U.N. Official Faults U.S. Detentions

The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights yesterday attacked the use of severe interrogation tactics by C.I.A. officers, and the C.I.A.'s practice of "rendering" prisoners to third countries that engage in torture:

U.N. Official Faults U.S. Detentions: "Arbour's statement said that the 'absolute ban on torture, a cornerstone of the international human rights edifice, is under attack. The principle once believed to be unassailable -- the inherent right to physical integrity and dignity of person -- is becoming a casualty of the so-called 'war on terrorism.'

John R. Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, criticized Arbour, calling it 'inappropriate' for her to choose a Human Rights Day celebration to criticize the United States instead of such rights abusers as Burma, Cuba and Zimbabwe. He also warned that it would undercut his efforts to negotiate formation of a new human rights council that would exclude countries with bad rights records."

No, Mr. Bolton, it is entirely appropriate to call out the U.S. on Human Rights Day. This country used to be considered a leader in recognizing and protecting the value and dignity off the individual. Now, our leaders brazenly argue that torture, indefinite detention, and show trials are acceptable in this post-9/11 world. If the United States sends that message, who will have the moral authority to make demands of Burma, Cuba, and Zimbabwe? Being a practitioner of torture 'lite' is not a moral high ground.

Mr. Bolton, if we end up being alone on this "new human rights council," it won't be because of Arbour or Chirac or Merkel. It will be because you and your Administration have undercut our reputation, by your words and actions. And speaking of that council, if it ever gets off the ground I'll be very interested to see which of our remaining allies are on it -- maybe Russia? maybe Saudi Arabia? Any of them practice torture?