WikiLeaks Caper Not A Big Deal

Sunday, December 5, 2010

Recently, the website WikiLeaks engaged in another one of its infamous info-dumps, releasing what it says is a collection of 251,287 State Department documents into the public eye.

Most of the documents are copies of cables that were sent back and forth between Washington and our embassies. Many of them contain, shall we say, less than flattering -pictures of the people our diplomats deal with. The juicier ones, in fact, read like notes passed by mean high school girls, but with better vocabularies.

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, one cable states, is "feckless, vain and -ineffective." The prime minister and defense minister of Kazakhstan are a -couple of hard-partying drunks. French President Sarkozy is "impulsive," -"mercurial" and surrounded by "yes-men." Libya's Muammar Qaddafi is an eccentric nutcase who never goes -anywhere without a voluptuous blonde Ukrainian "nurse."

I read this sort of thing and I have to ask: Is any of this really new information? Qaddafi's a loon, Berlusconi's an empty suit, and Sarkozy's arrogant and impulsive. Oh, and -according to another cable, the Afghan government's -corrupt. I mean, stop the presses. Everyone who cares already knows this stuff.

Of more interest are revelations about our so-called allies in the Middle East. The good news is that it seems that we're not the only ones worried about Iran's nuclear ambitions. The bad news is that they all seem to want to leave it to us to do something about it.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, according to one cable, urged the U.S. to "cut the head off the snake before it's too lake."

Hey, I've got an idea, Your Majesty: You do it. We're kind of busy right now, and the snake's in your backyard. Meanwhile, while we cast about for al-Qaida in Iraq, Pakistan and Yemen, it's another well-known "secret" -confirmed by these cables that it's the Saudis who are among the biggest, if not the biggest, financiers of -terrorism, who hope, according to the leaked documents, that if you give the maniacs enough cash, they'll "leave the House of Saud alone."

Again, this is not really news to anyone who's been paying attention the past few years.

It also appears, much to no one's surprise, that many Middle Eastern leaders can't stand each other. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak "hates Hamas" and knows Iran is a sponsor of terrorism, but won't say it because it might "create a dangerous situation" (presumably most dangerous to Mubarak himself).

The above-mentioned King Abdullah says the country of Iraq "is in his heart," but its president, Nouri al-Maliki, is not. As for Asif Ali Zardari, the president of Pakistan, grumpy King Abdullah describes him as "rotten."

There have been demands (including, disappointingly, in this very paper) that WikiLeaks and its founder and spokesman Julian Assange be prosecuted. A former adviser to Stephen Harper, the Canadian prime minister, went -further, suggesting that President Obama "put out a -contract" on Assange, and "use a drone or something" to assassinate him. Former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said the person responsible for the leaks should be executed for "putting national security at risk."

Well, now, let's hold on just a minute here before we fetch the rope.

Assange, to be sure, is an unlikable, pompous twit with an ego so massive it has its own gravitational field. He's under suspicion for rape in Sweden. Also, he has bad hair. There very well may have been a crime committed by whoever released the documents to WikiLeaks. But a capital one? So far, it seems like most of the information released is just embarrassing, not life-threatening or disastrous to our -diplomatic efforts.

On a recent trip to Kazakhstan by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Berlusconi and the Kazakh leadership were quick to act as if nothing had happened. The fact is, they might be annoyed, but most world leaders are not going to sulk and jeopardize their own national interests because someone sent a snarky cable about them.

Even Iran's nutball President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad shrugged off the disrespect as "psychological warfare" by the U.S. and said "such mischief will have no impact on the relations of countries."

Diplomacy has always been the art of negotiating with people you detest and who you know probably detest you, all the while pretending neither of you knows it. As one wit put it, it's the technique of sweetly saying "nice doggie" while looking around for a suitably large rock.

A bunch of leaked cables isn't going to change that.

Dusty Rhoades lives, writes and practices law in Carthage.

More like this story

blake 2 years, 5 months ago

The cables also revealed the Yemen government allowed us to bomb al-Qaeda in their country claiming it was their doing. The release of this threatens a tenuous relationship and aid in fighting a group the CIA identified as the most urgent terrorist threat to US security.

It was not all harmless.

dustyrhoades 2 years, 5 months ago

"The cables also revealed the Yemen government allowed us to bomb al-Qaeda in their country claiming it was their doing. "

Which has to be the worst kept secret EVER. I read it months ago.

dustyrhoades 2 years, 5 months ago

http://firedoglake.com/2010/08/25/here-we-go-again-obamas-war-in-yemen/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704125604575450162714867720.html

dustyrhoades 2 years, 5 months ago

"Since mid-December 2009, there have been five airstrikes against Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula leaders. The Yemeni government claims it is carrying out the attacks, but the US is known to have conducted the first strike, on Dec. 17. US officials claim the US is only providing intelligence and military support for the strikes."

This came out in March, BTW.

nothingspecial 2 years, 5 months ago

Amid yet another of a week's worth of folks trying to divert our attention away from an action by Wiki Leaks that embarrasses us and hurts our national security at a breathless number of levels, here are some opinions from the other side of the argument to give us a little bit of reality:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/02/AR2010120204561.html

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100066444/is-president-obama-getting-a-free-pass-over-wikileaks-the-left-would-have-bayed-for-bushs-blood-if-he-was-in-the-white-house/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/12/02/wikileaks_is_attacking_us_national_security.html

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20101202_Worldview__Disclosure_without_a_cause.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/1/international-subversives/

dustyrhoades 2 years, 5 months ago

Oh, I don't deny there's a lot of hysteria about it, NS, even from people who should know better, like my good friend, Steve Bouser. But just because a lot of people are running around shouting the sky is falling doesn't mean it is.

Sally244 2 years, 5 months ago

Intention is everything. Did Assange publish these to embarrass, humiliate, undermine American power and sabotage Americas relationships? Yes, I think so. Without publishing other country's private papers to go a long with these there's no other reason for doing it. Most of it's in bad taste but there are some real gems that can and probably will cause a lot of problems and diminish our negotiating powers in the world. There's no other way to look at it other than a cyber attack, the new war zone.

pinewoodnc 2 years, 5 months ago

Sally244. You are right on. It is the new war zone and may end up being the downfall for all. Obtaining privileged information and then publishing it to stir up an already volatile world, to me, is a form of treason. What if all information that is suppose to be secured and private start appearing over the internet? I don't think I want to be around if that becomes the norm. Much of the world is a ticking time bomb to begin with and this just adds fuel to the flames!

dustyrhoades 2 years, 5 months ago

"Obtaining privileged information and then publishing it to stir up an already volatile world, to me, is a form of treason."

How so?

"What if all information that is suppose to be secured and private start appearing over the internet?"

It already is, whether we like it or not.

bigD 2 years, 5 months ago

Lefty you just dont get it! Classified information must stay that way no matter how trivial...duh!

pinewoodnc 2 years, 5 months ago

Well, maybe it is time that something was done about that. I think people that engage in that reprehensible behavior need to be held accountable for the damage that they do. It is the worst kind of person that would derive some kind of satisfaction from revealing private information that could result in tragic consequences. When it starts to affect the world situation, something better be done before the damage cannot be undone.

Sally244 2 years, 5 months ago

Didn't we all learn around the dinner table that there are things we talk about but don't share with others? To then go ahead and share is being vindictive and childish.

dustyrhoades 2 years, 5 months ago

"Lefty"

Just so you know, Derek, this is where I stop reading.

dustyrhoades 2 years, 5 months ago

"When it starts to affect the world situation, something better be done before the damage cannot be undone."

How has this affected "the world situation" apart from a few red faces? no one's gone to war, no one's severed relations, and diplomats are still voicing the same old platitudes about "strong ties" etc.

I'll agree that there are certain things that need to be kept under wraps, at least for the time being. Someone else in another thread mentioned fleet movements and the the names of serving intelligence officers in the field. But, again, none of those were compromised here, and no one has yet answered the question: who do you trust to decide what we "don't need to hear"?

Right wingers love to gripe about the "nanny state," but it's the "Daddy state"--where the State can compel obedience or silence "because I said so"--that should worry you more.

OldPilot 2 years, 5 months ago

The Wikileaks release is at least annoying and at worst embarassing. It does however point out the lack of security in supposedly secure communications via the net. If this motivates the US to bolster its cyber defenses Assange and the Wikileaks organiation have done the US a great favor.

moonchild7 2 years, 5 months ago

Before 9/11 government agencies didn't like to "share" information, leaving us vulnerable to attacks. After 9/11 the Wikileaks "leaks" show that government agencies and Nations have been sharing so much inconsequential and mean-tempered gossip, that we're probably again vulnerable to attacks. Where are the intelligent adults in this world? Facebook, MySpace, Blackberries, IPOD's, Tweets, etc., are making complete dupes of humanity. I love information, and I love learning. I spent a lot of time in my youth in libraries(with books)trying to soak up as much knowledge as possible. Now with the internet more than enough information is at my fingertips. I can't get enough. But all of these very personal "File Sharing" activities have gone beyond normal. It's getting voyueristic, abusive and sick. That little GI who hacked into all those government secrets probably could have cared less about whether or not people would be harmed if the info was exposed. I have no idea if he felt he needed to expose these secrets(like the Pentagon Papers)because he felt a moral conviction to do so but I doubt it. The lines between sense and non-sense don't exhist anymore.

pinewoodnc 2 years, 5 months ago

You don't get it, DR. I see there is no point in discussing anything with certain "regulars" that seem to wish to argue with anything anyone writes and purport that their opinion is the "only" opinion of value.

dustyrhoades 2 years, 5 months ago

In other words, pinewood, you can't answer my question, so you get all huffy. Typical.

pinewoodnc 2 years, 5 months ago

No, I just don't waste my time with someone that thinks he is always right and no one else has a right to an opinion. Talk about typical!

dustyrhoades 2 years, 5 months ago

And yet, here you are.

jamjam 2 years, 5 months ago

do we really need to keep secretes? I prefer truth. Why not be truthful with everyone. Oh yeah, there's something to be gained. There's oil, natural gas, and passages to and from. What generates war? Consumption. who consumes? we do. So if there's fault, its ours. I mean if you want to be a warring state then you need espionage. If you want to be the world's police, then you need secretes. If you intent to capture resources, then you need a strong force of arms. We do not have enough treasury to conduct any more outlandish wars for resources. In one sense we can barely take care of ourselves, so why should we assert our will around the world when all we want is to take what resources they have.