Talking about Human Rights in the Context of Security

1

• Talking about Human Rights in the Context of
  Security
• Connect US Briefing
• June 18, 2009

2

• The gap between principle and practice normal
  rules cease to apply when the frame of reference
  is terrorism.

3

• Steps in the development of an effective
  messaging platform
• recognizing existing frames
• hypothesizing about possible new frames, and
• investigating and developing the most promising
  alternatives

4

• Frame
• A central organizing idea for making sense of
  relevant events, suggesting what is at issue
• Gamson and Modigliani,
• American Journal of Sociology, 1989

5

• What is this about?

Information
Understanding
Big ideas and paths of hidden reasoning (e.g.,
its about fairness, teamwork, David and Goliath,
wise management, heroes rescuing victims, a
stitch in time, etc.)
Cultural Logic
6
Existing frames

• Polling data - what the public thinks
• Default patterns of thinking about security - how
  the public thinks
• Opposition framing
• Advocates framing

7

• Polls show a conflicted public
• Support for prohibition of torture fairly steady
  (about 6 in 10), and very few want to eliminate
  the ban
• But poll numbers on willingness to consider
  exceptions in the context of terrorism and
  security are troubling and may be moving in the
  wrong direction
• Many narrowly split results, and responses often
  vary depending on question wording

8

• Harsh interrogation techniques for terrorism
  suspects are justified, say 55 percent - vs 36
  percent not justifed (Gallup, April 2009)
• Typically, when the word torture is used or
  techniques specified, tolerance falls. But a new
  AP/GFK poll (June 2009) shows 52 percent agree
  torture can be at least sometimes be justified
  to obtain information about terrorist activities
  from suspects.
• Closely divided on accountability, and support
  shifts depending on what kind of investigation
  (lowest for Congressional probe, highest for
  investigation by Obama Administration). The
  public accepts that we tortured detainees but
  dont necessarily want to hear or think more
  about it.

9

• Support for closing Guantanamo continues to
  decline (2-1 oppose, according to USA
  Today/Gallup poll, June)
• But 59 percent say they believe treatment of
  detainees at Guantanamo boosted anti-American
  sentiment in the world (Angus Reid, May 27, 2009)
  

10

• Patterns of thinking
• How the public reasons about rights in the
  context of terrorism
• Emergency thinking
• Requirement for action
• Belief in uniqueness of moment
• Reliance on experts
• Resistance to minimizing
• No difference between suspected/guilty

11

• Patterns of thinking
• How the public reasons about rights in the
  context of terrorism
• System justification to resolve
  psychological discomfort with offensive
  practices

12

• Patterns of thinking
• The impact of fear on public thinking
• In 2004, researchers found that asking subjects
  to think about their own death or just giving
  them subliminal reminders of the 9/11attacks
  led to significant increases in support for
  President Bush and his policies, regardless of
  political affiliation.
• Solomon/Greenberg/Pyszczinski,
• as summarized in The Political Brain, by Drew
  Westen

13

• Fight or flight
• Narrowed lens
• Focus on dangerous intentions
• Systems and institutions are cognitively
  invisible

14

• Difficulty assessing risk
• Threats are viewed in interpersonal
  terms and in personal terms
• "I want to feel like I feel when I lock my
  doors and put on my security system at
  night.
• If I have to lose some of my civil
  liberties to get there, it is
  okay." American Environics focus group
  participant, Chicago

15

• Analogy to familiar scenarios
• Schoolyard
• Wild West
• Urban Jungle
• where the normal rules dont apply

16

• How the opposition frames rights in the context
  of security
• Keep America safe

17

• How advocates have been framing the issue
• - Morality, or
• - Fact based and process oriented
• - Variety of messages and messengers

18
Possible new frames

• To help close the gap between principle and
  practice

19

• Challenge effectiveness?
• Challenge necessity?

20

• Put threat in proportion?
• Compare to common criminals?

21

• Build confidence, calm fears?
• Caution against fear itself?

22

• Channel fear into anger at terrorists or
  manipulative politicians?

23

• Our values, who we are as a nation?
• Moral authority, influence and standing in
  the world?

24

• Change the messenger?

25

• Dangerous overreaction?

26
Promising themes to convey elements of a shared
big story about torture

• When we overreact to terrorism, we hurt
  ourselves make mistakes that cost lives and
  treasure, betray time-tested values that are
  sources of strength, create sympathy and new
  recruits for extremist groups, etc.
• There are proven alternatives other strategies
  that can protect us.
• Senior military and intelligence officials tell
  us that torture is counterproductive produces
  unreliable results, strengthens the hand of Al
  Qaeda, makes our jobs harder

27
Promising themes to convey elements of a shared
big story about torture

• Not letting ourselves get knocked off course, off
  balance staying centered, connected to our
  strengths
• Demonstrating confidence in (not only respect
  for) the rule of law/due process/our values and
  principles.
• Rebuilding global support and respect for the
  United States as part of a big policy shift
  that the American public supports

28

• Be respectful of peoples fears address security
  concerns.
• Let people know there are alternatives to torture
  that are more effective and less costly to our
  reputation and security.
• Cite support from senior military officers and
  intelligence experts.
• Connect the dots explain how and why abuses
  reduce our security, instead of keeping us safe
  (e.g, the overreaction concept).
• Link human rights protections to restoring
  Americas global standing and moral authority
  which is essential to our security in an
  interconnected world.
• Talk about who we are as a nation but not an
  end in itself.
• Reference President Obamas position against
  torture.

29

• Dont treat people as if theyre immoral for
  accepting the use of torture under exceptional
  circumstances theyre imagining saving lives.
• Dont focus on those who were tortured public
  does not view them as victims.
• Dont promote process (e.g., international
  conventions) for its own sake. Explain how rules
  and treaty commitments increase our security
  while upholding the values that make us respected
  and strong.
• Don't criticize the Bush administration as being
  completely ineffective in fighting terrorism no
  attack since 9/11
• Dont make this all about the incompetence of a
  single Administration not about doing it
  right, but rather about doing the right thing. 

30

• Sweeping assertions about a direct relationship
  between rights protection and security are likely
  to be rejected. Help people connect the dots,
  reassure about the availability of alternatives.
• Remember that some reframes and arguments are
  memorable and appealing but dont change
  thinking about the need to protect human rights
  or civil liberties. Try to avoid ambiguity about
  what kinds of policies are best.
• Remember that most people are not familiar with
  the alternatives to torture for getting
  information from suspects and may find it
  difficult to believe that anything else could be
  more effective than torture.
• More research and thinking is needed about the
  challenge of holding a popular President
  accountable when he falls short on these issues,
  without marginalizing the human rights/civil
  liberties community. For now, remember no
  protest without a policy, and dont make it
  personal.

31

• QUESTIONS
• and
• DISCUSSION