Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Support Our Annual Fund Drive! CounterPunch is entirely supported by our readers. Your donations pay for our small staff, tiny office, writers, designers, techies, bandwidth and servers. We don’t owe anything to advertisers, foundations, one-percenters or political parties. You are our only safety net. Please make a tax-deductible donation today.
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Bradley Manning on Trial

by BINOY KAMPMARK

It is time to pull out the stops.  Yes, efforts have been made, some commendable, some noisily admirable, and the protesters have gathered constantly over the thousand and more days that Private Bradley Manning has been held.  The trial is about to begin, larded with 22 charges on the prosecution’s part, including espionage and aiding the enemy.

The campaign against Manning for his part in Cablegate has been insidious.  The whistleblower, for all the heroic properties he or she might have, is treated as the betrayer of covenants, contracts and promises.  The fundamental weakness of any whistleblowing regime is its construction from the inside.  It remains a creature of establishment, a design of state authorities to ultimately restrain disclosure rather than endorse it.  Ultimately, there is never any guarantee of protection against prosecution.  One must be punished for doing a good deed – that’s the tribal prerogative.

To “disclose” information, one has to do so through appropriate channels.  The family, in other words, takes precedence over the outsiders.  Authorities must be allowed a chance to bring in a duster and rearrange the mess they have presided over.  And if they don’t, where is one to go?

When that is not done, results are harsh and retributive.  Incarceration and punishment under archaic laws –  the Espionage Act 1917 remains a First World War relic that the Obama administration has only been too enthusiastic to deploy against dissidents – and a campaign of discrediting, tend to be the norm.  Manning has been dismissed as suicidal, homosexual, confused with gender, and unstable.  We can be thankful that none of these “tendencies” impaired his disgust at the reports coming out of American missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Within any legal context, it could be argued that Manning disclosed material that satisfied, in the broadest possible sense, the public interest.  He revealed the continued US backing of despotisms in the Middle East even as the embryonic spring was about to bloom.  He disclosed material which he was obligated to do to uphold the US Military Code, exposing atrocities.

The various legal tests that one can find in the jurisprudence of what constitutes public interest vary.  The Spycatcher case, the colourful reference to Attorney General (UK) v Heinemann Pty Ltd (1987) tested the limits of what could and could not be disclosed in a common law setting guarded by a culture of secrecy verging on mania.  MI5 wanted to protects its secrets; Peter Wright, a former officer of MI5, was happy to disclose it.  Besides, much of the material revealed blatant acts of criminality, wrong doing and, dare one say it, common knowledge.

The main judge in that case, the progressive jurist Justice Michael Kirby of the NSW Appellate Court, argued that a free press was indispensable to democracy.  Restraint on publication could only be granted if there was a “pressing social need” to do so.

That case cited the views of Justice Anthony Mason from the judgment of Commonwealth v Fairfax (1980), a High Court decision dealing with the Australian government’s attempt to restrain the publication of a collection of documents on foreign policy.  The words of the judge are worth noting when dealing with cases such as Manning’s:

“It is unacceptable in our democratic society that there should be a restraint on the publication of information relating to government when the only vice of that information is that it enables the public to discuss, review and criticise government action.”

The American context is even more powerful, and Justice Hugo Black’s scorching speech justifying the release of the Pentagon Papers in New York Times v. United States (1971) for publication suggested that any democratic society worth its salt would need to have a well nourished press and informed representative government.  “The guarding of military and diplomatic secrets at the expense of informed representative government provides no real security for our Republic.”

The revolution of new media, with its channelling of information gathered from whistleblowers, its insistence on scientific or forensic forms of examination, has provided another avenue for exposure. It has democratised information in a manner that terrifies the fogies of power, the censorious cynics of process. Too much truth, they fear, will kill.  The flipside of that is that the lie is indispensable.

Categories such as “traitor” or “hero” are the commercial brands of patriotism.  At the end of the day, patriotism is a deceptive, and changeable abstraction.  Such labels are never useful because invariably one person’s stock traitor is another’s valued hero.  What matters here is that Manning decided that his country could not be right and wrong, a monster sojourning in the valley of death while trumpeting the merits of virtue.  A social order that has to rest on a carefully manufactured illusion, notably one that extols blood rites, is one that deserves to perish.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

September 29, 2016
Robert Fisk
The Butcher of Qana: Shimon Peres Was No Peacemaker
James Rose
Politics in the Echo Chamber: How Trump Becomes President
Russell Mokhiber
The Corporate Vice Grip on the Presidential Debates
Daniel Kato
Rethinking the Race over Race: What Clinton Should do Now About ‘Super-Predators’
Peter Certo
Clinton’s Awkward Stumbles on Trade
Fran Shor
Demonizing the Green Party Vote
Rev. William Alberts
Trump’s Road Rage to the White House
Luke O'Brien
Because We Couldn’t Have Sanders, You’ll Get Trump
Michael J. Sainato
How the Payday Loan Industry is Obstructing Reform
Robert Fantina
You Can’t Have War Without Racism
Gregory Barrett
Bad Theater at the United Nations (Starring Kerry, Power, and Obama
James A Haught
The Long, Long Journey to Female Equality
Thomas Knapp
US Military Aid: Thai-ed to Torture
Jack Smith
Must They be Enemies? Russia, Putin and the US
Gilbert Mercier
Clinton vs Trump: Lesser of Two Evils or the Devil You Know
Tom H. Hastings
Manifesting the Worst Old Norms
George Ella Lyon
This Just in From Rancho Politico
September 28, 2016
Eric Draitser
Stop Trump! Stop Clinton!! Stop the Madness (and Let Me Get Off)!
Ted Rall
The Thrilla at Hofstra: How Trump Won the Debate
Robert Fisk
Cliché and Banality at the Debates: Trump and Clinton on the Middle East
Patrick Cockburn
Cracks in the Kingdom: Saudi Arabia Rocked by Financial Strains
Lowell Flanders
Donald Trump, Islamophobia and Immigrants
Shane Burley
Defining the Alt Right and the New American Fascism
Jan Oberg
Ukraine as the Border of NATO Expansion
Ramzy Baroud
Ban Ki-Moon’s Legacy in Palestine: Failure in Words and Deeds
Gareth Porter
How We Could End the Permanent War State
Sam Husseini
Debate Night’s Biggest Lie Was Told by Lester Holt
Laura Carlsen
Ayotzinapa’s Message to the World: Organize!
Binoy Kampmark
The Triumph of Momentum: Re-Electing Jeremy Corbyn
David Macaray
When the Saints Go Marching In
Seth Oelbaum
All Black Lives Will Never Matter for Clinton and Trump
Adam Parsons
Standing in Solidarity for a Humanity Without Borders
Cesar Chelala
The Trump Bubble
September 27, 2016
Louisa Willcox
The Tribal Fight for Nature: From the Grizzly to the Black Snake of the Dakota Pipeline
Paul Street
The Roots are in the System: Charlotte and Beyond
Jeffrey St. Clair
Idiot Winds at Hofstra: Notes on the Not-So-Great Debate
Mark Harris
Clinton, Trump, and the Death of Idealism
Mike Whitney
Putin Ups the Ante: Ceasefire Sabotage Triggers Major Offensive in Aleppo
Anthony DiMaggio
The Debates as Democratic Façade: Voter “Rationality” in American Elections
Binoy Kampmark
Punishing the Punished: the Torments of Chelsea Manning
Paul Buhle
Why “Snowden” is Important (or How Kafka Foresaw the Juggernaut State)
Jack Rasmus
Hillary’s Ghosts
Brian Cloughley
Billions Down the Afghan Drain
Lawrence Davidson
True Believers and the U.S. Election
Matt Peppe
Taking a Knee: Resisting Enforced Patriotism
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail
[i]
[i]
[i]
[i]