Wikileaks ... Secrets aren't that important.

[Matilda]

From The Drum blog on Australia's online ABC forum, from Sam Roggeveen:

"Just because information is classified, does not mean it is valuable."

(snip)

"The same principle holds good for the latest WikiLeaks revelations. So when a classified cable reveals that a Gulf monarch once mocked French military technology, don't assume this reveals the truth or even that King Hamad of Bahrain was being candid. He was, after all, talking to US General David Petraeus. Hamad may simply have been trying to ingratiate himself with an American by making fun of the French. Or perhaps he thought his comments would find their way back to American arms manufacturers, who would be encouraged to then offer Bahrain new toys.

Similarly, as Dan Drezner points out, just because a Chinese diplomat privately criticises North Korea and calls it a threat to global security doesn't mean Chinese policy is about to change radically. To make a judgment about that, you really need to examine the public evidence of China's policy.

Much has also been made of the revelation in the cables that Saudi Arabia is so concerned about Iran's nuclear program that King Abdullah urged the US to conduct a military strike. Again, it is dangerous to assume that this information can be trusted just because it is secret and the Saudi leader was speaking in private. The Saudis have an agenda all their own ... it might suit them to foment war between the US and Iran."

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41810.html


This is the truth of the matter. Probably the worst that can be said of most of this information is that it's highly embarrassing to a lot of highly-placed people. There is really not much there that most of us wouldn't have suspected anyway - Prince Andrew is a bit of dickhead - who'd have thought it? Major powers are all trying to manipulate events in other countries to suit their own agenda – what's new?

What I find most shocking is the emotive reactions from so many of these highly-placed people, and the fact that Julian Assange is forced to go into hiding, protected by security guards and is facing what looks very much like a trumped-up "rape" charge, which on examination appears to be no more than that he might have been a witness to a case of sexual harrassment. But he's in fear for his life, and I think he's right to be. Australian PM Julie Gillard has said that Assange's actions have been "highly irresponsible", but how does she find Canadian PM Steven Harper's call for Assange to be assassinated? Coming from a world leader, that is the height of irresponsibility, but I don't hear any other leaders saying that that would be taking things a bit too far – they probably all agree.

And that's the real shocker. That a man's life is in danger because world leaders have been embarrassed by their own words and actions.

[bemildred]

1. Yeah, the point is more that what's in the cables is lies and dissembling and pure bullshit.

One ought not assume any of it is true without other corroboration.

[CJCRANE]

2. Um...he defeats his own argument...

"The Saudis have an agenda all their own ... it might suit them to foment war between the US and Iran."

Isn't that the point - that these leaders have their own agendas?

I don't see how that's unimportant.

Is it unimportant if the Repubs do their bidding and push for that agenda?

[northernlights]

3. is it not important that Obama conspired to protect our war criminals

and threatened Spain with retaliation? He didn't just "turn the page" on Bush and Cheney's illegal wars and torture. He threatened anybody who attempted to bring them to justice.

Is it not important that this administration funded a coup in 2009 (hint...Obama's administration) and appointed a dictator?

These points may not be important to you. It marked a major turning point for me.

Amidst the gossipy parts there is seriously damaging information. Yes, it is business as usual for America. But now it is no longer relegated to "conspiracy theorist" nutcases. The sordid, despicable "foreign policy" is out in the open for all to see.

[bhikkhu]

4. well, unless you feel that politics is unimportant enough to be left in secret

"nothing to see here" is what any PTB with a vast and dirty record would like you to think. I tend to think that the wikileaks effort has set a precedent that should have every rotten conniving corrupt "diplomat" shaking in his/her shoes, and considering a change in behavior. If one dirty little war of the sort we hear little about doesn't happen, that's well worth the effort and whatever loss of "prestige" these guys imagine they have suffered.

[Matilda]

5. The point I made, which follows on from what the author says,

is that these things aren't really so secret anyway. We all know, or suspect, what goes on behind closed doors. And I'm fully in support of whistle-blowers everywhere.

What is so shocking - to me, at least - is that world leaders are trying to set up Assange on charges that are spurious at best, and in the worst case, calling for his termination. Not because world stability is really threatened by the leaks, but because the duplicity of so many has now been exposed. And the media are focussing on the sensational aspects of Assange's trumped-up rape charge, and where he might be hiding, while quoting the shock-horror reactions of the politicans caught being indiscreet, instead of asking them to "please explain".

[bemildred]

6. Yes, it's not a pretty picture is it?

You think we've made some progress in the last few centuries, and then you see this hysterical witch hunt, and you know it's not that much.