Why Did Harvard Kennedy School Rescind Their Offer for Chelsea Manning to Be a Visiting Fellow?
Recently, a significant controversy erupted when Harvard Kennedy School rescinded their offer to Chelsea Manning to serve as a visiting fellow. This move has sparked intense debate among academic circles, human rights activists, and the wider public. To unravel the reasons behind this decision, it is essential to examine the context, the individuals involved, and their positions.
The Context and The Controversy
Chelsea Manning’s appointment as a visiting fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School was initially met with widespread support from academic and human rights communities. Manning’s military service, her involvement in the release of potentially classified information to WikiLeaks, and her subsequent imprisonment have made her a symbol of both courage and controversy.
The decision to revoke the offer came as a surprise to many. According to Dean Douglas W. Elmendorf, the decision was influenced by the statements made by CIA Director, Michael Pompeo. The revocation of Manning’s offer raises questions about the academic institution’s commitment to academic freedom and the diversity of thought and expression.
Michael Pompeo: A Hawkish Figure
Michael Pompeo, known for his hawkish and openly partisan political stance, played a significant role in the decision to rescind the offer. Pompeo, who has a history of asserting controversial viewpoints, served as a congressman from the Tea Party wave of 2010. During his tenure, he defended waterboarding as a legitimate interrogation technique and dismissed detainee hunger strikes as political stunts. His appointment as CIA Director further cemented his position as a controversial figure within the intelligence community.
According to former CIA analyst Nada Bakos, Pompeo’s backtracking on issues of diversity within the CIA has made him less popular among agency insiders. His hawkish views and partisan political stance have been criticized by many as a threat to the workforce and national security. This context provides insight into why Manning’s appointment might have been seen as ideologically at odds with Pompeo's views.
Academic Freedom and Diversity
The termination of Manning’s offer raises important questions about academic freedom and diversity within academic institutions. Critics argue that the decision to revoke the offer is inconsistent with the principles of academic openness and the commitment to diverse viewpoints.
Manning’s support team, including Chase Strangio, made a compelling argument against the decision, highlighting the absurdity of inviting former press secretary Sean Spicer, known for his penchant for truth-bending statements, while revoking Manning’s offer. This comparison underscores the double standard present in the decision and highlights the need for academic institutions to uphold a consistent standard of merit and inclusivity.
The Future of Chelsea Manning
Considering the termination of her offer, Manning may turn to activism and advocacy work as her immediate future. With a strong track record as a spokesperson for LGBTQ affairs and a staunch advocate for whistleblowers, Manning is well-positioned to continue her work.
The GoFundMe page raised over $140,000 to help Manning resettle after her release from prison. These funds can support her in continuing her activism and public speaking engagements, providing a financial safety net that has been crucial for previous whistleblowers, such as Edward Snowden.
Additionally, there is speculation that reality TV might be another platform for Manning to reach broader audiences and share her story. If this opportunity arises, it could play a significant role in raising public awareness about the issues she has been advocating for.
Conclusion
While the decision by Harvard Kennedy School to revoke Manning's fellowship may seem arbitrary to some, it highlights the complex and often fraught nature of academic politics. Manning’s appointment was met with mixed reactions, but the ultimate revocation underscores the broader issues of diversity, academic freedom, and the potential for ideological conflicts to influence academic appointments.
As Manning moves forward, her activism and advocacy will undoubtedly continue to shape public discourse and inspire future generations. The path ahead is likely to be challenging, but supported by a growing community, Manning is poised to make a significant impact.
For more information on supporting Chelsea Manning:
Support the Chelsea Manning Welcome Home Fund