Ethical dilemmas in water boarding
The film Zero Dark Thirty by Kathryn Bigelow focuses on the efforts by the Central Intelligence Agency to track the whereabouts of Al Qaeda leader, Osama Bin Laden as a way of fighting terrorism in the country. After the terrorist attacks in the United States on 11th September 2001 (Bigelow 1), a CIA operative by the name Maya is tasked with interrogating prisoners suspected of working with Al Qaeda so as to get information that could lead to the apprehension of their leader. However, the prisoners are unwilling to cooperate, forcing the CIA to result to enhanced interrogative techniques, among which is water boarding. When analyzed under Kantian ethics, the decision to use water boarding was ethical in that the CIA operatives had a duty find the terrorists responsible for the attacks on the United States and bring them to justice. Although water boarding is a form of torture, it was a tool that the CIA operatives, led by Maya, had to undertake in order to fulfill their duties in serving their country and protecting its citizens.
According to the Kantian ethics theory, an act is considered to be ethical if the person engaged in the action performs all acts because of a duty or responsibility without being influenced by any emotions regardless of the end results (Vleeschauer 1). In the case of Maya, as a CIA operative, she was expected to do all that was in her power to retrieve information that would assist her in fulfilling her duties. Since water boarding was part of the enhanced interrogative techniques authorized by the agency she worked for, it was her duty to employ its use in interrogating the terrorist suspects (Bigelow 1). While the technique itself may be immoral due to the harm it causes those who have to endure it, Maya had to put her duty above the prisoners comfort and ensure that she used all methods to get results. The morality of her actions and decision to use water boarding is therefore determined by her duty and not by the effects that the method had on the prisoners.
While the ethical nature of an act in Kantianism ethics is determined by the duty and obligation of the person conducting the act, it can be argued that the acts by Maya in the film are better analyzed under the Utilitarian theory. The theory suggests that an act is considered to be ethical if its end results produce the most good (Driver 1). As such, the use of water boarding was ethical because the prisoners gave out information that assisted in the tracking and killing of Osama Bin Laden. Since Osama was the leader of the Al Qaeda, his death is seen as an acceptable outcome for everyone in the community. His death also brought justice to those affected by his terrorist groups, not to mention the disruption it caused to the Al Qaeda operations after losing their leader (Mayer 1). It would therefore be correct to state that, under the Utilitarianism theory, water boarding was ethical despite the pain and torture the prisoners had to endure before providing the information.
The moral dilemma comes about when the CIA need to retrieve information through interrogations from prisoners accused of being members of the Al Qaeda. There are various methods that the CIA can use to interrogate prisoners such as questionings, offering deals and negotiations. However, due to the nature of the prisoners they are dealing with, the CIA have to resolve to stricter methods classified as enhanced interrogation techniques. Among the approved methods that the agency can use is water boarding (Bigelow 1). The method involves holding the prisoner and pouring water on their face especially when placing a cloth over their head. When the cloth gets wet, it becomes difficult for the individual to breathe, giving the feeling of drowning. The dilemma for Maya was caused by the knowledge that water boarding is a form of torture but she had to carry it out in an attempt to get information to assist in finding the location of Bin Laden.
Even though the decision by Maya to use water boarding as an interrogation technique is ethical under Utilitarianism theory, its morality can be questioned when viewed from the perspective of the people tortured. To begin with, the CIA had to interrogate a group of prisoners before getting concrete information that led to the murder of Bin Laden. The people who were tortured had families who worried about their well being and seeing their loved ones suffer was in no way a common good. Furthermore, water boarding was used to torture the prisoners with the sole aim of finding the whereabouts of Bin Laden (Bigelow 1). Granted, killing Osama did disrupt the activities of Al Qaeda, the death of one person could not stop the destruction caused by the entire terrorist group. The overall good in this case was not targeting society but rather the interests of the CIA. The agency was invested in finding the men responsible for the attacks on the United States (Bigelow 1). While the common good would be to bring an end to terrorism, the interrogations carried out only managed to bring an end to a few members of the terrorist group among them being their leader. It is therefore difficult to assess the common good because the good achieved mostly favored the CIA and not the country.
The use of water boarding in Zero Dark Thirty was ethical when examined under the Kantian Ethics theory as Maya was acting in accordance to her job description, utilizing the methods that had been assessed and approved by her superiors as acceptable interrogation tools (Labrecque 1). Even though some may consider water boarding as being unethical and immoral as it is a form of torture, retrieving actionable information using the provided methods was a duty that Maya had to fulfill. Since Kantian Ethics places more emphasis on duty rather than the end results, the CIA operative carried herself in an ethical manner as she was only doing her job.
Depending on the perspective that one takes, an act can be moth ethical and unethical. This is especially because the decision of what is moral and what is not is based on perceptions that people have towards certain topics in society. In the case of water boarding, the act itself is immoral as it is a form of torture. However, since society has made the provision where some rights can be exempted especially when dealing with criminals, water boarding becomes moral under the Kantian ethics as was the case with Maya in Zero Dark Thirty. Despite being immoral, water boarding was moral as the CIA operative was carrying out her duties in accordance with the provision given by her superiors through the enhanced interrogation techniques.
Work cited
Bigelow K, “Zero Dark Thirty” First Light Productions, 2012, film
Driver J, “The history of utilitarianism” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2014, retrieved from, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/utilitarianism-history/
Labrecque J, “Zero Dark Thirty waterboarding controversy” Entertainment Weekly, 2012, retrieved from, https://ew.com/article/2012/12/11/zero-dark-thirty-waterboarding/
Mayer J, “Zero conscience in Zero Dark Thirty” The New Yorker, 2012, retrieved from, https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/zero-conscience-in-zero-dark-thirty
Vleeschauer J, “Kantianism” Encyclopedia Britannica, 2018, retrieved from, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Kantianism
The Dilemma occurs in various stages especially in the 40th minute as Maya contemplates using water boarding as an interrogative technique.
