Editing KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation Review: Observations of an Interrogator (section)

==Shock of Capture: A Strategic Inflection Point in an Interrogation==
According to the tactical interrogation model, a source should be questioned as soon as possible after capture to obtain time-perishable intelligence information. In the strategic interrogation model, the importance of the time component has less to do with the nature of the intelligence sought than with exploiting a unique window of vulnerability in the detention experience.
Only a small percentage of military personnel, and a much smaller percentage of terrorists and insurgents, have been exposed to resistance training that includes the stress-inoculation of intensive practical exercises. As a result, the trauma and the perceived chaos of capture — the so-called “shock of capture” — and initial detention will likely prove profoundly unsettling and cause detainees to do and say things against their interest that, upon reflection under more stable circumstances, they would not do or say. In most instances, newly captured detainees expect the worst in terms of treatment at the hands of the enemy and only later draw strength from the realization that they will not be killed or brutally tortured. By exploiting this initial period of overwhelming confusion, the well-trained and prepared interrogator may be able to obtain useful information through the immediate questioning of a source.

The shock of capture phenomenon is not necessarily limited to the initial point of detention. Every time the detainee is transferred to new surroundings — a new cell, a different wing of the current holding facility, or an entirely new facility
— a measure of shock of capture will likely occur. The detainee can be presented with a strange setting, a different routine, new guards, and a fresh interrogator. The rules of engagement in effect at the previous place of confinement may no longer apply in the new facility. The trauma born of confusion, ambiguity, and negative expectations can produce a new period of capture shock that an interrogator can strategically exploit.

A creative and often effective strategy for profiting from the shock of capture phenomenon is to use a dislocation of expectations approach. For example, anticipating mistreatment in the hands of the “infidels,” the detainee may steel himself for the worst, preparing mentally to respond to harsh approaches, abusive language, and a blatant disregard for personal and cultural preferences. With such hardened expectations, the detainee may be ill prepared to encounter someone who affords him better treatment and demonstrates an impressive understanding of his culture and language. Without a clear strategy at the ready for resisting this unexpected turn of events, the source may find himself — similar to the situation described above — responding to questions that he might choose to ignore or outright refuse to answer later on.

Interrogation is both an art and a science, with the proportion attributed to each difficult to determine precisely. In many instances, a “principle” of interrogation (i.e., a concept or method that has proven consistently applicable in a variety of circumstances) may have an equally true obverse. The [[KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation|KUBARK manual]] emphasizes the importance of conducting early “reconnaissance” of a source: screening and initial interrogation sessions designed exclusively to assess personality, to identify strengths, and to probe for weaknesses. Only after this has been accomplished would the interrogator begin the formal examination process. Such an approach has often proven effective.

The shock of capture phenomenon, by contrast, suggests that there are instances where a brief window of opportunity presents itself for the interrogator to question the source with little or no preliminary assessment. This approach has also proven effective.

Which method is better? If research were able to provide a valid answer, or to point to a protocol that could assist an interrogator in making the correct call on a consistent basis, this would then become an element of the overall interrogation process that could be moved from the category of “art” to “science.” Until then, the selection of an approach for dealing with newly detained sources remains not unlike the artist’s selection of paint from a palette filled with an array of attractive hues...the appropriateness of the selection largely reflects the talent of the artist.