What Waterboarding Is And Why It's Banned

Lizeth Hegmann DVM 03 Aug 2025

Waterboarding, a form of torture, involves pouring water over a cloth covering a person's face, creating the sensation of drowning.

Despite its controversial nature, waterboarding remains relevant today due to its historical significance and potential benefits in intelligence gathering. The technique was first used during the Spanish Inquisition and later resurfaced in the 20th century during the Algerian War.

In this article, we will explore the origins, methods, and controversies surrounding waterboarding, examining its historical significance, ethical implications, and legal status in the modern era.

What is Waterboarding

Waterboarding, a form of torture, involves pouring water over a cloth covering a person's face, creating the sensation of drowning. Understanding its essential aspects is crucial for comprehending its historical significance, ethical implications, and legal status.

Definition: A simulated drowning technique used for interrogation or torture.
Legality: Controversial and illegal under international law and in many countries.
History: Used historically during the Spanish Inquisition and Algerian War.
Methods: Involves pouring water over a cloth covering the face, inducing a choking sensation.
Effects: Can cause severe physical and psychological trauma, including water intoxication and PTSD.
Purpose: Historically used to extract confessions or information, but its effectiveness is disputed.
Ethics: Widely condemned as cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment.
Legal Challenges: Banned by the UN Convention against Torture, but some countries still authorize its use in extreme circumstances.
Alternatives: More humane and effective interrogation techniques are available.
Controversy: Remains a subject of intense debate and legal challenges.

These aspects provide a comprehensive overview of waterboarding, highlighting its historical roots, methods, ethical implications, and legal status. Understanding these elements is essential for informed discussions and decision-making regarding the use and prohibition of waterboarding.

Definition

At its core, waterboarding is a simulated drowning technique employed to extract information or coerce confessions. To understand its full implications, it is crucial to delve into its specific facets and components.

Method: Waterboarding involves restraining the individual and pouring water over a cloth covering their face, creating the sensation of drowning.
Psychological Impact: The technique induces intense fear, panic, and a sense of helplessness, often leading to psychological trauma and long-term mental health issues.
Physical Consequences: In addition to the psychological impact, waterboarding can also cause physical harm, such as water intoxication, hypothermia, and damage to the lungs and vocal cords.

These facets collectively highlight the cruel and inhumane nature of waterboarding, underscoring its status as a form of torture. Understanding these components is crucial for informed discussions on the legality, ethics, and implications of waterboarding in various contexts.

Legality

The legality of waterboarding is a highly contested issue, with varying perspectives and legal frameworks across different jurisdictions. Despite its controversial nature, waterboarding remains illegal under international law and in many countries, raising important questions about its status and implications.

International Law: The United Nations Convention against Torture (UNCAT) explicitly prohibits waterboarding, categorizing it as a form of torture. This prohibition is widely recognized and accepted by the international community.
National Laws: Many countries have incorporated the prohibition of waterboarding into their domestic laws. For example, the United States passed the McCain Amendment in 2005, which outlawed waterboarding and other forms of torture.
Legal Challenges: Despite these prohibitions, there have been instances where waterboarding has been used or authorized by governments. Such actions have often been met with legal challenges and condemnation from human rights organizations.
Ethical Concerns: The legality of waterboarding is closely intertwined with ethical considerations. Many argue that waterboarding is inherently cruel and inhumane, violating fundamental human rights and principles of justice.

The illegality of waterboarding under international law and in many countries reflects a growing consensus that torture is unacceptable and should not be employed by governments. Understanding the legal landscape surrounding waterboarding is essential for holding governments accountable and ensuring the protection of human rights.

History

The history of waterboarding extends back to ancient times, with documented use during the Spanish Inquisition and the Algerian War. Its historical significance lies in its association with torture and interrogation techniques employed by various regimes.

Spanish Inquisition: Waterboarding was used as a means of extracting confessions from suspected heretics and dissenters. The technique involved pouring water down the throat of the accused, often resulting in severe pain and distress.
Algerian War: French forces reportedly employed waterboarding against Algerian rebels during the Algerian War. This practice was met with international condemnation and allegations of torture.
Other Examples: Waterboarding has also been used in other historical contexts, including during the Vietnam War and by the CIA in the post-9/11 era.
Evolution of Torture Techniques: The use of waterboarding throughout history reflects the evolution of torture techniques, highlighting the cruel and inhumane methods employed to extract information or coerce confessions.

Understanding the historical context of waterboarding is crucial for comprehending its lasting impact on human rights and international law. It underscores the need for strong prohibitions against torture and the promotion of humane interrogation techniques.

Methods

Waterboarding involves pouring water over a cloth covering the individual's face, creating the sensation of drowning. This technique is commonly used during interrogations to extract information or coerce confessions. Here are some key aspects of the waterboarding method:

Restraint: The individual is typically restrained to prevent movement and resistance.
Cloth Covering: A cloth or towel is placed over the face, covering the nose and mouth.
Water Source: Water is poured over the cloth in a controlled manner, creating a suffocating sensation.
Choking Sensation: The water creates a blockage in the airways, leading to a choking sensation and the perception of drowning.

Waterboarding is a highly controversial technique, widely condemned as torture due to its severe physical and psychological effects. The method is designed to induce intense fear, panic, and a sense of helplessness, often resulting in long-term psychological trauma.

Effects

Waterboarding can inflict severe physical and psychological trauma, leaving lasting consequences on its victims. These effects range from immediate physical harm to long-term mental health issues.

Water Intoxication
Waterboarding can lead to water intoxication, a potentially fatal condition that occurs when excessive water dilutes the body's electrolytes, disrupting brain function and causing seizures.
Hypothermia
Prolonged waterboarding can induce hypothermia, a dangerous drop in body temperature that can lead to organ failure and death.
Lung Damage
The forced inhalation of water during waterboarding can cause lung damage, including pneumonia and respiratory distress syndrome.
PTSD
Many survivors of waterboarding experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), characterized by flashbacks, nightmares, and severe anxiety.

The severe effects of waterboarding underscore its cruel and inhumane nature. It is a form of torture that violates fundamental human rights and has no place in modern society.

Purpose

Waterboarding has been historically employed as a means of extracting confessions or information from individuals, despite ongoing debates about its effectiveness. Here are several key aspects to consider:

Coercion:
Waterboarding is often used to coerce individuals into providing information or confessions, relying on the intense fear and discomfort it induces.
Reliability:
The reliability of information obtained through waterboarding is highly questionable, as individuals may provide false confessions under extreme duress.
Historical Examples:
Waterboarding has been used throughout history in various contexts, including during the Spanish Inquisition, the Algerian War, and the United States' interrogation of suspected terrorists after the 9/11 attacks.
International Law:
The use of waterboarding has been condemned by international law and human rights organizations, which classify it as a form of torture.

In conclusion, while waterboarding has been historically used for the purpose of extracting confessions or information, its effectiveness is highly disputed, and its use is widely condemned as a cruel and inhumane practice that violates fundamental human rights.

Ethics

The ethical implications of waterboarding are profound, with widespread condemnation of its cruel, inhumane, and degrading nature. This ethical dimension is a defining characteristic of waterboarding, shaping its understanding and application.

Waterboarding's inherent cruelty stems from its infliction of severe physical and psychological distress. The act of simulated drowning creates intense fear, panic, and a sense of helplessness, often leading to long-term psychological trauma. This deliberate infliction of suffering violates fundamental human rights and contravenes ethical principles.

The ineffectiveness of waterboarding as a reliable method of extracting information further underscores its ethical unacceptability. Coerced confessions obtained under duress are inherently unreliable, raising concerns about the potential for false convictions and miscarriages of justice.

Real-life examples abound, highlighting the ethical pitfalls of waterboarding. Its use by the United States during the War on Terror drew widespread condemnation and allegations of torture. Similarly, its historical use during the Spanish Inquisition and the Algerian War exemplifies the ethical bankruptcy of this practice.

In conclusion, the ethical implications of waterboarding are inseparable from its definition and understanding. Its inherent cruelty, ineffectiveness, and violation of human rights render it an ethically repugnant practice that has no place in modern society.

Legal Challenges

The United Nations Convention against Torture (UNCAT) explicitly prohibits waterboarding, categorizing it as a form of torture. Despite this international ban, some countries still authorize its use in extreme circumstances, highlighting the ongoing tension between legal challenges and the practical application of waterboarding.

This discrepancy raises fundamental questions about the effectiveness of international law in preventing torture and the sovereignty of individual nations to determine their own interrogation methods. The fact that some countries continue to authorize waterboarding, despite its condemnation by the UN, underscores the challenges in achieving a global consensus on the definition and prohibition of torture.

Real-life examples of countries that have authorized waterboarding include the United States, which used the technique during the War on Terror, and Israel, which has employed it in the interrogation of Palestinian detainees. These cases demonstrate the practical challenges of enforcing international law and the potential for political expediency to override ethical and legal concerns.

Understanding the connection between legal challenges and the continued use of waterboarding is crucial for evaluating the effectiveness of international law and the commitment of individual countries to human rights. It also highlights the need for continued advocacy and education to promote the universal prohibition of torture and the adoption of humane and effective interrogation techniques.

Alternatives

Understanding waterboarding necessitates exploring the availability of more humane and effective interrogation techniques. This aspect highlights the ethical and practical reasons for rejecting waterboarding and adopting alternative approaches.

The use of alternative techniques is a critical component of the definition of waterboarding as it exposes the inherent cruelty and ineffectiveness of waterboarding. Humane and effective techniques prioritize the preservation of human rights and dignity, ensuring the reliability of information obtained during interrogations.

Real-life examples abound, showcasing the successful implementation of alternative techniques. These include rapport-building, non-coercive interviewing, and cognitive interviewing. Such techniques have proven effective in eliciting valuable information without resorting to torture or degrading treatment.

The practical significance of this understanding lies in promoting a shift towards humane and effective interrogation practices. By recognizing the availability of alternatives, law enforcement and intelligence agencies can enhance their capabilities while upholding human rights and the rule of law.

Controversy

The controversial nature of waterboarding significantly shapes its definition and understanding. The intense debate and legal challenges surrounding the practice underscore the ethical and legal complexities inherent in its use. This controversy is a pivotal component of what waterboarding is, as it highlights the ongoing struggle to reconcile the need for effective interrogation with the fundamental principles of human rights and the rule of law.

Real-life examples illustrate the practical implications of this controversy. The United States' use of waterboarding during the War on Terror sparked widespread condemnation and legal challenges, ultimately leading to its prohibition under the McCain Amendment. Similarly, Israel's authorization of waterboarding in the interrogation of Palestinian detainees has drawn international criticism and allegations of torture.

Understanding the controversy surrounding waterboarding is crucial for evaluating its legitimacy and the need for alternative interrogation techniques. It highlights the importance of striking a balance between national security concerns and human rights protection. The ongoing debate and legal challenges serve as a reminder of the ethical and legal complexities involved in the use of coercive interrogation methods.

In conclusion, our exploration of "what is waterboarding" has illuminated its multifaceted nature as a simulated drowning technique used for interrogation or torture. Condemned as cruel and inhumane, waterboarding's use has been challenged legally and ethically, with international law and human rights organizations prohibiting its use. Despite these prohibitions, some countries continue to authorize waterboarding in extreme circumstances, highlighting the tension between national security and human rights protection.

Several key points emerge from our analysis. First, waterboarding's inherent cruelty and ineffectiveness as a reliable interrogation method raise serious ethical and legal concerns. Second, the availability of more humane and effective interrogation techniques underscores the need to reject waterboarding and adopt ethical approaches. Finally, the ongoing controversy surrounding waterboarding reflects the ongoing struggle to balance national security with the fundamental principles of human rights and the rule of law.

The CIA May Have Waterboarded More People Than Admitted Business Insider

Practice of waterboarding unpresidential

Waterboarding 101 • History Infographics

Altura News Network