1 Dep’t of Defense Directive 2310.01E, The Department of Defense Detainee Program (Sept. 5, 2006), at <http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/.

2 At <http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm2-22-3.pdf; see <http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.phpPstory_id_key=9524; Smith, R. Jeffrey, GOP Senators Differ with President on Military Trials, Wash. Post, Sept. 6, 2006, at A3 Google Scholar; Zernike, Kate, Proposal fir New Tribunals fir Terror Suspects Would Hew to the First Series, N.Y. Times, Sept. 7, 2006, at A21.Google Scholar

3 Schmitt, Eric, New Army Rules May Snarl Talks with McCain on Detainee Issue, N.Y. Times, Dec, 14, 2005, at A1.Google Scholar

4 The announcement of the new field manual on the army’s Web site, at <http://www4.army.mil/news/article.php?story=9525, states that the “manual has been published in the interest of full transparency, and does not bear ‘For Official Use Only’ markings.” Nevertheless, as of this writing (mid-September 2006), the copy of the field manual linked to the announcement retains such markings.

5 The directive includes the text of Common Article 3 as an enclosure.

6 See Crook, John R., Contemporary Practice of the United States, 99 AJIL 706 (2005).Google Scholar

7 White, Josh, New Rules of Interrogation Forbid Use of Harsh Tactics, Wash. Post, Sept. 7, 2006, at A1 Google Scholar; White, Josh, New Army Manual Recalls Abuse, Wash. Post, Sept. 9, 2006, at A8.Google Scholar

8 White, Josh, Military Lawyers Say Tactics Broke Rules,, Wash. Post, Mar. 16, 2006, at A13 Google Scholar Degrading America’s Image (Editorial), N.Y. Times, June 6, 2006, at A22; Eric, Schmitt, Pentagon Rethinking Manual with Interrogation Methods, N.Y. Times, June 14, 2006, at A19.Google Scholar