Editorial: Cruel and unusual policy

Thursday, June 8, 2006 | 7:32 a.m.

The Pentagon is poised to omit from its new policies the Geneva Conventions provisions that ban "humiliating and degrading treatment" of those detained and interrogated by the U.S. military.

According to the Los Angeles Times, although no final decision has been made, Pentagon officials propose to omit the previous directive that says the military will "comply with the principles, spirit and intent" of the Geneva Conventions' Article 3 in its treatment of detainees. Pentagon officials say adhering to those standards will make it too easy for al-Qaida members to withhold information from interrogators, so they favor a new Army Field Manual that allows harsher treatment of those considered unlawful combatants, such as terrorism suspects.

The policy has been under debate and revision for more than a year. The State Department opposes removal of the Geneva standards, as do senators who say the proposed directive blatantly contradicts the torture ban championed by Republican Sen. John McCain - a former prisoner of war in Vietnam - who last year persuaded Congress to ban cruel treatment and torture of military detainees.

One government source told the Times that "it was a massive mistake to have withdrawn from Geneva. By backing away, you weaken the proposition that this is the baseline provision that is binding to all nations."

That is what proponents of this substandard proposed standard are either missing or ignoring. Adherence to the Geneva Conventions covers a broader scope than U.S. interests in the Iraq war or its fight against terrorism.

If the United States refuses to embrace Geneva bans on cruel and degrading treatment of detainees, what's to prevent other nations from following suit - including those who capture U.S. soldiers? The United States should be a leader in promoting international human rights, not setting a bad example.