By

Chase Madar /

CBS News/ July 8, 2011, 10:16 AM

4 reasons why Bradley Manning deserves a medal

AP Photo

We still don’t know if he did it or not, but if Bradley Manning, the 24-year-old Army private from Oklahoma, actually supplied WikiLeaks with its choicest material -- the Iraq War logs, the Afghan War logs, and the State Department cables -- which startled and riveted the world, then he deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom instead of a jail cell at Fort Leavenworth.

President Obama recently gave one of those medals to retiring Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who managed the two bloody, disastrous wars about which the WikiLeaks-released documents revealed so much.  Is he really more deserving than the young private who, after almost ten years of mayhem and catastrophe, gave Americans -- and the world -- a far fuller sense of what our government is actually doing abroad?

Bradley Manning, awaiting a court martial in December, faces the prospect of long years in prison.  He is charged with violating the Espionage Act of 1917.  He has put his sanity and his freedom on the line so that Americans might know what our government has done -- and is still doing -- globally.  He has blown the whistle on criminal violations of American military law.  He has exposed our secretive government’s pathological over-classification of important public documents.

Here are four compelling reasons why, if he did what the government accuses him of doing, he deserves that medal, not jail time.

1: At great personal cost, Bradley Manning has given our foreign policy elite the public supervision it so badly needs.

In the past 10 years, American statecraft has moved from calamity to catastrophe, laying waste to other nations while never failing to damage our own national interests.  Do we even need to be reminded that our self-defeating response to 9/11 in Iraq and Afghanistan (and Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia) has killed roughly 225,000 civilians and 6,000 American soldiers, while costing our country more than $3.2 trillion?  We are hemorrhaging blood and money.  Few outside Washington would argue that any of this is making America safer.

An employee who screwed up this badly would either be fired on the spot or put under heavy supervision.  Downsizing our entire foreign policy establishment is not an option.  However, the website WikiLeaks has at least tried to make public scrutiny of our self-destructive statesmen and -women a reality by exposing their work to ordinary citizens.

Consider our invasion of Iraq, a war based on distortions, government secrecy, and the complaisant failure of our major media to ask the important questions.  But what if someone like Bradley Manning had provided the press with the necessary government documents, which would have made so much self-evident in the months before the war began?  Might this not have prevented disaster?  We’ll never know, of course, but could additional public scrutiny have been salutary under the circumstances?

Thanks to Bradley Manning’s alleged disclosures, we do have a sense of what did happen afterwards in Iraq and Afghanistan, and just how the U.S. operates in the world.  Thanks to those disclosures, we now know just how Washington leaned on the Vatican to quell opposition to the Iraq War and just how it pressured the Germans to prevent them from prosecuting CIA agents who kidnapped an innocent man and shipped him off to be tortured abroad.

As our foreign policy threatens to careen into yet more disasters in Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, and Libya, we can only hope that more whistleblowers will follow the alleged example of Bradley Manning and release vital public documents before it’s too late.  A foreign policy based on secrets and spin has manifestly failed us.  In a democracy, the workings of our government should not be shrouded in an opaque cloud of secrecy.  For bringing us the truth, for breaking the seal on that self-protective policy of secrecy, Bradley Manning deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

2: Knowledge is powerful.  The WikiLeaks disclosures have helped spark democratic revolutions and reforms across the Middle East, accomplishing what Operation Iraqi Freedom never could.

Wasn’t it American policy to spread democracy in the Middle East, to extend our freedom to others, as both recent American presidents have insisted?

No single American has done more to help further this goal than Pfc. Bradley Manning.  The chain reaction of democratic protests and uprisings that has swept Egypt, Libya, Bahrain, Syria, Yemen, and even in a modest way Iraq, all began in Tunisia, where leaked U.S. State Department cables about the staggering corruption of the ruling Ben Ali dynasty helped trigger the rebellion.  In all cases, these societies were smoldering with longstanding grievances against oppressive, incompetent governments and economies stifled by cronyism.  The revelations from the WikiLeaks State Department documents played a widely acknowledged role in sparking these pro-democracy uprisings.

In Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, and Yemen, the people’s revolts under way have occurred despite U.S. support for their autocratic rulers.  In each of these nations, in fact, we bankrolled the dictators, while helping to arm and train their militaries. The alliance with Mubarak’s autocratic state cost the U.S. more than $60 billion and did nothing for American security -- other than inspire terrorist blowback from radicalized Egyptians like Mohammad Atta and Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Even if U.S. policy was firmly on the wrong side of things, we should be proud that at least one American -- Bradley Manning -- was on the right side.  If indeed he gave those documents to WikiLeaks, then he played a catalytic role in bringing about the Arab Spring, something neither Barack Obama nor former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (that recent surprise recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom) could claim.  Perhaps once the Egyptians consolidate their democracy, they, too, will award Manning their equivalent of such a medal.

3: Bradley Manning has exposed the pathological over-classification of America’s public documents.

“Secrecy is for losers,” as the late Senator and United Nations Ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan used to say.  If this is indeed the case, it would be hard to find a bigger loser than the U.S. government.

How pathological is our government’s addiction to secrecy?  In June, the National Security Agency declassified documents from 1809, while the Department of Defense only last month declassified the Pentagon Papers, publicly available in book form these last four decades.  Our government is only just now finishing its declassification of documents relating to World War I.

This would be ridiculous if it weren’t tragic.  Ask the historians.  Barton J. Bernstein, professor emeritus of history at Stanford University and a founder of its international relations program, describes the government’s classification of foreign-policy documents as “bizarre, arbitrary, and nonsensical.”  George Herring, professor emeritus at the University of Kentucky and author of the encyclopedic From Colony to Superpower: A History of U.S. Foreign Policy, has chronicled how his delight at being appointed to a CIA advisory panel on declassification turned to disgust once he realized that he was being used as window dressing by an agency with no intention of opening its records, no matter how important or how old, to public scrutiny.

Any historian worth his salt would warn us that such over-classification is a leading cause of national amnesia and repetitive war disorder.  If a society like ours doesn’t know its own history, it becomes the great power equivalent of a itinerant amnesiac, not knowing what it did yesterday or where it will end up tomorrow.  Right now, classification is the disease of Washington, secrecy its mania, and dementia its end point.  As an ostensibly democratic nation, we, its citizens, risk such ignorance at our national peril.

President Obama came into office promising a “sunshine” policy for his administration while singing the praises of whistleblowers.  He has since launched the fiercest campaign against whistleblowers the republic has ever seen, and further plunged our foreign policy into the shadows.  Challenging the classification of each tightly guarded document is, however, impossible.  No organization has the resources to fight this fight, nor would they be likely to win right now.  Absent a radical change in our government’s diplomatic and military bureaucracies, massive over-classification will only continue.

If we hope to know what our government is actually doing in our name globally, we need massive leaks from insider whistleblowers to journalists who can then sort out what we need to know, given that the government won’t.  This, in fact, has been the modus operandi of WikiLeaks.  Our whistleblower protection laws urgently need to catch up to this state of affairs, and though we are hardly there yet, Bradley Manning helped take us part of the way.  He did what Barack Obama swore he would do on coming into office.  For striking a blow against our government’s fanatical insistence on covering its mistakes and errors with blanket secrecy, Bradley Manning deserves not punishment, but the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

4. At immense personal cost, Bradley Manning has upheld a great American tradition of transparency in statecraft and for that he should be an American hero, not an American felon.

Bradley Manning is only the latest in a long line of whistleblowers in and out of uniform who have risked everything to put our country back on the right path.

Take Daniel Ellsberg, leaker of the Pentagon Papers, a Pentagon-commissioned secret history of the Vietnam War and the official lies and distortions that the government used to sell it.  Many of the documents it included were classed at a much higher security clearance than anything Bradley Manning is accused of releasing -- and yet Ellsberg was not convicted of a single crime and became a national hero.

Given the era when all this went down, it’s forgivable to assume that Ellsberg must have been a hippie who somehow sneaked into the Pentagon archives, beads and patchouli trailing behind him.  What many no longer realize is that Ellsberg had been a model U.S. Marine.  First in his class at officer training school at Quantico, he deferred graduate school at Harvard to remain on active duty in the Marine Corps.  Ellsberg saw his high-risk exposure of the disastrous and deceitful nature of the Vietnam War as fully consonant with his long career of patriotic service in and out of uniform.

And Ellsberg is hardly alone.  Ask Lt. Colonel (ret.) Darrel Vandeveld.  Or Tom Drake, formerly of the National Security Agency.

Transparency in statecraft was not invented last week by WikiLeaks creator Julian Assange.  It is a longstanding American tradition.  James Madison put the matter succinctly: “A popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy; or, perhaps both.”

A 1960 Congressional Committee on Government Operations report caught the same spirit: “Secrecy -- the first refuge of incompetents -- must be at a bare minimum in a democratic society… Those elected or appointed to positions of executive authority must recognize that government, in a democracy, cannot be wiser than the people.”  John F. Kennedy made the same point in 1961: “The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society.”  Hugo Black, great Alabaman justice of the twentieth-century Supreme Court had this to say: “The guarding of military and diplomatic secrets at the expense of informed representative government provides no real security for our Republic.”  And the first of World-War-I-era president Woodrow Wilson’s 14 Points couldn’t have been more explicit: “Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.”

We need to know what our government’s commitments are, as our foreign policy elites have clearly demonstrated they cannot be left to their own devices.  Based on the last decade of carnage and folly, without public debate -- and aggressive media investigations -- we have every reason to expect more of the same.

If there’s anything to learn from that decade, it’s that government secrecy and lies come at a very high price in blood and money.  Thanks to the whistleblowing revelations attributed to Bradley Manning, we at least have a far clearer picture of the problems we face in trying to supervise our own government.  If he was the one responsible for the WikiLeaks revelations, then for his gift to the republic, purchased at great price, he deserves not prison, but a Presidential Medal of Freedom and the heartfelt gratitude of his country.

Bio: Chase Madar is a lawyer in New York and a frequent contributor to the London Review of Books, the American Conservative magazine, CounterPunch.org, and Le Monde Diplomatique>.  His next book, The Passion of Bradley Manning, will be published by O/R Books this fall.  This piece originally appeared on TomDispatch. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

© 2011 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
104 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
graceflorida says:
Manning is a hero. at great risk he gave Crimes of military corruption to outside news sources - AFTER he repeatedly went to "inside sources of corruption" who said FORGET ABOUT IT.
reply
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Military corruption???!!! You don't even know the story! What a laugh! You know NOTHING about that tragic incident! Go read up before you start trying to act like you know what's going on. Corruption, indeed!
linkicon reporticon emailicon
noloyalisti says:
I like the way the right wingers try to justify their wars to benefit the giant corporation escape taxes. Because many more people die from disease or car wrecks that somehow justifies the murder, mayhem and occupation that America leads the world in. ANd all for the profits of billionaires.

Gotta hand it to the billionaires; not only did they figure out how to use taxpayer money for their corporate expansion overseas, they fooled a whole lot of America Republicons that they are working in their interest. What a sad, sick joke.
reply
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
I like the way left wingnuts try to blame conspiracy and corporations for all the world's ills - all without knowing a damn thing about corporations ... or much else, for that matter. Most of them know as much about economics as a dry fart in a wet bag. What a sad, sick joke.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
noloyalisti says:
I know the sick mentality of the right wing: my country wrong or right. And being a superior American I can maim or kill anyone I want and if there is collateral damage, oh well. It was their fault for getting in my way.

It occurs to me that the Republicon ideology that permeates the American armed forces is one of cowardly bully. What I say is right. Might makes right and if you are weak, you deserve to die. Man is that sick twisted stuff.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
noloyalisti says:
In fact, the FIRST thing Wikileaks published were some of out soldiers massacring civilians including women and children. That was NOT just diplomacy. Those are war crimes. I guess the same people who thought the Bush Cheney war crimes were fine are the same ones who support these ones.
reply
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
OK, rimshot, you are obviously referring to the "Granai airstrike," in which the U.S. military bombed militant targets in the town of Granai, Afghanistan but tragically were unable to discern the presence of civilians, including children. What Wikileaks published was a grainy video through one of the gunsights. The fact that civilians were casualties in this air strike was known to the world. It's not like Manning revealed a shameful secret. This airstrike was tragic, but was attributed to human error. It was not, nor has it ever been classified, as a war crime. To say or imply that the U.S. military purposefully massacres civilians only reveals the limits to your intellect and your command of the Queen's English. To imply that no one knew about this tragedy until Pvt. Manning released the video to Wikileaks is just plain in-your-face stupidy.
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
You cannot be more wrong. The U.S. military does not deliberately target civilians. You're just full of hot air.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
noloyalisti says:
Yeah, was it not the Republicons who wanted transparency? Didn't the Speaker Bonehead say he wanted open government? Is this another example of anything a Republicon says it is exactly the opposite? Like being for the American people?
reply
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Just like an air-headed liberal to equate open government with illegal release of classified materials!
goszampolit replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
For Walt below: It is patently obvious that the US Government, whether Democrat or Republicon, is actively classifying everything as "secret" or higher to cover up war crimes, uck fups, and simple ugliness. This is classification to avoid accountability, which seems to be a concept that conservatives have forsaken. Accountability is for E grades and other poor people.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
ginni4 says:
Thank you so much for the courage to post this article. I will start watching CBS again. Haven't for a long time. Factual, straight forward reporting on divisive issues is one of the most important things a newspaper or channel should do. The ignorance shown by some of your readers who have made negative comments about the Manning case demonstrates how desperately this country needs the facts on all issues.
reply
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Aw c'mon, Ginni - this article is an op-ed, for crying out loud. It's NOT a news story! It is written by one person for the sole purpose of stating an opinion. Period. This person, by the way, just so happens to be trying to sell a book about the subject matter of the op-ed.
dominickj1 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
walt9800 AND what do you think Transparency means? I'm not fond of Bonehead, but transparency means just that. You don't get to pick and choose what you want to be transparent.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
margsview says:
I am truly amazed that CBS is finally standing up instead of kneeling down to all those that want journalism to become hollow, devoid of fact or analysis. I stopped watching 60 minutes for these exact reasons. I now go on-line to find out what is going on. Newspapers and TV shill for corporations and banks now, leaving no respect or room for the public who pay for all the loopholes and subsidies both mediums have enjoyed without merit. My heart goes out to Manning who may not have known how much this act would cost him. Nothing will change until a movement similar to the one popular in California for the past 3 decades, begins nation-wide.
reply
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
What did CBS do that was so great? All they did was give some guy an op-ed, which, by the way, does not qualify as investigative journalism. And I'm not aware of any tax loopholes enjoyed by the media (print or broadcast) that aren't available to any other business. But subsidies?? I'm not aware of any government subsidies to the media. Please elaborate. Finally, just what is this 30 year old popular movement in California to which you refer? Proposition 8?
linkicon reporticon emailicon
markmazza says:
There are a lot of people who see humanity as a bunch of viscious opportunistic, self-serving animals. And they expect our government to respond appropriately, which to them, means hit them before they hit us, take before they take, con them before they con us, exploit lest we be the exploited.

In their us-vs-them world, those people will never see Bradley Manning as anything more than a traitor. The idea of a global community is inconceivable to them. With nearly 7 billion people on this planet now connected in so many ways, a global approach is fast becoming necessary.

The old way of thinking is not going to work well for the US in the coming years. Country's that find away to peacefully co-exist will succeed, but country's that continue the tactics exposed by Wiki Leaks will eventually lead us to WW-III.

As Einstein said, WW-IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
reply
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
To what tactics are you referring?? Diplomacy??? Oh, I get it! By your standards, a global approach does not include global diplomacy!
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
enza - hold on to your britches, there! First off, I'm calling you out on your numbers. I don't think the last 100 years has seen the slaughter of 100 million women and children. And secondly, you're spinning correlation as if it were cause and effect -- a common beginner's mistake. For example, the same 100 years has seen agricultural technology improve crop yields by several hundred percent. Do you attribute drought and starvation in sub-Sahara Africa to improved agricultural technology? By the same token, it is a weak argument indeed to blame any slaughters of the scale you toss out on diplomacy. PS - you can spit now. Depending on your spit volume, the corn stalk you save could be your next meal! :)
linkicon reporticon emailicon
noloyalisti says:
I am glad to see Bradley Manning be recognized for the American hero he is. No one should be punished for revealing the truth or crimes. The American people need and deserve to know what is going on in our name. Sadly, because of all the stuff that is hidden and propagandized, at least 95% of the people do not know really what our military is about.
reply
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
A question - just for fun. Is anyone who divulges a national secret (or secrets), irregardless of the content, a hero??
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Harden_Tar says:
This twit betrayed his oath to protect this country. He decided he was going to release the country's secrets, disregarding that oath and betraying the trust the United States had bestowed upon him. It does not matter WHAT he released. It is the act that warrants the punishement. He deserves what he is going to get.
reply
noloyalisti replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
You simply cannot say "my country wrong or right". If ANYONE breaks the law, they should be punished. What is happening to the people who did the evil deeds that were exposed? Don't blame the messenger!
walt9800 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Nono - WHAT evil deeds were exposed??? You need to read up, dude!
See all 104 Comments