Can Clinton handle collateral damage from Wikileaks State Dept. cables?
Friday, June 11, 2010 at 12:28PM By Kay B. Day
In the belief that Wikileaks might publish large numbers of cables from the US Dept. of State, the Pentagon is said to be searching for the founder of the site, Julian Assange. Philip Shenon at The Daily Beast said, “American officials said Pentagon investigators are convinced that Assange is in possession of at least some classified State Department cables leaked by a 22-year-old Army intelligence specialist, Bradley Manning of Potomac, Maryland, who is now in custody in Kuwait.”
It’s hard to tell how much information is in Wikileaks’ files because, after all, these are matters of state secrets and Wikileaks isn’t exactly transparent, perhaps by necessity, about its own inner mechanism.
Manning is the ‘whistleblower’ in the viral video Wikileaks edited into the brief film ‘Collateral Murder.’ Pilots are heard as aircraft fire in an urban war setting. The video I saw didn’t place the attack in context, however.
Wired interviewed one soldier shown on the video. He was carrying an injured child who was wounded when a man driving the van she and another child were in tried to retrieve a man injured in the attack. He did confirm there was an urban combat situation in progress.
It’s hard to come to a solid conclusion about the video, other than to be horrified at war in general no matter who is right.
It’s worth remembering information in Michael Yon’s book ‘Moment of Truth in Iraq,’ where he notes ambulances often picked up wounded insurgents. It stands to reason there would be armed men in such vehicles.
I asked myself after seeing the video if I, a parent, would expose my children to possible death in a war zone by stopping to retrieve an injured party in an obvious combat situation. The answer is no. I might expose myself, but not my children. No one has asked about the motivation of the father who took that action.
Assange is a curiosity—he appears to travel from place to place and presents himself to media when he pleases.
One thing is worthy of attention—who funds the site and who funds the ‘volunteers’ who work for it?
Some releases seem political rather than a search for truth and justice—for instance, the leaking of the US Transportation Security Administration’s 2008 procedures for airport security checkpoints.
An article reprinted from US News at the Wikileaks website said, “The document itself details screening procedures at metal detectors, explosive residue testers, and other elements of airport security. It outlines procedures for escorting certain travelers around security checkpoints, including air marshals, diplomats, and CIA officers. An annex to the document gives several examples of official credentials for agencies including the CIA, Congress, and federal air marshals and notes on determining their authenticity.” [Dec. 7, 2009]
It’s difficult for an American to accept the release of a document such as this, at least for those of us who haven’t forgot the attack on our country September 11, 2001 that was a declaration of war by an ideological group bent on destroying the US in hopes of furthering the power of Islamist groups such as al Qaeda. The only benefit in releasing that particular data would be to wannabe terrorists.
Ironically there’s also an announcement on the WL site about an appearance by Assange and like-minded individuals: “Super panel tonight [June 11, 2010] in Vegas with Julian Assange, Valerie Plame & Scott Risen.”
Numerous accounts of Manning’s angst and motivation for compromising his US Army position are available online. It’s difficult to tell how much of Manning’s claims about conscience are true, because after all, there are people who will do anything for attention. Who knows where Manning’s truth really lies?
It’s not hard to conclude there could be cables that are very damaging to our country. WL says it endorses “principled leaking.” Principles, however, are subjective things. And a free country is at a distinct disadvantage compared to a country like Iran where Wikileaks is banned.
If all the world were free, such leaks might be viewed in a broader context.
Perhaps because we are a superpower, there’s a bigger target on our back than that of a country like North Korea.
One piquant question relates to the abilities of Sec. of State Hillary Clinton—can she handle what could be a national security disaster if Wikileaks releases cables that reflect negatively on the US or our allies? And how will she prevent such leaks in the future?
Hopefully someone somewhere knows what Wikileaks has in hand from Manning’s breach of security and protocol, raising another question. How did he compromise so much for so long?
Besides all that, how do we even know Assange is who he claims to be?