The prison at Guantanamo Bay has become a symbolic eyesore on an increasingly unpopular war, especially after the recent suicides of three detanees. But much as the war isn't something we can just stop, Gitmo won't simply go away. While the courts work at charting this new legal territory, Gitmo continues its high-profile tightwire act, balancing national security against world opinion. But a recent Washington Post editorial offers a salient and chilling point--while we have our anxious eyes fixed on Guantanamo, we may well be missing the larger point.

With its state-of-the-art prison, good medical care, legal representation, and clear regulations in place, Gitmo is now "by far the most comfortable and legally accountable detention facility maintained by the United States for foreign prisoners."

However, "some 500 detainees held by the United States at the Bagram prison in Afghanistan live in far harsher conditions and have fewer rights..." and "Bagram's inmates are better off than the prisoners -- believed to number in the dozens -- held in secret CIA facilities. They have effectively disappeared, like the victims of a Third World dictatorship; they have never been registered with the International Red Cross, provided with a legal review of their cases or allowed to communicate with the outside world."

So, ironically, "the United States' treatment of its foreign detainees would improve enormously if all the prisoners it holds were transferred to Guantanamo."

A friend who recently visited Gitmo wrote that his impression of the prison was very positive--I have no reason to doubt him. There's also no reason to doubt the claims that many of the detainees held at Gitmo are very dangerous. What concerns me is the legal precedent we've set--we've deviated from both Constitutional law and the Geneva Conventions in creating Gitmo and these European secret prisons. Some argue it's necessary because of the new kind of war we're fighting. They argue that the detainees aren't owed the same kind of due process reserved for U.S. citizens. Perhaps they're right. But wasn't the original intent of due process to pertain to all? We are, ultimately, a nation of laws.

Even if all the detainees in all the prisons are being treated humanely, where do we fall within the law? Our most shining virtue and our example to the world has always been our adherence to the law. When we were attacked on 9/11, did our trust in our own legal system fail? Did we suddenly need to deviate from 300 years of documented, analytical thought?

So I agree with the Post editorial that we should quickly find a way to legally deal with the detainees at our foreign prisons, and that we should be held accountable to the world for what we do in these places.