It may be that some good will be achieved; but the show could only have gained from presenting its issues in a more serious fashion.
17th Feb 2005