The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention

[Eugen Leitl]

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/14/manning

The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention

By Glenn Greenwald

    *

The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention

Reuters/Jonathon Burch/AP/Salon

(updated below)

Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking
classified documents to WikiLeaks, has never been convicted of that crime,
nor of any other crime.  Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S.
Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months -- and for two months
before that in a military jail in Kuwait -- under conditions that constitute
cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even
torture.  Interviews with several people directly familiar with the
conditions of Manning's detention, ultimately including a Quantico brig
official (Lt. Brian Villiard) who confirmed much of what they conveyed,
establishes that the accused leaker is subjected to detention conditions
likely to create long-term psychological injuries.

Since his arrest in May, Manning has been a model detainee, without any
episodes of violence or disciplinary problems.  He nonetheless was declared
from the start to be a "Maximum Custody Detainee," the highest and most
repressive level of military detention, which then became the basis for the
series of inhumane measures imposed on him.

>From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive
solitary confinement.  For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight
months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell.  Even inside his
cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising
and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions.  For
reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most
basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets
for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch).  For the one
hour per day when he is freed from this isolation, he is barred from
accessing any news or current events programs.  Lt. Villiard protested that
the conditions are not "like jail movies where someone gets thrown into the
hole," but confirmed that he is in solitary confinement, entirely alone in
his cell except for the one hour per day he is taken out.

    * Continue reading

In sum, Manning has been subjected for many months without pause to inhumane,
personality-erasing, soul-destroying, insanity-inducing conditions of
isolation similar to those perfected at America's Supermax prison in
Florence, Colorado:  all without so much as having been convicted of
anything.  And as is true of many prisoners subjected to warped treatment of
this sort, the brig's medical personnel now administer regular doses of
anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the
effects of this isolation.

Just by itself, the type of prolonged solitary confinement to which Manning
has been subjected for many months is widely viewed around the world as
highly injurious, inhumane, punitive, and arguably even a form of torture.
In his widely praised March, 2009 New Yorker article -- entitled "Is
Long-Term Solitary Confinement Torture?" -- the surgeon and journalist Atul
Gawande assembled expert opinion and personal anecdotes to demonstrate that,
as he put it, "all human beings experience isolation as torture."  By itself,
prolonged solitary confinement routinely destroys a personbs mind and drives
them into insanity.  A March, 2010 article in The Journal of the American
Academy of Psychiatry and the Law explains that "solitary confinement is
recognized as difficult to withstand; indeed, psychological stressors such as
isolation can be as clinically distressing as physical torture."

For that reason, many Western nations -- and even some non-Western nations
notorious for human rights abuses -- refuse to employ prolonged solitary
confinement except in the most extreme cases of prisoner violence.  "Itbs an
awful thing, solitary," John McCain wrote of his experience in isolated
confinement in Vietnam. bIt crushes your spirit."  As Gawande documented: "A
U.S. military study of almost a hundred and fifty naval aviators returned
from imprisonment in Vietnam . . . reported that they found social isolation
to be as torturous and agonizing as any physical abuse they suffered."
Gawande explained that Americabs application of this form of torture to its
own citizens is what spawned the torture regime which President Obama vowed
to end:

    This past year, both the Republican and the Democratic Presidential
candidates came out firmly for banning torture and closing the facility in
GuantC!namo Bay, where hundreds of prisoners have been held in years-long
isolation. Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain, however, addressed the
question of whether prolonged solitary confinement is torture. . . .

    This is the dark side of American exceptionalism. . . . Our willingness
to discard these standards for American prisoners made it easy to discard the
Geneva Conventions prohibiting similar treatment of foreign prisoners of war,
to the detriment of Americabs moral stature in the world.  In much the same
way that a previous generation of Americans countenanced legalized
segregation, ours has countenanced legalized torture. And there is no clearer
manifestation of this than our routine use of solitary confinement . . . .

It's one thing to impose such punitive, barbaric measures on convicts who
have proven to be violent when around other prisoners; at the Supermax in
Florence, inmates convicted of the most heinous crimes and who pose a threat
to prison order and the safety of others are subjected to worse treatment
than what Manning experiences.  But it's another thing entirely to impose
such conditions on individuals, like Manning, who have been convicted of
nothing and have never demonstrated an iota of physical threat or disorder.

In 2006, a bipartisan National Commission on America's Prisons was created
and it called for the elimination of prolonged solitary confinement.  Its
Report documented that conditions whereby "prisoners end up locked in their
cells 23 hours a day, every day. . . is so severe that people end up
completely isolated, living in what can only be described as torturous
conditions."  The Report documented numerous psychiatric studies of
individuals held in prolonged isolation which demonstrate "a constellation of
symptoms that includes overwhelming anxiety, confusion and hallucination, and
sudden violent and self-destructive outbursts."  The above-referenced article
from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law states:
"Psychological effects can include anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive
disturbances, perceptual distortions, obsessive thoughts, paranoia, and
psychosis."

When one exacerbates the harms of prolonged isolation with the other
deprivations to which Manning is being subjected, long-term psychiatric and
even physical impairment is likely.  Gawande documents that "EEG studies
going back to the nineteen-sixties have shown diffuse slowing of brain waves
in prisoners after a week or more of solitary confinement."  Medical tests
conducted in 1992 on Yugoslavian prisoners subjected to an average of six
months of isolation -- roughly the amount to which Manning has now been
subjected -- "revealed brain abnormalities months afterward; the most severe
were found in prisoners who had endured either head trauma sufficient to
render them unconscious or, yes, solitary confinement.  Without sustained
social interaction, the human brain may become as impaired as one that has
incurred a traumatic injury."  Gawande's article is filled with horrifying
stories of individuals subjected to isolation similar to or even less
enduring than Manning's who have succumbed to extreme long-term psychological
breakdown.

Manning is barred from communicating with any reporters, even indirectly, so
nothing he has said can be quoted here.  But David House, a 23-year-old MIT
researcher who befriended Manning after his detention (and then had his
laptops, camera and cellphone seized by Homeland Security when entering the
U.S.) is one of the few people to have visited Manning several times at
Quantico.  He describes palpable changes in Manning's physical appearance and
behavior just over the course of the several months that he's been visiting
him.  Like most individuals held in severe isolation, Manning sleeps much of
the day, is particularly frustrated by the petty, vindictive denial of a
pillow or sheets, and suffers from less and less outdoor time as part of his
one-hour daily removal from his cage.

This is why the conditions under which Manning is being detained were once
recognized in the U.S. -- and are still recognized in many Western nations --
as not only cruel and inhumane, but torture.  More than a century ago, U.S.
courts understood that solitary confinement was a barbaric punishment that
severely harmed the mental and physical health of those subjected to it.  The
Supreme Court's 1890 decision in In re Medley noted that as a result of
solitary confinement as practiced in the early days of the United States,
many "prisoners fell, after even a short confinement, into a semi-fatuous
condition . . . and others became violently insane; others still, committed
suicide; while those who stood the ordeal better . . . [often] did not
recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsequent service to the
community."  And in its 1940 decision in Chambers v. Florida, the Court
characterized prolonged solitary confinement as "torture" and compared it to
"[t]he rack, the thumbscrew, [and] the wheel."

The inhumane treatment of Manning may have international implications as
well.  There are multiple proceedings now pending in the European Union Human
Rights Court, brought by "War on Terror" detainees contesting their
extradition to the U.S. on the ground that the conditions under which they
likely will be held -- particularly prolonged solitary confinement -- violate
the European Convention on Human Rights, which (along with the Convention
Against Torture) bars EU states from extraditing anyone to any nation where
there is a real risk of inhumane and degrading treatment.  The European Court
of Human Rights has in the past found detention conditions violative of those
rights (in Bulgaria) where "the [detainee] spent 23 hours a day alone in his
cell; had limited interaction with other prisoners; and was only allowed two
visits per month."  From the Journal article referenced above:

    International treaty bodies and human rights experts, including the Human
Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, and the U.N. Special
Rapporteur on Torture, have concluded that solitary confinement may amount to
cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment in violation of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture and
other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment or Punishment.  They have
specifically criticized supermax confinement in the United States because of
the mental suffering it inflicts.

Subjecting a detainee like Manning to this level of prolonged cruel and
inhumane detention can thus jeopardize the ability of the U.S. to secure
extradition for other prisoners, as these conditions are viewed in much of
the civilized world as barbaric.  Moreover, because Manning holds dual
American and U.K. citizenship (his mother is British), it is possible for
British agencies and human rights organizations to assert his consular rights
against these oppressive conditions.  At least some preliminary efforts are
underway in Britain to explore that mechanism as a means of securing more
humane treatment for Manning.  Whatever else is true, all of this illustrates
what a profound departure from international norms is the treatment to which
the U.S. Government is subjecting him.

* * * * *

The plight of Manning has largely been overshadowed by the intense media
fixation on WikiLeaks, so it's worth underscoring what it is that he's
accused of doing and what he said in his own reputed words about these acts.
If one believes the authenticity of the highly edited chat logs of Manning's
online conversations with Adrian Lamo that have been released by Wired (that
magazine inexcusably continues to conceal large portions of those logs),
Manning clearly believed that he was a whistle-blower acting with the noblest
of motives, and probably was exactly that.  If, for instance, he really is
the leaker of the Apache helicopter attack video -- a video which sparked
very rare and much-needed realization about the visceral truth of what
American wars actually entail -- as well as the war and diplomatic cables
revealing substantial government deceit, brutality, illegality and
corruption, then he's quite similar to Daniel Ellsberg.  Indeed, Ellsberg
himself said the very same thing about Manning in June on Democracy Now in
explaining why he considers the Army Private to be a "hero":

    The fact is that what Lamo reports Manning is saying has a very familiar
and persuasive ring to me.  He reports Manning as having said that what he
had read and what he was passing on were horrible -- evidence of horrible
machinations by the US backdoor dealings throughout the Middle East and, in
many cases, as he put it, almost crimes. And let me guess that -- hebs not a
lawyer, but I'll guess that what looked to him like crimes are crimes, that
he was putting out. We know that he put out, or at least it's very plausible
that he put out, the videos that he claimed to Lamo.  And that's enough to go
on to get them interested in pursuing both him and the other.

    And so, what it comes down, to me, is -- and I say throwing caution to
the winds here -- is that what I've heard so far of Assange and Manning --
and I haven't met either of them -- is that they are two new heroes of mine.

To see why that's so, just recall some of what Manning purportedly said about
why he chose to leak, at least as reflected in the edited chat logs published
by Wired:

    Lamo: what's your endgame plan, then?. . .

    Manning: well, it was forwarded to [WikiLeaks] - and god knows what
happens now - hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms - if not,
than [sic] we're doomed - as a species - i will officially give up on the
society we have if nothing happens - the reaction to the video gave me
immense hope; CNN's iReport was overwhelmed; Twitter exploded - people who
saw, knew there was something wrong . . . Washington Post sat on the videob&
David Finkel acquired a copy while embedded out here. . . . - i want people
to see the truthb& regardless of who they areb& because without information,
you cannot make informed decisions as a public.

    if i knew then, what i knew now - kind of thing, or maybe im just young,
naive, and stupid . . . im hoping for the former - it cant be the latter -
because if it isb& were fucking screwed (as a society) - and i dont want to
believe that webre screwed.

Manning described the incident which first made him seriously question the
U.S. Government: when he was instructed to work on the case of Iraqi
"insurgents" who had been detained for distributing so-called "insurgent"
literature which, when Manning had it translated, turned out to be nothing
more than "a scholarly critique against PM Maliki":

    i had an interpreter read it for meb& and when i found out that it was a
benign political critique titled "Where did the money go?" and following the
corruption trail within the PMbs cabinetb& i immediately took that information
and *ran* to the officer to explain what was going onb& he didnbt want to hear
any of itb& he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the FPs in
finding *MORE* detaineesb&

    i had always questioned the things worked, and investigated to find the
truthb& but that was a point where i was a *part* of somethingb& i was actively
involved in something that i was completely againstb&

And Manning explained why he never considered the thought of selling this
classified information to a foreign nation for substantial profit or even
just secretly transmitting it to foreign powers, as he easily could have
done:

    Manning: i mean what if i were someone more malicious- i could've sold to
russia or china, and made bank?

    Lamo: almost as reviled around the world, as the waterboard, hypothermia
and other Bush-era tactics that caused so much controversy.

What all of this achieves is clear.  Having it known that the U.S. could and
would disappear people at will to "black sites," assassinate them with unseen
drones, imprison them for years without a shred of due process even while
knowing they were innocent, torture them mercilessly, and in general acts as
a lawless and rogue imperial power created a climate of severe intimidation
and fear.  Who would want to challenge the U.S. Government in any way -- even
in legitimate ways -- knowing that it could and would engage in such lawless,
violent conduct without any restraints or repercussions?  

That is plainly what is going on here.  Anyone remotely affiliated with
WikiLeaks, including American citizens (and plenty of other government
critics), has their property seized and communications stored at the border
without so much as a warrant.  Julian Assange -- despite never having been
charged with, let alone convicted of, any crime -- has now spent more than a
week in solitary confinement with severe restrictions under what his lawyer
calls "Dickensian conditions."  But Bradley Manning has suffered much worse,
and not for a week, but for seven months, with no end in sight.  If you
became aware of secret information revealing serious wrongdoing, deceit
and/or criminality on the part of the U.S. Government, would you -- knowing
that you could and likely would be imprisoned under these kinds of
repressive, torturous conditions for months on end without so much as a
trial:  just locked away by yourself 23 hours a day without recourse -- be
willing to expose it?  That's the climate of fear and intimidation which
these inhumane detention conditions are intended to create.

* * * * *

Those wishing to contribute to Bradley Manning's defense fund can do so here.
All of those means are reputable, but everyone should carefully read the
various options presented in order to decide which one seems best.

UPDATE:  I was contacted by Lt. Villiard, who claims there is one factual
inaccuracy in what I wrote:  specifically, he claims that Manning is not
restricted from accessing news or current events during the proscribed time
he is permitted to watch television.  That is squarely inconsistent with
reports from those with first-hand knowledge of Manning's detention, but it's
a fairly minor dispute in the scheme of things.