U.S. needs to completely renounce torture

As Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's visit to Europe has demonstrated, the controversy over torture is not merely a debate over how best to protect the civilized world against the cruel and unconventional forces of terrorism; it is a question of how the civilized world ought to define itself.

Clearly, a nation that condones torturing prisoners to extract information is abdicating a measure of its own claim to a high moral ground. It cannot then be taken seriously when it speaks about the need for nations to respect freedom, liberty and basic human rights.

As Rice learned, this nation's traditional European allies want to believe the United States still occupies that high moral ground. Her statements in Europe, which modified the Bush administration's previous statements and gave assurances that American forces would honor both the U.S. Constitution and international treaties on torture, were readily received by the NATO secretary general and others. This was so even though she qualified her remarks by saying abuses may still take place, but that they would be investigated.

That last statement seemed aimed at the terrorists themselves, planting enough doubt in their minds that the mere threat of torture might force them to release information.

But diplomatic statements are one thing. The rule of law, on the other hand, allows for no such wiggle room. While Rice was in Europe, Congress was hashing out the details of a bill sponsored by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., that specifically would outlaw the mistreatment of enemy combatants held by the United States. Despite his earlier threats of a veto, President Bush needs to sign this bill when it reaches his desk. The health of the nation's reputation demands it.

The administration had sought to specifically exempt the CIA from the law. McCain has held firm against that, with apparent widespread support from Republicans and Democrats in both houses.

The war on terror is being fought on two fronts. One concerns national security and is illustrated by the attacks of 9/11 and later in Spain and Britain. It also includes military efforts to replace brutal regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq with republics that value freedom. The other front involves the hearts and minds of people worldwide. Much of the world saw the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as unnecessary. It becomes much harder to convince them of this nation's noble intentions if the U.S. government appears to condone torture in any degree.

That was made clear last week when Britain's highest court ruled that evidence obtained through torture would no longer be admissible in that nation's tribunals — a decision made with disparaging references to recent U.S. policies concerning detainees.

The war on terror is indeed a struggle for civilization and freedom. But if the forces of civilization adopt uncivilized practices in order to win, victory will be meaningless.