Pvt. Bradley Manning, who is accused of leaking government documents to WikiLeaks, has been held in austere conditions in the Quantico brig for months. While the Department of Defense insists that he is being held under maximum-security conditions and prevention-of-injury watch for his own safety, his attorney, David Coombs, alleges that the conditions themselves are unnecessary and punitive. Coombs says Manning has been held in conditions equivalent to 23-hour isolation and recently was forced to sleep naked every night.
Because the military lacks standing judges to adjudicate these matters, where you stand largely falls along whether or not you trust the government or whether you trust Manning's attorney and the government's critics. Part of the issue is that the justification relies on confidential information about Manning's mental health, meaning that the government's response largely amounts to "trust us." After eight years of Bush, that explanation is hardly adequate, and the administration's responses to critics of Manning's detention has not been reassuring.
Last week, former State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley described the conditions of Manning's confinement as "ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid," a startling remark that further reinforced the sense that something is very wrong with the way Manning is being treated. The same day, President Barack Obama indicated that he had asked the Pentagon about Manning's imprisonment and that they assured him the conditions were necessary for his own safety. Crowley resigned without backing down.
These events do not inspire confidence in the administration's approach, instead evoking disquieting memories of the past administration. As Glenn Greenwald noted, Obama's remarks resembled George W. Bush invoking assurances from people in his administration that his torturous "enhanced interrogation techniques" were lawful, and Crowley's resignation is an echo of Bush sacking officials in all areas of policy who refused to agree to his worldview and leave the reality-based community behind.
What happened with Crowley and Obama last week also changes the nature of the controversy over Manning's detention. First, Manning's detention has ceased to be merely the responsibility of the brig commander because it has gained the president's approval. Second, Crowley appears to have been forced to resign for giving his honest opinion about the conditions under which Manning is being held.
The underlying dynamic here is that the Obama administration has already asked the left to acquiesce to an uncomfortable level of policy continuity with the Bush administration on national security. Now, for many on the left, the administration seems to be asking that they accept that the administration's dissenters are not to publicly speak their conscience, and that the abuse of those accused of terrible crimes is no vice. This is a request in some ways greater and more terrifying than any Obama has made before, because it is a demand that the left accept more that just the Bush administration's policies but their internal moral logic as well.
My worry is that, just as the GOP began to embrace the moral legitimacy of torture in order to defend Bush, the left may embrace similar logic in its defense of Manning's treatment -- or even simply to defend Obama. It has already found itself struggling to defend Obama's failure to fulfill his promises on national-security issues as a candidate. If this happens, I fear that this country's voyage to Dick Cheney's Dark Side will be irreversible.
