Cablegate: exploring WikiLeaks

Screen Capture from Wikileaks site

Last week, the organization WikiLeaks published the first installment of a massive stockpile of U.S State Department cables that detail their daily exchanges with various embassies and consulates.

WikiLeaks was founded in 2007 by Australian journalist Julian Assange.  Originally considered a fringe-group, WikiLeaks has become more controversial with each new release of information as governments fear the secrets will damage national security and relations abroad. A not-for-profit, stateless organization, WikiLeaks functions with the help of full-time volunteers around the world and anonymous sources who submit leaked information in the hopes of reducing government corruption and increasing worldwide transparency.

The leaks were released early to The New York Times, The Guardian and various other European newspapers.  The information is so massive that reporters are still sifting through it a week later.  “The Lede” New York Times bloggers have even asked readers to delve into the cables themselves and send any insight or analysis to the blog.

This batch of cables was retrieved by Army intelligence analyst, Private First Class Bradley Manning who downloaded them from a military computer system and submitted them to WikiLeaks.  He has been arrested and is facing charges of illegally leaking classified information.

The leaks have embarrassed the United States, the world’s sole superpower, whose administration was predicated upon improving transparency in Washington.  Initially the leaks appear to be an alarming exposé of state secrets, but upon closer inspection it seems they may not be so damaging after all.

Professor of Government William Rose said, “I find it embarrassing but not life threatening. The things revealed aren’t actually important, these ideas have already been out there.”

Of the 250,000 leaks, many are unclassified and none are designated “top secret,” the most highly classified category of information in the United States.

Teddy Fisher ’12 said, “I think that except for a few small instances, the direct damage has been small.  We already knew for example, that the Afghan government was corrupt, and we already knew that Berlusconi was a pig, or that Putin had sinister designs on the West – and anyone with sense knows that the government knows the same.”

Government officials seem unsure of the true ramifications of the leaks. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton voiced the potential for threats to diplomatic relations between countries and security of all nations in the wake of the cable release, while Defense Secretary Robert Gates took a more calm stance, saying the effects on foreign policy would be “fairly modest.”

The main reason that the effect of the cables may be muted in terms of damage to hard power is that many countries can’t afford not to interact with the United States.  “Countries have an incentive to interact with us, and WikiLeaks hasn’t changed those interests,” Rose said. The larger ramifications will be seen in the arena of soft power- damage to the appeal and perception of American culture and reputation.

Professor of Government Dorothy James said, “One casualty of the leaks is likely to be the attempts to increase information sharing among government departments and agencies.”

On December 1, the U.S government announced new restrictions on exactly who can view State Department documents.  This policy implicates information sharing strategies that were implemented after the 9/11 Commission Report, which attributed part of the 9/11 attack to lack of cooperation and sharing between United States agencies.  Using this logic, the shrinking of the pool of officials who can access State Department documents could backfire and instead expose security weaknesses for terrorists to exploit.

Rose indicated that the cycle within the intelligence agency frequently shifts between open sharing and strict security.  The cycle is driven by disasters, such as 9/11 and this WikiLeaks saga.

Part of the crackdown on security included a warning from the Obama administration to all federal employees that the documents leaked are still considered classified, and thus accessing them whether directly via the WikiLeaks site, or through any other site that has published them, is a violation.  A similar warning was expanded to Columbia University students, and allegedly to other universities, that publishing individual cables or discussing the cables through social media like Twitter and Facebook could compromise future job prospects in the government field.  A Columbia alum issued the warning to Columbia’s Career Services saying any re-publishing of the leaks would “call into question [an individuals] ability to deal with confidential information.”

Coupled with intensified security in the United States, an NPR report noted concern for heightened anti-American sentiment in the wake of the attacks, specifically in relation to Yemeni cables between General David Petraeus and Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh which reveal cooperation between Yemen and the United States.  News of this cooperation may anger Yemeni citizens and, paired with the State Department leaks, give Al Qaeda material with which to recruit followers.

Julian Assange’s actions haven’t come without ramifications either.  Various internet sites, including Amazon.com, PayPal and EasyDNS.net (one of the main systems that manages WikiLeaks’ domain name) have severed ties with WikiLeaks since the cables were released on Sunday.  This has resulted in a massive scramble to get the website back online.  Providing further problems for the site has been a flood of requests from suspected robot computers in Europe, Russia and Thailand.  Although the exact source of the perpetrators will be difficult to trace, it is speculated that a government body has something to do with it.

Assange himself is in deep water surrounding allegations of sexual abuse in Sweden.  An Interpol “Red Notice” (most-wanted alert) was released on November 30 and has forced him into hiding, presumably in London, to conduct his operations in secret.  Facing the threat of arrest, Assange posted an “insurance policy” on the WikiLeaks website.  This file is encrypted with a code that supposedly even a government can’t crack, but once the code is broken the file will automatically dump the rest of the information in the WikiLeaks arsenal. The password to unlock the file will be released in the event that anything adverse befalls the WikiLeaks leader.

So while the major concern is no longer that the cables will ruin carefully-constructed diplomatic relations between the United States and foreign countries at the moment, Assange has established WikiLeaks as an organization to be reckoned with, leaving many wondering what will be revealed next and how it will shift the balance between freedom of the press and state privacy.

Fisher notes, “The danger is the implications of what WikiLeaks could be used for- or what other as yet unreleased information could be sold to foreign governments. The threat of further releases to come is what has the US government so angry.”

Representative Ron Paul tweeted on Friday, “RE: Wikileaks- In a free society, we are supposed to know the truth.  In a society where truth becomes treason, we are in big trouble.”

Professor Rose, however, insists on the importance of confidentiality among government officials, “There really is a place for confidentiality.  A leader is going to want to have a frank discussion in public- you wouldn’t get a frank and full opinion without confidentiality.” •