Torture is an international crime...

In an op-ed in today's Washington Post, John Bolton, a former US ambassador to the United Nations during the Bush administration, takes President Obama to task for not doing his utmost to prevent foreign nations from launching judicial investigations against former Bush officials suspected of taking part in the administation's "enhanced interrogation techniques" or torture, program.
The irony here is that the Spanish investigation led by Magistrate Baltasar Garzon (who in the past indicted former Chilean president Pinochet) targeting six administration lawyers (other similar efforts are taking place in Germany) would have never been initiated, had the US launched its own...
As a signatory to the UN Convention Against Torture, it is the US government's legal responsibility to treat all detainees humanely, and to investigate any potential violation of the treaty's provisions.
If, for whatever reason, it fails to do so, then other nations must intervene. Martin Scheinin, the UN special investigator for human rights and counterterrorism, told the Washington Post:"torture is an international crime irrespective of the place where it is committed. Other countries have an obligation to investigate. This may be something that will be haunting CIA officials, or Justice Department officials, or the vice president, for the rest of their lives".
Mr Bolton claims that the real objective of the foreign investigations is to "intimidate US officials into refraining from making hard but necessary decisions to protect our national security".
No one, naturally, is demanding that the US cease taking those measures it deems necessary to protect itself.
I would argue that the only objective here is to compel those nations that have signed the UN Convention to abide by their treaty obligations, including the US.
The US can implement whatever policies it wishes, as long as they are legal!
Furthermore, what support and ligitimacy can the US possible derive from policies that violate international law?
Will not such violations encourage a host of other nations to follow suit, arguing that they are only following America's lead?
US leadership is much needed in many parts of the world, in order to help resolve a host of intractable problems. Yet, now that it is tainted, how effective can US policy be, particularly in the Middle East and Asia?
Contrary to what Mr Bolton further asserts, the issue at hand is not about "criminalizing policy disagreements", but prosecuting violations of international, but also US law.
This is a prerequisite to reestablishing US credibility abroad, as well as its moral standing.
One cannot castigate the human rights record of other nations, no matter how brazen the violations, or insist that they respect international law, if one ignores one's own failings...

Mr Obama is making considerable efforts to reintroduce America to the rest of the world, after eight years of Bush-Cheney bravado (Thomas P.M. Barnett pithily described their grand strategy in his great new book, Great Powers: America and the World after Bush, as "kicking ass and taking names", p.235).
His good faith and standing can only be butressed if he decides to confront the US torture program head on, and prosecute those who broke the law...