News about the end of the world, because of WikiLeaks revelations, is just a little exaggerated, Mark Twain would write. It would take all his satirical genius to properly comment on the agitation in the media about American diplomatic dispatches caught by Julian Assange’s hackers. The publication will go on for weeks. Nevertheless, as expected, in these 251,287 documents, there is no shocking news, no clamorous revelation, nothing that we have not known for a long time. The situation is that none of the 251,287 documents — not even one — is classified as top secret.
It was known that the Gulf countries push for military intervention against the Iranian nuclear program. The Saudi and Pakistani betrayal was known. North Korean support of Iran was known. The corruption of the Afghan government was known. Negotiation for the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners was known. The special relationship between Italy and Russia was known. Nor is the only original piece of news a novelty — that Barack Obama, just like George W. Bush, has spied on U.N. leaders.
The WikiLeaks files are not the Pentagon Papers, the confidential documents of the Defense Department. In 1971, at first the Times and then the Post told the secret story, commissioned by the Pentagon for internal use, about military involvement in Vietnam. And [they told] about the lies of four administrations regarding strategic intentions, about military activities, and about extending the war to Cambodia and Laos. In the WikiLeaks papers (at least, in what is known), not only are there no particular revelations, but rather, the publication shows that in democratic societies, thanks to the old and free press, the decision process is transparent and news is known in real time; not much is new.
Reactions in Italy and in the World
As for opinions about world leaders, WikiLeaks dispatches contain reports and considerations not really different from those the editors, themselves, read in newspapers. Obama’s spokesperson has put these cables [cablegrams], rich in unflattering adjectives, in the right context: “Field reporting to Washington is candid and often incomplete information. It is not an expression of policy, nor does it always shape final policy decisions.”
People are not reading the opinions of the administration but elements of information and evaluation that have been sent to someone who must decide whether or not to pay them attention when developing policy. As far as it goes for Sarkozy, Berlusconi, Cameron and the others, Obama’s actions and policies matter more than WikiLeaks suggestions.
Another point is diplomatic etiquette. Now the international secretariats are seriously embarrassed and forced to communicate cautiously, as though Julian Assange were a sort of global policeman, able to spy on everything and everybody. WikiLeaks files do not justify the distressing headings of newspapers nor the catastrophic statements of politics about the end of the American empire, about the diplomatic 9/11, about the storm that has stricken the world. The world is still standing and has much more serious problems to face.
Julian Assange is playing Robin Hood, the man of transparency, justice and peace. Although, if he wants to be really open, even to disprove the conspiracy theories that are already circulating on the net, he should be interested in defending himself from the charges of rape. And, especially, he should tell how he managed to turn WikiLeaks into a major world power, able to dictate the political agenda and mock the newspapers.
Assange is not a champion of information. He does not want to inform. He wants the violation of the American fort. He does not even care about peace. He just wants to embarrass the White House which, moreover, is headed by the winner of a Nobel Peace Prize. Keep that in mind.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.