'We do not torture'.

Byline: The Register-Guard

Thirty-seven days after declaring at a news conference in Panama that "we do not torture," President Bush finally did what the world was waiting for: He took action to back up his words.

By accepting Sen. John McCain's call for a law banning cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners in U.S. custody, Bush on Thursday began extricating himself and the nation from a series of shameful contradictions.

If "we do not torture," why was the president threatening to veto any bill containing McCain's ban on prisoner abuse? Why did Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testify during his confirmation hearings that waterboarding - a classic torture method developed during the Spanish Inquisition - "might ... be permissible in certain circum- stances''?

Why did Vice President Dick Cheney argue so vehemently to exempt the CIA from the ban on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of prisoners? Why has a network of secret foreign prisons been developed if not to ensure that CIA interrogations there are beyond the reach of U.S. law?

The practical effect of Bush's course correction is unclear, but the symbolic significance is enormous. It reassures skeptical Americans and Europeans that the Bush administration is serious about reversing the widespread perception that it says one thing but does another with respect to prisoners captured in the war on terror. In an administration infamous for its convoluted legal justifications of harsh interrogation tactics, Bush's support for McCain's unequivocal ban speaks volumes.

McCain's insistence that the ban had to apply to the CIA and other civilian interrogators was crucial to its credibility. But that rankled the White House, and particularly Che- ney. Both sides refused to budge for more than a month.

McCain attached his ban on prisoner abuse to a must-pass $435 billion defense spending bill that provides $50 billion for the Iraq war. The amendment passed 90-9 in the Senate and 308-122 in a nonbinding vote in the House. Following the House vote on Wednesday, the administration could read the handwriting on the wall.

The deadlock was broken Thursday when the White House and McCain agreed to bring the interrogation amendment into conformity with the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which says that those accused of violating interrogation rules can defend themselves if a reasonable person could have concluded that they were following lawful orders.

The amendment flatly prohibits "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" of anyone in U.S. government custody, regardless of where they are held. It provides no immunity from civil or criminal prosecution for those who violate the standards. It also requires that all prisoner interrogations follow procedures in the Army Field Man- ual.

Unfortunately, there's still room for disagreement on what constitutes cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. In fact, the Army is working on a new classified addendum to the field manual that reportedly allows more stress-inducing methods than the current version.

But the McCain amendment changes the interrogation environment 180 degrees from previous Bush administration practice. Instead of legal hair-splitting to justify abhorrent interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, mock executions, sexual humiliation and cold cells, U.S. interrogators will know the law demands humane treatment of all prisoners.

It's the kind of clarity military and intelligence personnel have been clamoring for since the abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay came to light in 2004. Finally, Americans can once again proclaim to the world that our treatment of prisoners is based on the belief that torture isn't wrong because it's illegal; torture is illegal because it's wrong.