A four-star general would need to approve the use of the separation tactic to ensure it was not abused, Kimmons added.
Disclosing the Army's techniques was controversial within the Pentagon, and Kimmons acknowledged that the military had wrestled with the idea of keeping some of them secret. But he said the reality was that the interrogation techniques were not the kind of secret that could be kept forever.
"Even classified techniques, once you use them on the battlefield over time, become increasingly known to your enemies, some of whom are going to be released in due course," Kimmons said Wednesday.
For the CIA, immersed in a culture of secrecy, the sort of disclosure the Army made this week is anathema.
Agency officials believe that talking about what methods are allowed or not allowed undercuts their ability to question terrorists.
Administration officials acknowledged Thursday that as long as the CIA did not follow the Pentagon lead and disclose its methods, questions would persist.
"The fact that they are not disclosing means there is going to be skepticism," said an official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of government rules.
Nonetheless, the CIA is better equipped to seek intelligence from difficult suspects, others said.
"With the CIA, you are only talking about a narrow group," the senior administration official said. "You don't have a problem of techniques falling in the hands of an interrogator who doesn't have a lot of training."
But Musa, the Amnesty lawyer, said several CIA contractors had been accused of beating detainees to death, and there was little evidence that the agency's interrogators could be trusted with tougher tactics.
"Anytime anyone has danced up to the line," she said, "they have crossed over it."
julian.barnes@latimes.com
Times staff writer Greg Miller contributed to this report from Washington.
