The conscience and courage of Chelsea Manning

by Nozomi Hayase on April 4, 2014

Post image for The conscience and courage of Chelsea Manning

Four years after WikiLeaks’ release of the Collateral Murder video, Manning’s contagious courage continues to reveal the dehumanized colonizer within.

Four years have passed since WikiLeaks’ sensational release of the classified US military video titled Collateral MurderOn April 5, 2010, the raw footage was published depicting airstrikes by a US Army helicopter gunship in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad. The soldiers attacked Iraqis, killing about a dozen men wandering down a street, including two Reuters staffers, Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh in the first of three reckless attacks involving civilians.

The video opened with a quote from George Orwell: “Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give the appearance of solidity to pure wind.” It gained global attention, with viewers reaching millions, shattering the euphemism of ‘collateral damage’ and revealing the true state of modern warfare behind the warping shield of propaganda.

Much focus in the media at the time was given to analyzing whether some of the Iraqi people in the video were carrying rocket propelled grenades or AK-47s and arguments ensued about the rules of engagement. The unfolding of these scenes calls for recognition, for us to take a look at these wars from a wider perspective than the narrow view offered by the establishment media lens.

Before anyone talks about the laws of armed conflict and whether the rules of engagement were broken or not, we need to ask why these armed crews were even there in the first place. We should be examining the legality of the Iraq War itself. Speaking in defense of the disclosure of classified US military documents on the Iraq War, Assange pointed out how “most wars that are started by democracies involve lying,” and noted how “the start of the Iraq war involved very serious lies that were repeated and amplified by some parts of the press.”

Iraq has never been shown to have threatened the United States and it is common knowledge that the premise of this war was based on blatant lies. Colin Powell’s fabrications at the UN Security Council about Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction were a particular low point for the US in its base war propaganda. The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg designated the term ‘war of aggression’ as an attack on another nation or people without any justification of self-defense and listed it as a major international war crime.

In a report given at a New York Commission Hearing in May 11, 1991, attorney and President Emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights Michael Ratner seriously questioned the conduct of United States against Iraq:

As people living in the United States we have an obligation not to close our eyes, cover our ears and remain silent. We must not and cannot be ‘good Germans.’ We must be, as Bertrand Russell said about the crimes committed by the U.S. in Vietnam, ‘Against the Crime of Silence.’ We must bear witness to the tens of thousands of deaths for whom our government and its leaders bear responsibility and ask the question, ‘Has the United States committed war crimes with regard to its initiation and conduct of the war against Iraq?’

The questions raised by the graphic video-game turkey-shoot nature of this video needs to be placed within its larger context, along with examining the justification or potential war crimes of each incident in the video.

The moving imagery in the video revealed a particular mindset displayed by these US military-trained soldiers. It is the consciousness behind the gun-sight. The mind is generally blind to biases behind a perception that is trained to look at the world through the crosshairs of a gun-sight. From a broader historical perspective, one could say it is a colonial mind that controls an inception point, setting its own rules of engagement and defining the course of events and destiny of those caught in it.

“Lets shoot. Light ‘em all up. Come on, fire!” In a series of air-to-ground attacks, a helicopter crew excitedly found a target. One man can be heard saying, “Oh, yeah, look at those dead bastards,” and another responds saying “Nice.” When they find a wounded individual trying to crawl away, another man simply says: “All you gotta do is pick up a weapon,” expressing his wish to shoot him.

After finding that there were kids in the minivan that they had engaged, simply on their way to school, one man can clearly be heard blaming the victims: “It’s their fault for bringing their kids into a battle.” These civilians are no longer seen as victims and the permission to engage is manufactured by the aggressors attacking “targets” who are just trying to get away.

In the original 38-minute video recording the scenes in New Baghdad on July 12, 2007, the past century has lingered to haunt our global society. The dark shadow of colonization is carried over into the military-industrial age of the 20th century with its outward-thrusting brutality. The cynical naming of the ‘Apache’ helicopter evokes a memory of the genocide of American natives long ago. Native American activist Winona LaDuke once spoke of how it is common military-speak when you leave a base in a foreign country to say that you are heading ‘out into Indian Country.’ The brutal projection of US power into the oil-rich Middle East contains echos of these historical ‘Indian Wars’. The unfolding scenes appear as if the US is almost glorifying and continuing these crimes against humanity from the past.

This colonial mentality and injustice, never atoned for, is now expanding into a global web of military forces that more and more serve hidden corporate goals and agendas. In Discourse on Colonialism, the French poet and author Aimé Césaire wrote how colonization brutalizes and de-civilizes even the colonizer himself:

[C]olonization … dehumanizes even the most civilized man; that colonial activity, colonial enterprise, colonial conquest, which is based on contempt for the native and justified by that contempt, inevitably tends to change him who undertakes it; that the colonizer, who in order to ease his conscience gets into the habit of seeing the other man as an animal, accustoms himself to treating him like an animal, and tends objectively to transform himself into an animal.

The real scenes of modern war on the ground stand like a mirror. Reflected in the graphic WikiLeaks video, we begin to see something about each one of us that has long escaped consciousness. In the raw image of this cruel scene, we can see a part of our culture’s collective shadow, as the barbarian degraded in the effort of ‘civilizing’ those ‘others’. Descending into torture, drone attacks on wedding parties and other acts of collateral murder, this barbarism is clothed in the rhetoric of civility and self-defense, yet reveals the unredeemed colonizer within.

What is it that is shattering the armament around the hearts of so many? The conscience of Chelsea Manning, the source behind the leak of Collateral Murder, was the spark for a worldwide awakening. Her act of conscience shattered the abstraction and opened the gate that guarded this inception point, allowing the public to bear witness to uncensored images of modern warfare and decide for themselves how to see it. In the unfolding images, we were able to see what Chelsea Manning saw.

At the pretrial hearing in her prosecution for leaking the largest trove of secret documents in US history, Manning read out a personal statement to the court in Fort Meade, Maryland, describing how she came to download hundreds of thousands of classified documents and videos from military databases and submit them to the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. She spoke about facts regarding the 12 July 2007 aerial weapons team — the video depicting the incident in New Baghdad.

Manning began her statement by saying how at first, having already seen countless similar combat scenes, she didn’t think the video was very special. Yet she came to be troubled by “the recording of audio comments by the aerial weapons team crew and the second engagement in the video of an unarmed bongo truck.” Then she spoke of the attitudes of the soldiers in the helicopter: “The most alarming aspect of the video to me … was the seemly delightful bloodlust they appeared to have.” She continued:

They dehumanized the individuals they were engaging and seemed to not value human life by referring to them as “dead bastards” and congratulating each other on the ability to kill in large numbers. At one point in the video there is an individual on the ground attempting to crawl to safety. The individual is seriously wounded. Instead of calling for medical attention to the location, one of the aerial weapons team crew members verbally asks for the wounded person to pick up a weapon so that he can have a reason to engage. For me, this seems similar to a child torturing ants with a magnifying glass.

Manning furthermore spoke about the specific moment where the father driving his kids to school in a van stopped and attempted to assist the wounded:

While saddened by the aerial weapons team crew’s lack of concern about human life, I was disturbed by the response of the discovery of injured children at the scene. In the video, you can see that the bongo truck [was] driving up to assist the wounded individual. In response the aerial weapons team crew — as soon as the individuals are a threat, they repeatedly request for authorization to fire on the bongo truck and once granted they engage the vehicle at least six times.

She further pointed to the attitude of the aerial weapons team when they learned about the injured children in the van, noting how their actions showed no remorse or sympathy for those they killed or injured, even exhibiting pleasure when a vehicle drove over one of the bodies.

Manning had come to see this everyday reality in Iraq from the perspective of those who have been conjured into the designation of ‘enemy’. From that moment, she began to see these unfolding human tragedies increasingly from the point of view of those she was trained to see as others; those who have been methodically demonized throughout this war of terror.

How should we understand this sudden awakening of conscience? In elucidating the etymology of the word conscience, the Jungian psychoanalyst Edward Edinger related it to the concept of consciousness:

Conscious derives from con or cum, meaning ‘with’ or ‘together,’ and scire, ‘to know’ or ‘to see’. It has the same derivation as conscience. Thus the root meaning of both consciousness and conscience is ‘knowing with’ or ‘seeing with’ an ‘other’. In contrast, the word science, which also derives from scire, means simply knowing, i.e., knowing without ‘withness.’ … The experience of knowing with can be understood to mean the ability to participate in a knowing process simultaneously as subject and object, as knower and known. This is only possible within a relationship to an object that can also be a subject.

Conscience first engages the empathic imagination, breaking down walls of separation. One can begin to feel another person’s pain as if it were one’s own. The moment Manning saw other human beings who she had been trained to see as ‘enemy combatants’ in the gunsight, she freed them from a perception enslaved by the subject position of US supremacy; a perception that had made these human beings into lifeless objects. Here, the other perspective that had long been denied was brought back to consciousness. Manning saw another human being whose life was as precious as hers; not an enemy, but a victim of an unjust war waged by an imperialist military-industrial complex.

In the famous chat log with hacker Adrian Lamo that led to her arrest, Manning recounted how she wanted “people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public… We’re human… and we’re killing ourselves…”

Manning saw what people too often fail to see: she saw those who had been branded ‘enemy combatants’ as human beings like herself. This happened also to US soldier Ethan McCord, who rescued the little girl from the bongo truck in the Collateral Murder video, and who realized she was no different from his own daughter:

Manning’s deed of whistleblowing was an act of conscience: knowledge gained by placing herself in a relationship with others; putting herself in the other’s shoes. She was willing to sacrifice her safety to restore a lost image; an inception point and authentic act of courage from a place of our common humanity.

Manning’s courage to act out of her conscience interrupted a trajectory of history that had been moving in a particular direction. The memory started to flow, reaching back before the invasion of Iraq, before 9/11 and even before the nation’s addiction to oil began — to the genocide of the natives; the moment when those who are made enemies became dehumanized in eyes.

Before anyone even starts talking about justification for acts of war, we should all be asking: who are these Iraqis and Afghans, these Libyans or Syrians who are so often portrayed as “putting America in danger”? In that iconic leaked footage from a fateful day in New Baghdad, who did we see or fail to see? Unfolding images of the decimated Reuters reporters shot from the Apache helicopter confront us with a question: are we truly civilized? Who are the people who have been dehumanized, turned into enemies and made into inferior beings?

One ordinary person with extraordinary courage offered the possibility to restart a genuine conversation about the legitimacy of Western “civilization” that has until now been operating as a monologue. Manning created a possibility for real dialogue, one that is long overdue. Her courage, and the tireless work of those at WikiLeaks, calls us to truly see these events beyond the political language that makes lies sound truthful and murder respectable.

Are we able to witness what is really happening — ongoing collateral murder carried out in our name — even right in this very moment? Manning’s conscience awakened her heart. We, too, can awaken our hearts, for courage is contagious.

{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }

Alex Fethiere April 5, 2014 at 04:17

In an article critiquing colonialism, calling Aimé Césaire a French poet when he was in fact from a former French colony (Martinique) is pretty ironic.

Reply

healme April 5, 2014 at 11:42

The soldiers attitude to killing people, they were like excited children and could not wait to fire the weapons. This was not about war it was about adults given the authority to act like children, it was about killing people. Another other side of the coin is darker, what evidence if any did the reporters have on their camera before they were killed, it could be why they were killed.

Reply

Fred Mecklenburg April 5, 2014 at 12:08

Judging by the general failure of Left, Right and Center political spectra to give a damn about the genocide taking place before our eyes in Syria, with the regime’s barrel bombing, torture dungeons, and starvation sieges, all as visible as could be, I’d have to say that the answer is No, unfortunately that dialogue has been a non-starter.

Reply

Sebastian Ramirez April 5, 2014 at 13:57

According to the Nuremburg Principles, the actions revealed by Manning’s video leak constitute war crimes against humanity, and those responsible should be tried, and, if found guilty, punished.

Reply

dave fryett April 5, 2014 at 18:58

I think there is a deeper level of deception here than the author understands. For instance, the Assange quote: He states that wars initiated by “democracies” have involved “lying.” It is grotesque hyperbole to refer to the US or UK as democracies, yet the respective ruling classes have, by lying incessantly about it, managed to convince the public whom they have diseducated in their school systems that it is so. Assange reinforces this lie while pretending to expose a truth. The message is that altho’ our governments are committing crimes, they are still authentic, democratic bodies, which in the end, confers a measure of legitimacy on the war.

“the start of the Iraq war involved very serious lies that were repeated and amplified by some parts of the press.” Some parts? Putting it this way suggests that it was something less than a concerted effort on the part of the capital-controlled, that is just about all of it, to manufacture consent for this war. Describing it as “some” implies that there were elements within the mainstream media which resisted. In the US, that was confined to independent media Again Assange’s underrlying message here is that there was a meaningful debate within the media on the Iraq war. There was none, and Assange knows it.

Bottom line: The government and media, while they may make mistakes and even commit crime, are essentially legitimate and doing their job in your service. And that’s horseshit.

Next the author trots out Michael Ratner from the Center for Constitutional Rights, an institution which generations of Left activists have come to distrust. He asks “Has the United States committed war crimes with regard to its initiation and conduct of the war against Iraq?” Here Ratner calls for the invasion to be done legally. With anti-war activists like him, the Pentagon has little to fear.

The author: “What is it that is shattering the armament around the hearts of so many? The conscience of Chelsea Manning, the source behind the leak of Collateral Murder, was the spark for a worldwide awakening…”

No it wasn’t. What awakening? Was there a successful international effort to drive the occupiers out of Iraq? Or has there been more of the same in Libya, Syria etc.?

Here’s an alternate interpretation: Collateral Murder was a psy-op with multiple functions.

1) It made wikileaks, an organization which has proven to be of great counterrevolutionary use to capital in Tunisia, Bahrain, Syria, Egypt etc., a household word and established its bona fides as an anti-imperialist, pro-transparency center, which it certainly is not.

2) It served to dissuade journalists who might be tempted to go off script.

CM is shocking only to the vapid. War is lethal, innocents get killed, and the people trained to commit these acts have been so successfully brainwashed that they revel in their abominations, none of this is new. The people who arranged for this psy-op understand, as the author of this article fails to, that would be no mass protests, no “awakening.” They also knew what kind of chilling effect it would have on reporters who reveal things they shouldn’t.

Chelsea Manning is where she is because she trusted Julian Assange [https://www.google.com/search?q=wikileaks+bradley+manning&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb#channel=sb&q=wikileaks+we+steal+secrets&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbm=vid].

“One ordinary person with extraordinary courage offered the possibility to restart a genuine conversation about the legitimacy of Western “civilization”

What is the author suggesting, that Western civilization is not civilization? Or that it is not legitimate? Astonishing! What kind of racist does one have to be to pose such a question? If s/he is talking about imperialism (then that is what s/he should have said) it has in no way been limited historically to the West, why is s/he not calling for a genuine conversation on the legitimacy of Japanese civilization given its indulgence in conquest? This author shouldn’t be writing articles about matters of conscience as s/he doesn’t seem to have one.

The author: “Manning’s courage…calls us to truly see these events beyond the political language that makes lies sound truthful and murder respectable.”

Making lies sound truthful is what Assange and Ratner have done, and what the author of this article and now ROAR have done. The issue isn’t the lies that lead to war, it is war itself. The solution is not to be found in “conscience” but in the elimination of those forces which impel us to war. And the problem has nothing to do with the civilization of the West, that is fascist nonsense. While i take the author as sincere, this article is just more obscurantist drivel which serves, wittingly or no, to serve the interests of the imperial forces it purports to condemn.

Reply

Sharon Greenlaw April 5, 2014 at 22:23

I am so disappointed that it has cost so much to so many to bring you truth and yet you not only recieve it poorly ..you even try to keep it from others. I am a Mother.
Like most people a mere Country cannot erase me.A mere mindset cannot kill truth.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: