The Washington Post Editorial Board today urged President Bush to close the U.S. prison at Gitmo and seek another way to hold suspected terrorists. The overall message is a welcome one as the Post recognizes that the prison camp at Gitmo has been a public image disaster for the U.S. However, I am not 100% convinced that the second suggestion from the editorial, that the President should seek to create an administrative system to hold suspects, is as wise.

While the WP is correct when it suggests that the methodology for trying suspects in Israel and the U.K. is a step above current U.S. practice and would be an improvement if enacted in the U.S., the lack of confidence in the overall U.S. governmental approach to terror cases makes adoption of an administrative system look like a risky proposition.

In recent years too many high ranking Bush Administration figures have made questionable choices regarding the detention of suspected terrorists. Additionally there is still evidence that the administration is allowing the use of illegal tactics in the interrogation arena. These two issues make it hard to defend an administrative system to try suspected terrorists.

I will concede that if the next U.S. administration agrees to be more judicious in its approach to the arrest of suspected terrorists and is willing to end the use of torture and other illegal interrogation approaches, Congress should look at innovative approaches to trying terrorists that could be based systems like the one used until recently in the U.K.