Editorial: Banning brutal interrogations

Monday, Dec. 19, 2005 | 8:44 a.m.

Bush administration's long-overdue acceptance of a ban on torture comes with compromise and guarded relief

President Bush's acceptance of Sen. John McCain's amendment to ban torture of foreign terrorist suspects should be viewed with measured relief.

Certainly, we are glad that America's image may slowly be cleansed of the stain left by reports of harsh treatment of prisoners at the U.S.-operated Abu Ghraib facility in Iraq and the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It is difficult to promote America's values and democracy as the high road when widespread reports say the U.S. leadership regularly ignores international rules banning cruel treatment of foreign detainees and performs these deeds in secret overseas prisons.

But even though the Senate and House already had approved McCain's proposal, which is an amendment to the overall defense spending bill, McCain appeased Bush and a handful of Republican critics Thursday by adding a compromise. It allows CIA agents and other civilian interrogators who are accused of breaking the ban the right to claim they had a reasonable belief that they were obeying a legal order -- a defense currently extended only to members of the U.S. military.

And we shouldn't forget that last week's about-face came from the same Bush administration that sidestepped the rules to begin with. After the Sept. 11 attacks, administration lawyers legalized the cruel treatment of war detainees with memos declaring that the United Nations Convention Against Torture treaty, which bars torture, applies only on domestic soil.

The fact is, McCain didn't really need Bush's approval. The Arizona Republican -- a former Navy pilot who was detained and tortured in a North Vietnamese prison camp for more than five years -- had enough votes in both the House and Senate to override the veto Bush had threatened to issue if the defense bill included McCain's amendment. The Senate had passed McCain's amendment 90 to 9 in October, and the House supported it with a nonbinding resolution 308 to 122 on Wednesday.

With his own public approval ratings in the pits and public support for the war in Iraq fading, Bush had nothing to gain with a veto. It wouldn't exactly improve the score at home or abroad. The recent U.S. policy on brutal interrogation techniques has always been a no-win proposition. But the Bush administration hasn't been adept at recognizing that.