Treating the Captured with Consideration - Effective Means of Subversion?

Factual Questions
1

I was skimming through Mao’s On Guerrilla Warfare, when I came upon a bit that, considering all the hub-bub concerning the US usage of and political battle over torture, seemed awfully pertinent.

This is not intended to inspire a debate on whether torture works or not, or whether a deontological or utilitarian position should be taken.

Have there been any studies or cases wherein treating POWs, “enemy combatants,” or what have you, not just as such, but with a degree of compassion or consideration has been evaluated in some way? Does this yield more info, or more accurate info, then typical interrogation? Do we catch more flies with honey than vinegar?

2

I don’t know of a study, per se. But in ancient times, many of the most successful despots were ones who, novelly, did not kill all their enemies, rape their women, steal all their possessions and allow captives to practice their own culture and religion to some degree. People forced to fight to the death have nothing to lose.

3

Genghis Kahn seemed to practice a version of it as told by this account:

Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World (Hardcover)
by Jack Weatherford
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0609610627/104-9644978-9911917?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance

Sorry, couldn’t make the link work.