I assume the suicide option is an option for the prospective torturee - not for the agency.
If the pill causes pain, that's an unwanted side-effect. It's unlikely to be as painful as the actions of your torturer, whose goal is to cause as much pain as possible, and who may also want to stretch it out for weeks. And there's a good chance your torturer will kill you anyway.
Sometimes torture is used for punishment or repression, not to obtain information. Arguably that's always the purpose; "information" obtained through torture isn't very reliable.
The psychological pain (weight) of even carrying such a suicide pill/coin as part of your mission pack-out. Perhaps the person has a strong Judeo-Christian belief that God finds suicide and self-harm abhorrent. Or "Dr. Ellie Arroway"-non religious beliefs of the same. Maybe it's a big question mark how those beliefs are tested in the moment of being tortured. Maybe nobody involved likes the option, but it's there because we do not know about that moment, or what happens after we die, but we do know how utterly horrifyingly people can behave in war.
Plus, the last thing the State would want is for their asset to have second thoughts about taking the suicide pill─“They may torture me soon and it will probably be extremely painful... but the pill will certainly be extremely painful! Maybe I should risk it”
First, if they are detained, they will be strip searched long before any torture takes place. You either take it early or not at all - odds are everything will be taken away.
Second, the last thing you want in such situation is ambiguity - people don't just commit suicide willy-nilly. Instructions must be very clear.
Thirdly, either the agent has secret information that cannot be divulged, or they don't. This is known upfront before the mission. Any agent at high risk of capture is kept away from sensitive information, to minimise possible damage. Every spy and reconnaissance organisation work like that. As soon as agent is captured, damage control is put in place.
Lastly, orders to commit suicide are not legally possible.
>First, if they are detained, they will be strip searched long before any torture takes place. You either take it early or not at all - odds are everything will be taken away.
Aleksandr Ogorodnik was able to get the KGB to give him his pen, which had a suicide pill in it, to write his confession.
"If you do not comply with our request for your suicide, we cannot guarantee the safety of your children, Samantha, currently in 3rd grade in Glaveston Primary, and John, named after your father, who is a star quarterback on Washington High's team. We trust you do what is necessary."
This is over the top even for the CIA, but they were definitely capable of being monsters. In the case of Gary Powers the agency fought hard to avoid a prisoner exchange and even internally claimed he had defected intentionally. His wife was even committed to a psychiatric institution: not so much to threaten Powers, but just to keep her from embarrassing the agency with her drinking. Ultimately they went ahead with the exchange partly out of fear that Powers would learn what they’d done to his wife.
Imagine joining a government agency to protect your country and your family... And the government not only betrays you personally but also threatens your wife and children.
Surely even the CIA has limits on the atrocities they are willing to commit?
> Lastly, orders to commit suicide are not legally possible.
Obviously you don’t order it. You play up the cruelty of the enemy tortourers. This probably is not hard, every secret service probably have enough nightmare fuel on hand to do if they want to. And then you provide the means and let your agent know they can use it uppon capture.
Were the agents told that the death will be painful? I believe that organization such as the CIA would rather lie to its own agents to make sure they would poison themselves.
