Resilience, Peace and Security

America is more accepting of torture than most other countries

An Albanian holds up a U.S. flag as President George W. Bush's motorcade passes through central Tirana central Tirana June 10, 2007. Bush said on Sunday the United Nations should grant independence quickly to the breakaway Serbian province of Kosovo, and if Russia continued to block it the West would act.REUTERS/Damir Sagolj    (ALBANIA) - RTR1QNTJ

Nearly half of Americans see torture as an acceptable part of war Image: REUTERS/Damir Sagolj

Rosamond Hutt
Senior Writer, Forum Agenda
Our Impact
What's the World Economic Forum doing to accelerate action on Resilience, Peace and Security?
The Big Picture
Explore and monitor how United States is affecting economies, industries and global issues
A hand holding a looking glass by a lake
Crowdsource Innovation
Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale
Stay up to date:

United States

Americans’ attitudes towards torture have hardened over the past decade and a half, according to a new global survey of public views on war.

Nearly half (46%) of Americans polled by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) think it is acceptable to torture captured enemy combatants “to obtain important military information”. And 33% believe that torture is a “part of war”.

Only Nigerians (70%) and Israelis (50%) were more comfortable than Americans with the idea of torturing enemy fighters.

 Views on torture
Image: ICRC

When the ICRC carried out its last People on War survey in 1999, 65% of Americans did not believe it was acceptable to torture captured enemy fighters.

For this year’s survey, conducted between June and September, the ICRC gauged the views of 17,000 people in 16 countries on the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which set out how civilians and prisoners should be treated during times of conflict.

Countries surveyed included the permanent five (P5) members of the UN Security Council – the US, Russia, China, Britain and France – plus Switzerland, as well as nations suffering conflict such as Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq, Ukraine and South Sudan.

The findings suggest that people in war-ravaged countries were more likely to respond humanely to questions on the laws of war. For example, only 14% of Ukrainians and 16% of Afghans thought torture was “part of war".

Overall, more than a third (36%) of respondents believe that captured enemy fighters could be tortured. Just under half thought the practice was unacceptable, compared with two thirds in the 1999 survey.

"We all need to redraw a line in the sand: torture in any form is forbidden," ICRC President Peter Maurer said in a statement. "We demonize our enemies at our own peril. Even in war, everyone deserves to be treated humanely."

The research points to a rift between the P5 countries and the other nations surveyed over their views on international humanitarian law. 78% of people living in countries affected by war said it was wrong to attack enemy fighters in populated areas, knowing that civilians would be killed. In P5 countries and Switzerland, only half of respondents said it was wrong, and just 36% in the US.

 Survey 2
Image: ICRC

In addition, 26% of people in P5 countries thought depriving the civilian population of essentials like food, water and medicine to weaken the enemy was just “part of war”, compared with 14% in countries affected by conflict.

More than eight out of 10 of all those surveyed thought it was wrong to attack hospitals, ambulances and healthcare workers to weaken the enemy. In wartorn countries, this figure was 89% (100% in Yemen), 79% in P5 countries and Switzerland, and 76% in the United States.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

Sign up for free

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Related topics:
Resilience, Peace and SecurityCivil Society
World Economic Forum logo
Global Agenda

The Agenda Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

Subscribe today

You can unsubscribe at any time using the link in our emails. For more details, review our privacy policy.

Why small island states need scaled finance and amplified action

Jorge Moreira da Silva

May 29, 2024

About Us



Partners & Members

  • Join Us

Language Editions

Privacy Policy & Terms of Service

© 2024 World Economic Forum