Waki Wiki Leaks Worries Washington Wets

Once again the nauseating Julian Assange and his Wikileaks disclosures have dominated the press. The 250,000 or so cables allegedly handed over to the ‘international new media non-profit organisation’ (donations gratefully accepted) by US Army Private Bradley Manning is currently – in spite of the blocking of servers – being trickle fed to the general public through selected media channels. `

The diplomatic cables were sent via the United States' SIPRNet (Secret Internet Protocol Router Network). Only  15,652 cables, are classified as "secret." and of those, 4,330 are so sensitive that they carry the additional label "NOFORN," meaning that they should not be made accessible to non-US nationals and of course, these are the cables of most interest.

On where we should draw the line with regards to freedom of information has always been a contentious issue for democratic countries. Does the publishing of the diplomatic cables promote openness, freedom and increased public knowledge or does it undermine western democracy and endanger lives?

And when a clearly worried White House administration defends its ‘candid assessments’ and condemns Wikileaks for publishing them, does this mean the US is afraid of being held to account? Oh to be a fly on the wall of the Oval Office!

The main issue with the publication of the material is that it undermines important current strategic relationships but for the most part is unlikely to directly endanger lives (from what I have seen so far).  And that is the crux of the matter.  Wikileaks should offer a degree of editing to remove anything which could endanger lives.  I would hazard a guess that most of these cables will be within the 4330 NOFORN classification, so it is not necessary to edit a quarter of a million documents.

With regards to the reporting of the leaks, I can’t help but feel those which have made sensational reading and offered juicy dissection to news outlets are in fact the most harmless while the less spectacular feeds are those which should cause most concern. Most of what has been said so far is either already in the public domain or is commonly assumed.

Honesty time – hands up anyone who was genuinely surprised to read that foreign governments don’t trust Karzai, that Arab leaders – particularly Sunnis – are afraid of Ahmedinejad, Berlusconi is "feckless and vain" or that Mexico was failing in its fight against drug cartels. Who hadn’t already realised that Putin is seen as an alpha dog, that Obama doesn’t care about Europe or that it is actually the US bombing terrorist hides in Yemen? We knew that Cameron and Clegg didn’t get along (I love the one that says Clegg ‘gratefully’ accepted an ‘aggressive’ invitation to dinner from Cameron. Did he put a pistol to Clegg’s head or told him he’d steal his dinner money or maybe threatened to smash his face in if he didn’t come?), that the west fears Pakistani nuclear materials could fall into the wrong hands and that the Duke of York is an obnoxious, boorish freeloader.

So what if those details are out there. I do not feel that lives are put at risk by these ‘revelations’.

What I would draw the line at however (and I am surprised that this did not get as much media coverage as some of the more sensational cables) was the revelation of America’s list of ‘critical infrastructure’. These are worldwide sites which would cause chaos if hit. They vary from huge hydroelectric plants, to communication junctions, to a factory in Australia which makes antidotes for snake bites. I feel that this is a Wikileak too far and is in fact offering the terrorists a ready made list of ‘Please Insert Suicide Bomber Here’ targets.

Wikileaks has a huge number of journalists downloading these cables; I am sure there would be slightly more sympathy for Assange and his current plight had they thought to edit at least some of the revelations.

Ecrivain Man