Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:42:31.111Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International Law and Public Attitudes Toward Torture: An Experimental Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2013

Geoffrey P.R. Wallace
Geoffrey P.R. Wallace*
Affiliation:
Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. E-mail: geoffrey.wallace@rutgers.edu
Get access

Abstract

Domestic approaches to compliance with international commitments often presume that international law has a distinct effect on the beliefs and preferences of national publics. Studies attempting to estimate the consequences of international law unfortunately face a wide range of empirical and methodological challenges. This article uses an experimental design embedded in two U.S. national surveys to offer direct systematic evidence of international law's effect on mass attitudes. To provide a relatively tough test for international law, the surveys examine public attitudes toward the use of torture, an issue in which national security concerns are often considered paramount. Contrary to the common contention of international law's inefficacy, I find that legal commitments have a discernible impact on public support for the use of torture. The effect of international law is also strongest in those contexts where pressures to resort to torture are at their highest. However, the effects of different dimensions in the level of international agreements' legalization are far from uniform. In contrast to the attention often devoted to binding rules, I find that the level of obligation seems to make little difference on public attitudes toward torture. Rather, the relative precision of the rules, along with the degree to which enforcement is delegated to third parties, plays a much greater role in shaping public preferences. Across both international law and legalization, an individual's political ideology also exerts a strong mediating effect, though in varying directions depending on the design of the agreement. The findings have implications for understanding the overall impact of international law on domestic actors, the importance of institutional design, and the role of political ideology on compliance with international agreements.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 67 , Issue 1 , January 2013 , pp. 105 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, Kenneth W., Keohane, Robert O., Moravcsik, Andrew, Slaughter, Anne-Marie, and Snidal, Duncan. 2000. The Concept of Legalization. International Organization 54 (3):401–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramowitz, Alan I., and Saunders, Kyle L.. 2008. Is Polarization a Myth? Journal of Politics 70 (2):542–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Almond, Gabriel A. 1950. The American People and Foreign Policy. New York: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
Andenaes, Johannes. 1966. The General Preventive Effects of Punishment. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 114 (7):949–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Bass, Gary Jonathan. 2000. Stay the Hand of Vengeance: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaumont, Joan. 1996. Protecting Prisoners of War, 1939–1995. In Prisoners of War and Their Captors in World War II, edited by Moore, Bob and Fedorowich, Kent, 281–97. Oxford, UK: Berg.Google Scholar
Bellamy, Alex J. 2005. Responsibility to Protect or Trojan Horse? The Crisis in Darfur and Humanitarian Intervention After Iraq. Ethics and International Affairs 19 (2):31–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, Adam J. 2009. In Time of War: Understanding American Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolton, John R. 2000. The Risks and Weaknesses of the International Criminal Court from America's Perspective. Virginia Journal of International Law 41 (1):186–203.Google Scholar
Braman, Eileen, and Nelson, Thomas E.. 2007. Mechanism of Motivated Reasoning? Analogical Perception in Discrimination Disputes. American Journal of Political Science 51 (4):940–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brambor, Thomas, Clark, William R., and Golder, Matt. 2006. Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses. Political Analysis 14 (1):63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breyer, Stephen. 2005. Active Liberty: Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Browning, Christopher R. 1998. Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Brunnée, Jutta, and Toope, Stephen J.. 2010. Legitimacy and Legality in International Law: An Interactional Account. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Donald T., and Stanley, Julian C.. 1966. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Cardenas, Sonia. 2007. Conflict and Compliance: State Responses to International Human Rights Pressure. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chayes, Abram, and Chayes, Antonia H.. 1993. On Compliance. International Organization 47 (2):175–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, Pamela J., and Feldman, Stanley. 1981. The Origins and Meaning of Liberal/Conservative Self-Identifications. American Journal of Political Science 25 (4):617–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1964. The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics. In Ideology and Discontent, edited by Apter, David, 206–61. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Dai, Xinyuan. 2006. The Conditional Nature of Democratic Compliance. Journal of Conflict Resolution 50 (5):690–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, Xinyuan. 2007. International Institutions and National Policies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Darren W. 2007. Negative Liberty: Public Opinion and the Terrorist Attacks on America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Downes, Alexander B. 2008. Targeting Civilians in War. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Downs, George W., Rocke, David M., and Barsoom, Peter N.. 1996. Is the Good News About Compliance Good News About Cooperation? International Organization 50 (3):379–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drezner, Daniel W. 2008. The Realist Tradition in American Public Opinion. Perspectives on Politics 6 (1):51–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James N., Green, Donald P., Kuklinski, James H., and Lupia, Arthur. 2006. The Growth and Development of Experimental Research in Political Science. American Political Science Review 100 (4):1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichenberg, Richard C. 2003. Gender Differences in Public Attitudes Toward the Use of Force by the United States, 1990–2003. International Security 28 (1):110–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D. 1994. Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes. American Political Science Review 88 (3):577–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feaver, Peter D., and Gelpi, Christopher. 2004. Choosing Your Battles: American Civil-Military Relations and the Use of Force. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Finnemore, Martha. 2000. Are Legal Norms Distinctive? New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 32 (3):699–705.Google Scholar
Flavin, Patrick, and Nickerson, David W.. 2012. Reciprocity and Public Opinion on Torture. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Franck, Thomas M. 1990. The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, Lon L. 1969. The Morality of Law. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gelpi, Christopher, Feaver, Peter D., and Reifler, Jason. 2009. Paying the Human Costs of War: American Public Opinion and Casualties in Military Conflicts. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, Jack L., and Posner, Eric A.. 1999. A Theory of Customary International Law. University Of Chicago Law Review 66 (4):1113–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzales, Alberto R. 2002. Memorandum for the President. Decision Re Application of the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War to the Conflict with Al Qaeda and the Taliban. National Security Archives, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Goodliffe, Jay, and Hawkins, Darren G.. 2006. Explaining Commitment: States and the Convention Against Torture. Journal of Politics 68 (2):358–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Karen J. 2006. The Rule of Law Finds Its Golem: Judicial Torture Then and Now. In The Torture Debate in America, edited by Greenberg, Karen J., 1–9. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grieco, Joseph M., Gelpi, Christopher F., and Warren, T. Camber. 2009. When Preferences and Commitments Collide: The Effect of Relative Partisan Shifts on International Treaty Compliance. International Organization 63 (2):341–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gronke, Paul, Rejali, Darius, Drenguisa, Dustin, Hicksa, James, Millera, Peter, and Nakayama, Bryan. 2010. U.S. Public Opinion on Torture, 2001–2009. PS: Political Science and Politics 43 (3):437–44.Google Scholar
Guzman, Andrew T. 2008. How International Law Works: A Rational Choice Theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hathaway, Oona A. 2002. Do Human Rights Treaties Make a Difference? Yale Law Journal 111 (8):1935–2042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, Darren G., Lake, David A., Nielson, Daniel L., and Tierney, Michael J.. 2006. Delegation Under Anarchy: States, International Organizations, and Principal-Agent Theory. In Delegation and Agency in International Organizations, edited by Hawkins, Darren G., Lake, David A., Nielson, Daniel L., and Tierney, Michael J., 3–38. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henkin, Louis. 1979. How Nations Behave. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J., and Weiler, Jonathan D.. 2009. Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holsti, Ole R. 2004. Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, Feldman, Stanley, Taber, Charles, and Lahav, Gallya. 2005. Threat, Anxiety, and Support of Antiterrorism Policies. American Journal of Political Science 39 (3):593–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jentleson, Bruce W. 1992. The Pretty Prudent Public: Post Post-Vietnam American Opinion on the Use of Military Force. International Studies Quarterly 36 (1):49–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jentleson, Bruce W., and Britton, Rebecca L.. 1998. Still Pretty Prudent: Post-Cold War American Public Opinion on the Use of Military Force. Journal of Conflict Resolution 42 (4):395–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O., Moravcsik, Andrew, and Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 2000. Legalized Dispute Resolution: Interstate and Transnational. International Organization 54 (3):457–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koh, Harold H. 1996–97. Why Do Nations Obey International Law? Yale Law Journal 106 (8):2599–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koremenos, Barbara, Lipson, Charles, and Snidal, Duncan. 2001a. The Rational Design of International Institutions. International Organization 55 (4):761–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koremenos, Barbara, Lipson, Charles, and Snidal, Duncan. 2001b. Rational Design: Looking Back to Move Forward. International Organization 55 (4):1051–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krasner, Stephen. 1999. Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krislov, Samuel, Boyum, Keith O., Clark, Jerry N., Schaefer, Roger C., and White, Susan O., eds. 1972. Compliance and the Law: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Landman, Todd. 2004. Measuring Human Rights: Principle, Practice, and Policy. Human Rights Quarterly 26 (4):906–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasswell, Harold D. 1971. National Security and Individual Freedom. New York: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar
Legro, Jeffrey W. 1995. Cooperation under Fire: Anglo-German Restraint During World War II. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Levendusky, Matthew. 2009. The Partisan Sort: How Liberals Became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipson, Charles. 1991. Why Are Some International Agreements Informal? International Organization 45 (4):495–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipson, Charles. 2003. Reliable Partners: How Democracies Have Made a Separate Peace. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lutz, Ellen L., and Sikkink, Katherine. 2000. International Human Rights Law and Practice in Latin America. International Organization 54 (3):633–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maoz, Ifat, and McCauley, Clark. 2008. Threat, Dehumanization, and Support for Retaliatory Aggressive Policies in Asymmetric Conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution 52 (1):93–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermott, Rose. 2002. Experimental Methods in Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science 5:31–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mearsheimer, John. 1994–95. The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security 19 (3):5–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mearsheimer, John. 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Merolla, Jennifer L., and Zechmeister, Elizabeth J.. 2009. Democracy at Risk: How Terrorist Threats Affect the Public. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 1995. Explaining International Human Rights Regimes: Liberal Theory and Western Europe. European Journal of International Relations 1 (2):157–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2000. The Origins of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Postwar Europe. International Organization 54 (2):217–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgenthau, Hans J. 1985. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Morrow, James D. 2007. When Do States Follow the Laws of War? American Political Science Review 101 (3):559–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrow, James D., and Jo, Hyeran. 2006. Compliance with the Laws of War: Dataset and Coding Rules. Conflict Management and Peace Science 23 (1):91–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumayer, Eric. 2005. Do International Human Rights Treaties Improve Respect for Human Rights? Journal of Conflict Resolution 49 (6):925–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumayer, Eric. 2008. Death Penalty Abolition and the Ratification of the Second Optional Protocol. International Journal of Human Rights 12 (1):3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nincic, Miroslav, and Ramos, Jennifer. 2011. Torture in the Public Mind. International Studies Perspectives 12 (3):231–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowak, Manfred. 2006. What Practices Constitute Torture? U.S. and UN Standards. Human Rights Quarterly 28 (4):809–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., and Bouton, Marshall M.. 2006. The Foreign Policy Disconnect: What Americans Want from Our Leaders but Don't Get. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poe, Steven C., and Tate, C. Neal. 1994. Repression of Human Rights to Personal Integrity in the 1980s: A Global Analysis. American Political Science Review 88 (4):853–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rathbun, Brian C. 2004. Partisan Interventions: European Party Politics and Peace Enforcement in the Balkans. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rathbun, Brian C. 2007. Hierarchy and Community at Home and Abroad: Evidence of a Common Structure of Domestic and Foreign Policy Beliefs in American Elites. Journal of Conflict Resolution 51 (3):379–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratner, Steven R. 2000. Does International Law Matter in Preventing Ethnic Conflict? New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 32 (3):591–698.Google Scholar
Ratner, Steven R., and Abrams, Jason S.. 2001. Accountability for Human Rights Atrocities in International Law: Beyond the Nuremberg Legacy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Raustiala, Kal, and Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 2002. International Law, International Relations and Compliance. In Handbook of International Relations, edited by Carlsnaes, Walter, Risse, Thomas, and Simmons, Beth A., 538–58. London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rejali, Darius. 2007. Torture and Democracy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rodley, Nigel. 1999. The Treatment of Prisoners Under International Law. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Scalia, Antonin, and Gutmann, Amy. 1998. A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Shadish, William R., Cook, Thomas D., and Campbell, Donald T.. 2002. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Robert Y., and Bloch-Elkon, Yaeli. 2007. Ideological Partisanship and American Public Opinion toward Foreign Policy. In Power and Superpower: Global Leadership and Exceptionalism in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Halperin, Morton H., Laurenti, Jeffrey, Rundlet, Peter, and Boyer, Spencer P., 49–68. New York: Century Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Shelton, Dinah, ed. 2000. Commitment and Compliance: The Role of Non-Binding Norms in the International Legal System. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shils, Edward A., and Janowitz, Morris. 1948. Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht in World War II. Public Opinion Quarterly 12 (2):280–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, Beth A. 1998. Compliance with International Agreements. Annual Review of Political Science 1 (1):75–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, Beth A. 2009. Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, Beth A. 2010. Treaty Compliance and Violation. Annual Review of Political Science 13:272–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, Jack, and Borghard, Erica D.. 2011. The Cost of Empty Threats: A Penny, Not a Pound. American Political Science Review 105 (3):437–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taber, Charles S., and Lodge, Milton. 2006. Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3):755–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomz, Michael. 2007. Domestic Audience Costs in International Relations: An Experimental Approach. International Organization 61 (4):821–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomz, Michael. 2008. Reputation and the Effect of International Law on Preferences and Beliefs. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Political Science, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.Google Scholar
Tomz, Michael, Wittenberg, Jason, and King, Gary. 2003. Clarify: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results. Version 2.1. Journal of Statistical Software 8 (1):8–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Twining, W.L., and Twining, P.E.. 1973. Bentham on Torture. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 24 (3):305–56.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1990. Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Valentino, Benjamin A., Huth, Paul K., and Croco, Sarah. 2006. Covenants Without the Sword: International Law and the Protection of Civilians in Times of War. World Politics 58 (3):339–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valentino, Benjamin, Huth, Paul, and Balch-Lindsay, Dylan. 2004. “Draining the Sea”: Mass Killing and Guerrilla Warfare. International Organization 58 (2):375–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voeten, Erik. 2008. The Impartiality of International Judges: Evidence from the European Court of Human Rights. American Political Science Review 102 (4):417–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Stein, Jana. 2008. The International Law and Politics of Climate Change: Ratification of the United Nations Framework Convention and the Kyoto Protocol. Journal of Conflict Resolution 52 (2):243–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walzer, Michael. 1973. Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands. Philosophy and Public Affairs 2 (2):160–80.Google Scholar
Zemans, Frances K. 1983. Legal Mobilization: The Neglected Role of the Law in the Political System. American Political Science Review 77 (3):690–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar