"We found no link between approved interrogation techniques and detainee abuse," said the review carried out by Vice Admiral Albert Church.

The United States faced international condemnation over pictures of sexual humiliation of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad in late 2003.

"Even in the absence of a precise definition of 'humane treatment,' it is clear that none of the pictured abuses at Abu Ghraib bear any resemblance to approved policies at any level, in any theater," the report said.

In Iraq, "interrogators clearly understood that abusive practices and techniques -- such as physical assault, sexual humiliation, terrorizing detainees with unmuzzled dogs, or threats of torture or death -- were at all times prohibited," the report said.

The report cited "a breakdown of good order and discipline in some units" and a failure by interrogators to understand the "cultural and religious sensitivities" of imprisoned detainees.

It also said some abuse was a result of the "volatile" nature of wartime interrogation, during which "service members find themselves in dangerous situations, apprehending individuals who may be responsible for the death or serious injury of fellow service members."

Nevertheless, the report concluded "the vast majority of detainees held by the US in the global war on terror have been treated humanely."

Church's report said that as of September, 2004, there were 71 substantiated cases of abuse involving 121 detainees, six of whom had died. But it added that 130 other cases, including some which led to deaths, were still being investigated.

The report said eight of the 71 cases were at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp for war on terror detainees in Cuba. Three cases, including one death, were in Afghanistan and the remaining 60 cases, including five deaths, were in Iraq.

As of September 2004, disciplinary action had been taken against 115 service members, with 36 facing courts-martial, the report said.

A 21-page unclassified version of the report was released and Church defended US military action before the Senate Armed Services committee.

Human rights groups were quick to point, however, out what they called substantial shortcomings in the latest of a series of inquiries.

"One would have hoped for a much more thorough investigation," said Avi Cover, an official with the New York-based Human Rights First, joined the American Civil Liberties Union this month in filing a lawsuit against Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld alleging his "direct responsibility" for illegal torture and abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Cover said there were "striking omissions" in Church's investigation. "He didn't interview detainees. He didn't interview Ambassador Paul Bremer" the former civilian overseer of Iraq."

Carl Levin, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, dismissed the document as a whitewash.

"These are failures of command at high levels," he said. "This failure of accountability of senior leaders sends the wrong signal to our troops and to the American people. It harms the United States' standing as a nation of laws."

The Church report did find that the Defense Department could have prevented some of the abuse.

It spoke of "missed opportunities" by military officials in failing to learn from earlier conflicts about ways to prevent mistreatment.

Particularly at Abu Ghraib "there was a failure to react to early warning signs of abuse."

The document also said current US interrogation policy "is explicit in its prohibition of certain techniques (but) contains several ambiguities which, although they would not permit abuse, could obscure commanders' oversight of techniques being employed," Church wrote.

He generally praised the interrogation technique used at Guantanamo. By contrast, in Afghanistan and Iraq "dissemination of interrogation policy was generally poor."

All rights reserved. � 2005 Agence France-Presse. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by Agence France-Presse. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of Agence France-Presse.