Martial Law? Military Experience, International Law, and Support for Torture

Abstract

A large body of work points to diverging civil–military views on the initial decision to use force, yet there is little sense if similar differences hold over appropriate conduct in the midst of armed conflict. The rise of international laws governing behavior during war has similarly raised the question of whether these rules can shape the beliefs of various domestic actors. This paper seeks to address both gaps in the literature by leveraging the use of experiments embedded in a pair of US national surveys to examine the impact of international law and military experience on individual attitudes toward torture. The results show veterans are significantly more likely to support torture compared to civilians without any prior military background. International law further reduces civilian support for torture, while veterans are largely unaffected by general legal appeals. However, when facing highly precise rules, or where the threat of punishment is delegated to third parties, more legalized agreements can significantly reduce veteran support for torture. The results have implications for the study of institutional design, the differential effects of legal norms on nonstate actors, and the potential for greater awareness of the laws of war to influence attitudes toward wartime violence.

Violence on Many Sides: Framing Effects on Protest and Support for Repression

“…13 We also expect variation in the military service variable even under Israel's compulsory military service laws, since there are notable exceptions to service. Military service predicts attitudes toward the use of force (Wallace 2014). We also collect data on respondents' primary news source, including television, print, online, radio or podcasts.…”

A Nationalist Backlash to International Refugee Law: Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Turkey

“…These studies have generally shown that the legal component of international human rights and humanitarian law violations can shift popular opinion. That is, respondents who are told about an immoral state practice are significantly less likely to support that practice (or more likely to support action to prevent it) if they are also told that the practice violates international law (Wallace 2013(Wallace , 2014Chilton 2014). These findings are remarkable in their implication that international law qua law can have an observable, normative pull on the electorate.…”

“…This article contributes to at least two different bodies of research. First, we add to the growing experimental literature on the effect of international law on popular opinion (Tomz 2008;Wallace 2013Wallace , 2014Chilton 2014). These studies have generally found that respondents are less likely to support policies that violate international law, suggesting that they value international law qua law.…”

A Nationalist Backlash to International Refugee Law: Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Turkey

“…This article contributes to at least two different bodies of research. First, we add to the growing experimental literature on the effect of international law on popular opinion (Tomz 2008; Wallace 2013, 2014; Chilton 2014). These studies have generally found that respondents are less likely to support policies that violate international law, suggesting that they value international law qua law.…”