Rice states limits on grilling of suspects

WASHINGTON -- American interrogators around the world may not use cruel, inhuman, or degrading techniques when questioning suspected terrorists, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced yesterday in what appeared to be a significant policy shift for the Bush administration.

''As a matter of US policy, the United States' obligations under the [United Nations Convention Against Torture], which prohibits cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment -- those obligations extend to US personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the United States or outside of the United States," Rice told reporters during a visit to the Ukraine.

Although President Bush has repeatedly insisted that ''we do not torture," his administration has also contended that the Convention Against Torture only restricts US interrogators inside the country. Human rights organizations have blamed that interpretation for detainee abuse scandals in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the US military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan yesterday said Rice's statement reflected ''existing policy," but deflected questions on whether it represented a change.

The administration has been resisting moves in Congress to limit harsh interrogation techniques outside the United States. Bush had threatened to use his first veto against any bill enacting a sweeping ban on harsh interrogation techniques, and Vice President Dick Cheney has personally lobbied Congress to exempt CIA interrogators from any limits.

Rice's announcement yesterday, during a European tour in which she has been dogged by criticism over US policies concerning the treatment of prisoners, signaled that the administration may have decided to retreat from its insistence that it has and should maintain the legal authority to use aggressive interrogation techniques against overseas prisoners.

The secretary of state's comments were greeted with enthusiasm by members of Congress who favor tightening interrogation rules. Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, called them ''a reversal of the administration's position."

''It is an important and very welcome change from their previous position, which I believe has cost us dearly in the world and does not reflect our nation's laws or our values," Levin said.

But human rights activists were wary. Tom Malinowski, Washington policy director of Human Rights Watch, said Rice's statement was confusing because she spoke of the Convention Against Torture restrictions both in terms of a ''policy" choice -- which could be changed again -- and an ''obligation."

''I want someone to tell me that they now recognize that there is a legal obligation not to engage in cruel treatment of non-US citizens overseas," he said. ''If they can put it that clearly, then we'd know that it is a significant policy shift. If that's what this means it would be very, very welcome."

Analysts also said the substance of the policy will depend on how the administration defines ''cruel, inhuman, or degrading" techniques. A narrow interpretation, they said, could allow the administration to claim to be in compliance with its treaty obligations while engaging in abusive tactics.

In particular, activists said any meaningful definition of ''cruel, inhuman, or degrading" techniques should forbid shackling prisoners in painful positions, subjecting them to extremely cold cells, depriving them of sleep for long periods, threatening them with dogs, and ''water-boarding," a technique which simulates drowning.

London-based Amnesty International warned that Rice's words were not a ''major concession," urging Congress to make clear that overseas detainees must be treated humanely.

In October, the Senate voted 90-9 to approve a proposal by Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, that would make it explicitly illegal for American officials to use ''cruel, inhuman, or degrading" techniques on prisoners anywhere in the world.

The measure has stalled in the House because of stiff resistance from the Bush administration, which says it must preserve its flexibility in obtaining information from suspected terrorists.

Bush's national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, has been negotiating with McCain over ways to soften the impact of the amendment, but McCain has refused to alter the text.

McCain's spokeswoman expressed caution yesterday in assessing Rice's announcement, saying only that ''nothing has been resolved so far."

Elisa Massimino, the Washington director of Human Rights First, said the meaning of Rice's statement hinges on whether specific techniques, such as water-boarding, would be barred under the policy.

''The only way to know what it means is to get a straight answer to the question 'Can a CIA interrogator subject an alien detainee abroad to mock drowning consistent with this policy?' " she said. ''If the answer is 'yes,' then nothing has changed. If the answer is 'no,' then the objection to the McCain amendment should be withdrawn."

The Bush administration has long been cryptic about its policy toward the treatment of overseas prisoners. President Bush and his spokesman have declared that the United States does not torture prisoners and complies with the Convention Against Torture.

However, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has said that the Convention Against Torture treaty only has force on domestic soil, where the US Constitution applies.

''The Department of Justice has concluded there is no legal prohibition under the Convention Against Torture on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment with respect to aliens overseas," Gonzales wrote in response to Senate questions during his confirmation hearings last January.

Legal scholars were nearly universal in condemning Gonzales's interpretation as wrong, and Gonzales's statements prompted McCain, who survived torture as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, to introduce his bill banning cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of prisoners anywhere in the world.

Administration spokesmen in Washington yesterday sidestepped requests that they clarify what Rice's announcement meant and whether it was something entirely new.

McClellan portrayed Rice's comments as a ''comprehensive" description of ''existing policy," but did not answer a question about how long it had been ''existing policy."

At the State Department, deputy spokesman Adam Ereli also said Rice was stating the ''existing policy." Asked how long it had been the US policy, he said ''At least since the secretary said it."