As I witness the media barrage on WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, like others, I can’t help but notice the significance of the unfolding events. This drama is hard to ignore, and presents some interesting thoughts to ponder. This is like something out of a modern spy novel, full of references to classified government documents, Interpol, and doomsday files. It is interesting how there are those in the media who are portraying Assange as paranoid. It makes you wonder, if you were going to support whistleblowers and facilitate the uncovering of wrongdoings and corruption by big business and government, would you not also be extremely cautious and have some damn good insurance and friends in your corner to keep you from meeting an ‘unfortunate accident?’ There are many other questions that come to mind:
Did the U.S. government realize their strong public objection to the release of the embassy cables to have the effect it is currently having on the popularity of WikiLeaks?
I, for one, never really had much interest in visiting the WikiLeaks site, until I read about the extremely strong reaction by government leaders. I wonder how many other people have now visited the WikiLeaks web site because of the boom in publicity, in spite of the efforts by organizations to keep the web site offline. It seems that Assange and his staff are quite up-to-speed on Internet technology and adept at keeping the information accessible through any search engine search.
Are the recent criminal proceedings against Assange related to the release of documents on WikiLeaks?
Spokespeople for the U.S. government deny it, but the timing is undeniably peculiar. Only time will tell if Assange is guilty of breaking the law in Sweden, or if this case will result in Assange being handed over to authorities in the USA. The correlation between Assange’s charges and WikiLeaks is unclear, but this makes me wonder if there are any other people who ever made it on Interpol’s Most Wanted List for alleged non-consentual sex. If not, would it be safe to assume that there were political factors involved?
Is it surprising to anyone else how strong and across the board the objection to WikiLeaks is?
Actually, it is not surprising to me that many people fear the possible repercussions of classified intelligence being leaked. In our society people fear what might empower or inspire terrorist activities. People fear looking bad and losing face. What is surprising to me is how much this fear crosses party lines, with strong objections raised by leaders in the Democratic and Republican Parties. Hillary Clinton has publicly attacked the leaks, and Sarah Palin has chimed in her objections on her Twitter account. (It is notable that WikiLeaks released Clinton Wedding Papers in July 27, 2010.) It seems as though the system of government and politics has its limits when accepting a policy of transparency. Maybe the Democrats and Republicans can finally embrace each other on a shared pursuit, after all. When you think about how polarized and political our society has become, perhaps this common ground a good thing.
Does the disclosure of classified materials provide a security risk for Americans?
I have read the arguments that information provided on WikiLeaks give our enemies an advantage that they can use against us. Attorney General Eric Holder condemned the release of information on WikiLeaks stating, “It puts at risk our national security, but in a more concrete way, it puts at risk individuals who are serving this country in a variety of capacities…” It is true that terrorists and other enemies could use the information they acquire to harm American interests. But do you ever wonder if there is really any way to provide real security against anyone who intended to do us harm? If all someone had to do was to spend less than $2000 to mail an explosive package from Yemen to cost the American taxpayers millions (maybe billions) of dollars for upgraded airport security measures, not to mention other side effects, do terrorists really need any help? I believe more focus should be on improving international relations, and trust-building efforts to improve economies collaboratively, and we will have fewer enemies to worry about.
Should the U.S. government take more responsibility for keeping their information classified?
It appears the Australian government thinks so, as they speak out to defend the rights of their citizen, Assange. The U.S. government can prosecute those who break the rules, but it seems like the recipients of the information, whether it be a media outlet or media information collector are protected under the Freedom Of Information Act. It is more obvious than ever, that as the major news outlets publish documents from WikiLeaks on a daily basis, it IS a news provider. They have provided the information for free, in keeping with the spirit of “free information access” that has made the Internet such a valuable tool for democracy. If they were charging the news media for access to their information, I would believe that WikiLeaks would have enough money to hire an army of attorneys for Assange.
Is anything beneficial going to come out of this WikiLeaks circus?
Well, again, perhaps time will tell. Until then, many people will consume the news daily with increased interest, and perhaps more people will visit the WikiLeaks web site to see what all of the fuss is about. I am sure that many in power would prefer that all of this were swept quietly under the carpet. If it weren’t for CNN news coverage, I wouldn’t have checked out WikiLeaks and found out about the grisly fate of two Reuters news staff that a U.S. Army Apache helicopter crew mistakenly believed were insurgents. I wouldn’t have seen the classified helicopter video showing the crew's seemingly indiscriminate killing of the two journalists and at least 10 other individuals who were just at the wrong place at the wrong time. Especially poignant to me, was seeing a minivan trying to rescue a wounded journalist, and watching hell being unleashed on the poor rescuers, including a 4 yr-old girl and 7 yr-old boy being riddled with bullets as their father tried in vain to cover them with his body. I can only imagine that without a Internet media tool like WikiLeaks, Reuters may have never discovered the truth about their missing staff members, and the world may have never known about the Iraqi family that was ‘erased’ when they tried to help a fellow human being in need.
Is this drama going to be a litmus test for our society? With democracy, there is a need for transparency and the media has traditionally been guardians of that transparency. The Supreme Court has guaranteed the right for the media to publish classified government information. The only way to ensure integrity in the government and in business is to keep it in the light of the public eye. Those who have the most to lose with transparency seem to always use “security issues” as a reason to stay out of the light. Shouldn’t the people want to be kept informed about the politicians they choose to represent them in government? If people with conscience find out about an issue of grave importance to the people, shouldn’t we want to give them a way to do so anonymously? Don’t we want a military and government that operates openly, and that is not afraid to admit its mistakes?
I believe that it will be interesting to see how the Obama Administration handles this matter, and to see which principals they choose to forward on the world stage. Regardless of the direction that we go, it seems WikiLeaks has already made its mark in history.