KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation Review: Observations of an Interrogator - Revision history

AdminKB42: /* Introduction */

2025-08-17T23:43:55Z

Introduction

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:43, 17 August 2025
Line 31:		Line 31:

	== Introduction ==		== Introduction ==
	The ~~KUBARK21~~ Counterintelligence Interrogation Manual, produced by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1963 (and declassified in 1997), has become an icon of Cold War subterfuge and a lightning rod for those who allege that the United States continues to employ similar coercive interrogation techniques in the new conflict of the 21st century: the Global War on Terror. In an emphatic article, Alfred W. McCoy provides a sweeping review of the development of the [[KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation\|KUBARK manual]] and its disturbing legacy throughout the remaining course of Cold War history.22 McCoy makes a compelling argument that coercive interrogation methods, such as those set forth in the [[KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation\|KUBARK manual]], carry a far-reaching negative impact on U.S. foreign policy: a premise with critical implications for current counterinsurgency operations in Iraq.		The [[KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation\|KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation Manual]], produced by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1963 (and declassified in 1997), has become an icon of Cold War subterfuge and a lightning rod for those who allege that the United States continues to employ similar coercive interrogation techniques in the new conflict of the 21st century: the Global War on Terror. In an emphatic article, Alfred W. McCoy provides a sweeping review of the development of the [[KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation\|KUBARK manual]] and its disturbing legacy throughout the remaining course of Cold War history.22 McCoy makes a compelling argument that coercive interrogation methods, such as those set forth in the [[KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation\|KUBARK manual]], carry a far-reaching negative impact on U.S. foreign policy: a premise with critical implications for current counterinsurgency operations in Iraq.

	Rather than address these geopolitical concerns, this review will concern itself exclusively with the potential for lessons learned that could be derived from a highly controversial document. Just as important ideas for enhancing security practices can be elicited from a felon convicted of armed robbery, in looking past the ignominy of KUBARK’s intended use, one can find useful insights into the dynamics of intensive intelligence interrogation that can lead to principles applicable to current challenges.		Rather than address these geopolitical concerns, this review will concern itself exclusively with the potential for lessons learned that could be derived from a highly controversial document. Just as important ideas for enhancing security practices can be elicited from a felon convicted of armed robbery, in looking past the ignominy of KUBARK’s intended use, one can find useful insights into the dynamics of intensive intelligence interrogation that can lead to principles applicable to current challenges.

AdminKB42 at 23:42, 17 August 2025

2025-08-17T23:42:10Z

Show changes

AdminKB42: /* Qualities of an Effective Interrogator */

2025-08-17T23:34:13Z

Qualities of an Effective Interrogator

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:34, 17 August 2025
Line 108:		Line 108:
	The human intelligence (HUMINT) career field has long employed various psychological testing protocols (e.g., Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, California Psychological Inventory, etc.), in conjunction with exhaustive background investigations, in an effort to both identify those candidates with the inherent aptitude and/or personality profile for a given operational activity and to screen out those who would likely prove ill-suited and/or ill-equipped for the profession. A similar psychological screening protocol (without the background investigation) has been employed in the SERE career field in an effort to eliminate those candidates with the highest apparent probability for acting out violently or abusively while interacting with students during intensive practical exercises. For application to the interrogation discipline, a critical underpinning of such screening efforts is the availability of a “model” of a successful interrogator...and it is unlikely that a properly vetted model exists.		The human intelligence (HUMINT) career field has long employed various psychological testing protocols (e.g., Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, California Psychological Inventory, etc.), in conjunction with exhaustive background investigations, in an effort to both identify those candidates with the inherent aptitude and/or personality profile for a given operational activity and to screen out those who would likely prove ill-suited and/or ill-equipped for the profession. A similar psychological screening protocol (without the background investigation) has been employed in the SERE career field in an effort to eliminate those candidates with the highest apparent probability for acting out violently or abusively while interacting with students during intensive practical exercises. For application to the interrogation discipline, a critical underpinning of such screening efforts is the availability of a “model” of a successful interrogator...and it is unlikely that a properly vetted model exists.

	While identifying effective methods and processes is a key element of the Intelligence Science Board’s EI project mandate, designing a means for selecting candidates with the highest potential for success in implementing these methods and processes is of equal importance. Research in this regard should be acutely informed by the following three considerations:		While identifying effective methods and processes is a key element of the Intelligence Science Board’s EI project mandate, designing a means for selecting candidates with the highest potential for success in implementing these methods and processes is of equal importance. Research in this regard should be acutely informed by the following three considerations:33 34
	33 34
	• Those in hierarchical authoritarian structures have a documented tendency to engage in what appears to be “acceptable” inhumane behavior toward others, as demonstrated in the famous “Stanford University Experiment” (Haney, Banks, and Zimbardo, 1973).		• Those in hierarchical authoritarian structures have a documented tendency to engage in what appears to be “acceptable” inhumane behavior toward others, as demonstrated in the famous “Stanford University Experiment” (Haney, Banks, and Zimbardo, 1973).
	• Dr. Howard Gardner’s seminal work on multiple intelligences suggests that certain people might be naturally gifted with uncommon abilities and aptitudes in various areas, including (for EI purposes) interpersonal intelligence (the capacity to understand the intentions, motivations and desires of other people) and intrapersonal intelligence (the capacity to understand oneself, to appreciate one’s feelings, fears and motivations).34		• Dr. Howard Gardner’s seminal work on multiple intelligences suggests that certain people might be naturally gifted with uncommon abilities and aptitudes in various areas, including (for EI purposes) interpersonal intelligence (the capacity to understand the intentions, motivations and desires of other people) and intrapersonal intelligence (the capacity to understand oneself, to appreciate one’s feelings, fears and motivations).34
	KUBARK, 1011.		KUBARK, 1011.
	See, for example Howard Gardner, Ph.D., Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (New York: BasicBooks, 1983).		See, for example Howard Gardner, Ph.D., Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (New York: BasicBooks, 1983).
	~~101~~

	• Perhaps the most important single trait of individuals who have demonstrated long-term success in HUMINT operations is an exceptional aptitude for dealing with ambiguity. Whether this characteristic can be reliably measured remains to be seen.		• Perhaps the most important single trait of individuals who have demonstrated long-term success in HUMINT operations is an exceptional aptitude for dealing with ambiguity. Whether this characteristic can be reliably measured remains to be seen.

AdminKB42: /* Focus on Communist Methods of Interrogation */

2025-08-17T21:11:26Z

Focus on Communist Methods of Interrogation

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:11, 17 August 2025
Line 55:		Line 55:
	The intelligence service which is able to bring pertinent, modern knowledge to bear upon its problems enjoys huge advantages over a service which conducts its clandestine business in eighteenth century fashion. It is true that American psychologists have devoted somewhat more attention to Communist interrogation techniques, particularly “brainwashing,” than to U.S. practices. Yet they have conducted scientific inquiries into many subjects that are closely related to interrogation: the effects of debility and isolation, the polygraph, reactions to pain and fear, hypnosis, and heightened suggestibility.26		The intelligence service which is able to bring pertinent, modern knowledge to bear upon its problems enjoys huge advantages over a service which conducts its clandestine business in eighteenth century fashion. It is true that American psychologists have devoted somewhat more attention to Communist interrogation techniques, particularly “brainwashing,” than to U.S. practices. Yet they have conducted scientific inquiries into many subjects that are closely related to interrogation: the effects of debility and isolation, the polygraph, reactions to pain and fear, hypnosis, and heightened suggestibility.26
	25 Legal travelers are individuals who may lawfully travel to a foreign country for commercial, personal, or government purposes who may be debriefed upon their return by a representative of the Intelligence Community for information of intelligence interest obtained in the normal course of their official duties or personal activities. Legal travelers are not tasked (officially requested or directed) to collect information.		25 Legal travelers are individuals who may lawfully travel to a foreign country for commercial, personal, or government purposes who may be debriefed upon their return by a representative of the Intelligence Community for information of intelligence interest obtained in the normal course of their official duties or personal activities. Legal travelers are not tasked (officially requested or directed) to collect information.
	~~26 KUBARK, 2.~~
	97

	The study of hostile interrogation methods has been an essential undertaking in the noble effort to better prepare U.S. personnel to endure and withstand the challenges they might face if taken prisoner. However, no similar effort has ever been undertaken to better prepare U.S. intelligence personnel for their important role in gleaning critical intelligence data from enemy prisoners and detainees. The reasons for this omission remain unknown.		The study of hostile interrogation methods has been an essential undertaking in the noble effort to better prepare U.S. personnel to endure and withstand the challenges they might face if taken prisoner. However, no similar effort has ever been undertaken to better prepare U.S. intelligence personnel for their important role in gleaning critical intelligence data from enemy prisoners and detainees. The reasons for this omission remain unknown.
Line 67:		Line 65:
	— including the employment of coercive methods — to protect information and avoid becoming pawns in an adversary’s attempt to generate useful propaganda. To prepare personnel for this substantial challenge, resistance training seeks to create a systematic threat environment to achieve “stress inoculation.” This includes exposing trainees to intensive role-played interrogation scenarios. In the course of many years of experience in such practical exercises, many of the resistance instructors have become accomplished role-play interrogators.		— including the employment of coercive methods — to protect information and avoid becoming pawns in an adversary’s attempt to generate useful propaganda. To prepare personnel for this substantial challenge, resistance training seeks to create a systematic threat environment to achieve “stress inoculation.” This includes exposing trainees to intensive role-played interrogation scenarios. In the course of many years of experience in such practical exercises, many of the resistance instructors have become accomplished role-play interrogators.

	However, there are three fundamental reasons why experience as a resistance instructor does not necessarily prepare someone for service as an intelligence interrogator. First, resistance instructors — portraying interrogators from potential adversarial nations that have shown disregard for international convention on the treatment of prisoners — routinely employ a wide range of coercive methods that often fall well outside Geneva Convention guidelines. Second, although questioning is an important element of the role-play exercise, this activity does		However, there are three fundamental reasons why experience as a resistance instructor does not necessarily prepare someone for service as an intelligence interrogator. First, resistance instructors — portraying interrogators from potential adversarial nations that have shown disregard for international convention on the treatment of prisoners — routinely employ a wide range of coercive methods that often fall well outside Geneva Convention guidelines. Second, although questioning is an important element of the role-play exercise, this activity does not reach the depth required in an intelligence interrogation. Third, resistance instructors, though talented professionals, lack the training, linguistic skills, and subject matter expertise required of interrogation personnel. In sum, the employment of resistance instructors in interrogation — whether as consultants or as practitioners — is an example of the proverbial attempt to place the square peg in the round hole. (NOTE: In the months after 11 September 2001, special operations personnel, many of whom have received resistance training, were quick to request interrogation support from the SERE community based on well-entrenched memories of the skill and polish of resistance instructors during intense role-play scenarios.)28
	~~27 KUBARK~~, ~~110–111~~.		The Objective of an Interrogation: Information or Confession?

	not reach the depth required in an intelligence interrogation. Third, resistance instructors, though talented professionals, lack the training, linguistic skills, and subject matter expertise required of interrogation personnel. In sum, the employment of resistance instructors in interrogation — whether as consultants or as practitioners — is an example of the proverbial attempt to place the square peg in the round hole. (NOTE: In the months after 11 September 2001, special operations personnel, many of whom have received resistance training, were quick to request interrogation support from the SERE community based on well-entrenched memories of the skill and polish of resistance instructors during intense role-play scenarios.)28
	~~The Objective of an Interrogation: Information or Confession?~~
	[U]nlike a police interrogation, the [intelligence] interrogation is not aimed at causing the interrogatee to incriminate himself as a means of bringing him to trial. Admissions of complicity are not...ends in themselves but merely preludes to the acquisition of more information.29		[U]nlike a police interrogation, the [intelligence] interrogation is not aimed at causing the interrogatee to incriminate himself as a means of bringing him to trial. Admissions of complicity are not...ends in themselves but merely preludes to the acquisition of more information.29

Line 78:		Line 74:
	The confession that can be such a monumental achievement in the law enforcement world is often of little interest to the Intelligence Community. Conversely, the exhaustive detail necessary to support subsequent intelligence analysis and production often ranges far beyond that needed to support a conviction. While law enforcement seeks to establish responsibility, the Intelligence Community seeks to exploit knowledgeability. In sum, law enforcement attempts to understand the past; intelligence attempts to probe the future.		The confession that can be such a monumental achievement in the law enforcement world is often of little interest to the Intelligence Community. Conversely, the exhaustive detail necessary to support subsequent intelligence analysis and production often ranges far beyond that needed to support a conviction. While law enforcement seeks to establish responsibility, the Intelligence Community seeks to exploit knowledgeability. In sum, law enforcement attempts to understand the past; intelligence attempts to probe the future.

	Other key differences must be clearly understood. Law enforcement officials must adhere to federal and state laws pertaining to rights of the accused (including legal representation and the right to remain silent), standards of evidence, investigative parameters established by the prosecution, and limits on the duration of custody. In contrast, the activities of intelligence officials are governed by international and federal guidelines pertaining to the treatment of prisoners, priority intelligence requirements, the need to manage a potentially		Other key differences must be clearly understood. Law enforcement officials must adhere to federal and state laws pertaining to rights of the accused (including legal representation and the right to remain silent), standards of evidence, investigative parameters established by the prosecution, and limits on the duration of custody. In contrast, the activities of intelligence officials are governed by international and federal guidelines pertaining to the treatment of prisoners, priority intelligence requirements, the need to manage a potentially long-term exploitation process, and the pursuit of actionable information and/or information that corroborates or contributes to intelligence data gathered from other sources.

			As noted previously, what ultimately informs the methodology employed to collect data from a source is, in large measure, the nature of the information sought. It is critical, then, to understand the vital differences between gathering information to support a criminal case and gathering information to support foreign intelligence production.

	28 During his recall to active duty from June 2003 to January 2005, the author served as the Department of Defense Senior Intelligence Officer for Special Survival Training.		28 During his recall to active duty from June 2003 to January 2005, the author served as the Department of Defense Senior Intelligence Officer for Special Survival Training.
	~~29 KUBARK, 4–5.~~
	99

	~~long-term exploitation process~~, ~~and the pursuit of actionable information and/or information that corroborates or contributes to intelligence data gathered from other sources~~.		27 KUBARK, 110–111.
	~~As noted previously~~, ~~what ultimately informs the methodology employed to collect data from a source is, in large measure, the nature of the information sought~~. ~~It is critical, then~~, ~~to understand the vital differences between gathering information to support a criminal case and gathering information to support foreign intelligence production~~.		26 KUBARK, 2.
			29 KUBARK, 4–5.

	== Objective: Standard: Limits: Protections: Confession:==		== Objective: Standard: Limits: Protections: Confession:==

AdminKB42: /* Objective: Standard: Limits: Protections: Confession: */

2025-08-17T21:05:20Z

Objective: Standard: Limits: Protections: Confession:

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:05, 17 August 2025
Line 98:		Line 98:
	An analysis of these critical factors would suggest that interrogators operating in support of foreign intelligence requirements be afforded a considerably greater degree of flexibility than law enforcement personnel. While the two interrogation contexts have numerous areas of commonality, it is imperative that the strategies, tactics, and techniques developed for each reflect the differences between them. Without this understanding, the potential exists for significant error in application and practice.		An analysis of these critical factors would suggest that interrogators operating in support of foreign intelligence requirements be afforded a considerably greater degree of flexibility than law enforcement personnel. While the two interrogation contexts have numerous areas of commonality, it is imperative that the strategies, tactics, and techniques developed for each reflect the differences between them. Without this understanding, the potential exists for significant error in application and practice.
	One explanation for this can be found in the specificity principle. Arising from studies in the field of kinesiology (the science of human movement), the specificity principle suggests that the closer two activities are to one another — without becoming the same activity — the more practice in one will degrade skills in the other. To borrow an example from sports, the individual who plays softball and also participates in a bowling league (activities that require vastly different skill sets) would not find his or her skill in one sport impaired by participation in the other. Conversely, the individual who plays both racquetball and squash would likely encounter difficulties in transitioning from one activity to the other, especially in areas such as strategy, timing, and focus. It is precisely in the areas of strategy, timing, and focus that law enforcement and intelligence interrogation are critically different.		One explanation for this can be found in the specificity principle. Arising from studies in the field of kinesiology (the science of human movement), the specificity principle suggests that the closer two activities are to one another — without becoming the same activity — the more practice in one will degrade skills in the other. To borrow an example from sports, the individual who plays softball and also participates in a bowling league (activities that require vastly different skill sets) would not find his or her skill in one sport impaired by participation in the other. Conversely, the individual who plays both racquetball and squash would likely encounter difficulties in transitioning from one activity to the other, especially in areas such as strategy, timing, and focus. It is precisely in the areas of strategy, timing, and focus that law enforcement and intelligence interrogation are critically different.

	30 Any and all information collected by the U.S. Intelligence Community outside the United States from non-U.S. Persons may be used for intelligence analytical purposes.		30 Any and all information collected by the U.S. Intelligence Community outside the United States from non-U.S. Persons may be used for intelligence analytical purposes.

	31 While the Constitution of the United States specifically protects individuals from unreasonable searches and self-incrimination, the non-U.S. Person intelligence source does not enjoy these same protections.		31 While the Constitution of the United States specifically protects individuals from unreasonable searches and self-incrimination, the non-U.S. Person intelligence source does not enjoy these same protections.

	32 A “confession” obtained from an intelligence source only has value to the extent that it establishes direct access to the information reported. For intelligence purposes, the other interrogatives (e.g., why, how, how many, when again) are more important than confirmation of an individual “who.”		32 A “confession” obtained from an intelligence source only has value to the extent that it establishes direct access to the information reported. For intelligence purposes, the other interrogatives (e.g., why, how, how many, when again) are more important than confirmation of an individual “who.”
	~~100~~

	== Qualities of an Effective Interrogator ==		== Qualities of an Effective Interrogator ==

AdminKB42: /* Observations Interrogation: A Definition */

2025-08-17T21:02:59Z

Observations Interrogation: A Definition

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:02, 17 August 2025
Line 41:		Line 41:

	Some might argue that these definitions fail to distinguish interrogation from a debriefing. While there are far more similarities than differences between the two activities, what ultimately separates an interrogation from a debriefing 21 The term “KUBARK” is the Central Intelligence Agency cryptonym for a counterintelligence collection operation conducted in the early 1960s. In the cryptonym system employed by the CIA, the first two letters (the “digraph”) may refer to a country or a specific clandestine or covert activity, while the remaining word (in this instance, “BARK”) may refer to a specific operation or recruited source.		Some might argue that these definitions fail to distinguish interrogation from a debriefing. While there are far more similarities than differences between the two activities, what ultimately separates an interrogation from a debriefing 21 The term “KUBARK” is the Central Intelligence Agency cryptonym for a counterintelligence collection operation conducted in the early 1960s. In the cryptonym system employed by the CIA, the first two letters (the “digraph”) may refer to a country or a specific clandestine or covert activity, while the remaining word (in this instance, “BARK”) may refer to a specific operation or recruited source.

			rests in the nature of two fundamental elements: psychological set and physical setting.
			* Psychological Set. In the context of a debriefing, the debriefer and the source have essentially committed to the primary, shared purpose of producing actionable intelligence, even though each may be motivated by dramatically different personal objectives. The debriefer seeks the fulfillment of tasked intelligence collection objectives, while the source may act out of a sense of patriotism (e.g., a legal traveler25 reporting information learned while traveling abroad) or may be seeking preferential treatment from government authorities (e.g., a defector). In the course of an interrogation, both parties approach the interaction with different — and at times widely conflicting — sets of expectations and objectives. While the interrogator may share the debriefer’s objective of obtaining actionable intelligence, he or she may expect to encounter a source who seeks to resist, withhold, distort, and deceive.
			* Physical Setting. A legal traveler, in essence, submits voluntarily to the questioning of the debriefer, and reserves the right (in most instances) to end the session and depart at any time. It is therefore in the debriefer’s best interest to make the experience a positive one for the source. By contrast, an interrogator enjoys a significant degree of control over the movement of the source, the duration of the encounter, and often the degree of liberty available to the source (at that moment and for the immediate future). The interrogator has the option of leveraging his/her control over these factors — in the form of the “threat” of continued detention or the “reward” of early release or expanded privileges — as a means of influencing the source’s responsiveness to questioning.


	22 Alfred W. McCoy, “Cruel Science: CIA Torture and U.S. Foreign Policy,” The New England Journal of Public Policy (Winter 2005): 209-262.		22 Alfred W. McCoy, “Cruel Science: CIA Torture and U.S. Foreign Policy,” The New England Journal of Public Policy (Winter 2005): 209-262.
Line 46:		Line 51:
	23 Central Intelligence Agency, KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation, Washington, DC, 1963, 1; available at http://www.parascope.com/articles/0397/kubark06.htm. Hereafter cited as KUBARK.		23 Central Intelligence Agency, KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation, Washington, DC, 1963, 1; available at http://www.parascope.com/articles/0397/kubark06.htm. Hereafter cited as KUBARK.
	24 KUBARK, 85.		24 KUBARK, 85.


	~~rests in the nature of two fundamental elements: psychological set and physical setting.~~
	* Psychological Set. In the context of a debriefing, the debriefer and the source have essentially committed to the primary, shared purpose of producing actionable intelligence, even though each may be motivated by dramatically different personal objectives. The debriefer seeks the fulfillment of tasked intelligence collection objectives, while the source may act out of a sense of patriotism (e.g., a legal traveler25 reporting information learned while traveling abroad) or may be seeking preferential treatment from government authorities (e.g., a defector). In the course of an interrogation, both parties approach the interaction with different — and at times widely conflicting — sets of expectations and objectives. While the interrogator may share the debriefer’s objective of obtaining actionable intelligence, he or she may expect to encounter a source who seeks to resist, withhold, distort, and deceive.
	* Physical Setting. A legal traveler, in essence, submits voluntarily to the questioning of the debriefer, and reserves the right (in most instances) to end the session and depart at any time. It is therefore in the debriefer’s best interest to make the experience a positive one for the source. By contrast, an interrogator enjoys a significant degree of control over the movement of the source, the duration of the encounter, and often the degree of liberty available to the source (at that moment and for the immediate future). The interrogator has the option of leveraging his/her control over these factors — in the form of the “threat” of continued detention or the “reward” of early release or expanded privileges — as a means of influencing the source’s responsiveness to questioning.

	== Focus on Communist Methods of Interrogation ==		== Focus on Communist Methods of Interrogation ==

AdminKB42: /* Obstacles to Meaningful Intelligence: The Negative Effects of Coercion */

2025-08-17T20:38:28Z

Obstacles to Meaningful Intelligence: The Negative Effects of Coercion

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:38, 17 August 2025
Line 573:		Line 573:

	98 99 100		98 99 100
	The manner and timing of arrest can contribute substantially to the interrogator’s purposes. “What we aim to do is to ensure that the manner of arrest achieves, if possible, surprise, and the maximum amount of mental discomfort in order to catch the suspect off balance and to deprive him of the initiative.~~”100~~		The manner and timing of arrest can contribute substantially to the interrogator’s purposes. “What we aim to do is to ensure that the manner of arrest achieves, if possible, surprise, and the maximum amount of mental discomfort in order to catch the suspect off balance and to deprive him of the initiative.”
	KUBARK, 90–91.
	Mark Moyer, Phoenix and the Birds of Prey (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1997), 90.		100 KUBARK, 90–91.
	KUBARK, 85.		Mark Moyer, Phoenix and the Birds of Prey (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1997),
	~~133~~		90. KUBARK, 85.

	==Shock of Capture: A Strategic Inflection Point in an Interrogation==		==Shock of Capture: A Strategic Inflection Point in an Interrogation==

AdminKB42: /* Ivan Is a Dope */

2025-08-17T20:36:55Z

Ivan Is a Dope

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:36, 17 August 2025
Line 470:		Line 470:
	First, Cialdini’s authority principle plays an important part in this approach. The source, convinced that the interrogator knows as much as (perhaps more than) he does, sees little to be gained from protecting information of such apparently little value, especially if he anticipates that the consequences of withholding such information are undesirable. Second, recalling the premise that two of the interrogator’s primary objectives are to increase the stress the source internalizes about the consequences of resistance while simultaneously reducing the internalized stress over the prospect of cooperating, this approach systematically targets the latter. By maintaining this approach over time, the interrogator is able to introduce a new and perhaps unexpected factor in the source’s resistance/ cooperation calculus.		First, Cialdini’s authority principle plays an important part in this approach. The source, convinced that the interrogator knows as much as (perhaps more than) he does, sees little to be gained from protecting information of such apparently little value, especially if he anticipates that the consequences of withholding such information are undesirable. Second, recalling the premise that two of the interrogator’s primary objectives are to increase the stress the source internalizes about the consequences of resistance while simultaneously reducing the internalized stress over the prospect of cooperating, this approach systematically targets the latter. By maintaining this approach over time, the interrogator is able to introduce a new and perhaps unexpected factor in the source’s resistance/ cooperation calculus.

	== Ivan Is a Dope ==		=== Ivan Is a Dope ===
	It may be useful to point out to a hostile [source] that the cover story was ill-contrived, that the other service botched the job, that it is typical of the other service to ignore the welfare of its agents. The interrogator may personalize this pitch by explaining that he has been impressed by the [source’s] courage and intelligence.84		It may be useful to point out to a hostile [source] that the cover story was ill-contrived, that the other service botched the job, that it is typical of the other service to ignore the welfare of its agents. The interrogator may personalize this pitch by explaining that he has been impressed by the [source’s] courage and intelligence.84

AdminKB42: /* Ivan Is a Dope */

2025-08-17T20:36:41Z

Ivan Is a Dope

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:36, 17 August 2025
Line 471:		Line 471:

	== Ivan Is a Dope ==		== Ivan Is a Dope ==
	It may be useful to point out to a hostile [source] that the cover story was ill-contrived, that the other service botched the job,		It may be useful to point out to a hostile [source] that the cover story was ill-contrived, that the other service botched the job, that it is typical of the other service to ignore the welfare of its agents. The interrogator may personalize this pitch by explaining that he has been impressed by the [source’s] courage and intelligence.84

	~~82 KUBARK, 67.~~
	83 The author refers to this approach as “The Exquisite Ruse,” and has used it with great effect in interrogation operations conducted during Operations JUST CAUSE, DESERT STORM, and IRAQI FREEDOM.

	~~126~~

	that it is typical of the other service to ignore the welfare of its agents. The interrogator may personalize this pitch by explaining that he has been impressed by the [source’s] courage and intelligence.84

	This approach also leverages the psychological and emotional partition between aforementioned values outside the interrogation room and those inside the interrogation room. By using this approach effectively, the interrogator continues to separate the source from his or her external anchors. In this instance, that anchor is a belief in the parent service’s skill in managing cover to properly protect the source operationally. This has direct application to the interrogation of suspected terrorists, not only as it relates to cover support, but also to the threat briefings, operational planning, and equipment provided to the source by his or her sponsoring organization.		This approach also leverages the psychological and emotional partition between aforementioned values outside the interrogation room and those inside the interrogation room. By using this approach effectively, the interrogator continues to separate the source from his or her external anchors. In this instance, that anchor is a belief in the parent service’s skill in managing cover to properly protect the source operationally. This has direct application to the interrogation of suspected terrorists, not only as it relates to cover support, but also to the threat briefings, operational planning, and equipment provided to the source by his or her sponsoring organization.
Line 484:		Line 477:
	A key element of systematic interrogation is systematic innovation. Rather than assume that the approaches outlined in U.S. Army Field Manual 34-52 are the limit of their repertoire of tactics, interrogators should view those approaches as only the very beginning. The drafters of the KUBARK manual demonstrated the value to be found in the ability to adapt to new challenges, design innovative strategies, identify through practical experience what appears to consistently work well, and share these novel concepts with other interrogators. If a central clearinghouse for new interrogation tactics, techniques, and procedures existed		A key element of systematic interrogation is systematic innovation. Rather than assume that the approaches outlined in U.S. Army Field Manual 34-52 are the limit of their repertoire of tactics, interrogators should view those approaches as only the very beginning. The drafters of the KUBARK manual demonstrated the value to be found in the ability to adapt to new challenges, design innovative strategies, identify through practical experience what appears to consistently work well, and share these novel concepts with other interrogators. If a central clearinghouse for new interrogation tactics, techniques, and procedures existed
	— a means of capturing and widely disseminating the experience and insights of operators in the field — it is quite probable that the art of interrogation would currently be taught and practiced in a significantly different and far more effective fashion.		— a means of capturing and widely disseminating the experience and insights of operators in the field — it is quite probable that the art of interrogation would currently be taught and practiced in a significantly different and far more effective fashion.
	84 85
			82 KUBARK, 67.
			83 The author refers to this approach as “The Exquisite Ruse,” and has used it with great effect in interrogation operations conducted during Operations JUST CAUSE, DESERT STORM, and IRAQI FREEDOM.

			84 85

	=== The Need to Communicate ===		=== The Need to Communicate ===
Line 513:		Line 510:

	88 KUBARK, 76.		88 KUBARK, 76.


	== The Regression Factor: The Fundamental Objective of Coercive Methodology ==		== The Regression Factor: The Fundamental Objective of Coercive Methodology ==

AdminKB42: /* The All-Seeing Eye */

2025-08-17T20:35:39Z

The All-Seeing Eye

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:35, 17 August 2025
Line 463:		Line 463:
	81 KUBARK, 70.		81 KUBARK, 70.

	== The All-Seeing Eye ==		=== The All-Seeing Eye ===
	The interrogator who already knows part of the story explains to the source that the purpose of the questioning is not to gain information; the interrogator knows everything already. His real purpose is to test the sincerity (reliability, honor, etc.) of the source. The interrogator then asks a few questions to which he knows the answers. If the subject lies, he is informed firmly and dispassionately that he has lied. By skilled manipulation of the known, the questioner can convince a naïve subject that all his secrets are out and that further resistance would be not only pointless but dangerous.82		The interrogator who already knows part of the story explains to the source that the purpose of the questioning is not to gain information; the interrogator knows everything already. His real purpose is to test the sincerity (reliability, honor, etc.) of the source. The interrogator then asks a few questions to which he knows the answers. If the subject lies, he is informed firmly and dispassionately that he has lied. By skilled manipulation of the known, the questioner can convince a naïve subject that all his secrets are out and that further resistance would be not only pointless but dangerous.82