The recent controversy over torture has reminded me of my only visit to Israel, about a decade ago. I'd been doing some writing work for a research group called MAPS (the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies). Their mission is to get government approval for the constructive, therapeutic use of substances like LSD, psilocybin, and MDMA (commonly known as "ecstasy"). Rick Doblin, the founder and president of MAPS, invited me to come to Israel, where just about everybody who was anybody in the world of MDMA research would be meeting for a few days at the Dead Sea Hyatt to compare notes and try to arrive at a consensus on the risks and potential benefits of MDMA-based therapy.
I was surprised to see that the Israeli military were very interested in supporting MDMA research. They said they wanted to investigate using MDMA to help their soldiers recover from PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder). Since the most salient quality of MDMA is its powerful ability to dramatically reduce fear while increasing the ability to bond emotionally, it seemed an ideal adjunct to this sort of therapy. (A Spanish psychologist I met there was using MDMA in psychotherapy with women who'd suffered sexual abuse, with promising results. Until it was prohibited in the 1980s, psychologists had treated hundreds of patients successfully, using MDMA to reduce anxiety and build rapport.)
But then I started to wonder….
Imagine you've got a prisoner under interrogation. Sure, you could take the Cheney/Pinochet medieval approach: attach electrodes to his testicles, slam his head into a wall, lock him in a coffin for hours, threaten his family, and so on. But as the Israeli army knows all too well, these techniques only work well on TV and in the fevered imaginations of small men with more power than intelligence. Any serious interrogator will tell you (as they've been telling Congress recently) that what really works is building rapport and trust, getting the prisoner to look at the situation from a different perspective. What could be better for this than MDMA?
[Added] To be clear, I'm not advocating the use of MDMA or any other substance in such situations, but I think it's worth raising the questions that come to mind. Assuming that dosage levels associated with reduced fear and increased openness to emotional connection are virtually non-toxic, as seems to be the case, what, precisely would be the basis of ethical/legal prohibition? Is it illegal to offer a prisoner a beer to loosen him up? If so, how is MDMA any different?
Imagine: The prisoner is angry and terrified – faced with brutal interrogators. Then an authoritative officer shows up one day, incensed at the abuse the prisoner has been subjected to. He reprimands the interrogators (in the hearing of the prisoner, who's been dosed with some MDMA that morning). He "saves" the prisoner, in effect, and becomes his only friend in a very harsh world.
I'm not qualified to opine on the ethics or legality, but I'd bet that 100 micrograms of persuasion is worth more than 100 sessions of water-boarding in terms of extracting information; a hit of X more effective than a smack in the face. Maybe it's time for interrogation methods to move from the 15th century to the 21st?
