Editorial

WikiLeaks damage control

WikiLeaks have done a lot of damage to America; and the effort is to foreclose on the leaks in the pipeline.

Editorial December 07, 2010

Those who think the WikiLeaks were manufactured by the US to embarrass and defame certain individuals should take a look at the extent to which the US administration is going to take them off the internet. WikiLeaks.org is under attack from all directions. Those who have collaborated with the government include book-selling Amazon which has removed WikiLeaks from its hosting services. But some, like server DynaDot, are under pressure to do likewise. As a result the WikiLeaks.org web address is no longer functioning after an American internet company pulled the plug on the site.

Servers who removed WikiLeaks offered the excuse that they were under severe attack by hackers which endangered websites other than WikiLeaks, forcing them to remove the secret cables. Among other domain hosting companies, Octopuce in France had to remove WikiLeaks after being served a warning by the French government that said that it is unacceptable for a criminal site to be hosted in the country. Relying on a law that bans ‘criminal’ websites, the French industry minister wrote to the body governing internet use, warning that there would be consequences for any company or organisation helping to keep WikiLeaks online in the country.

So WikiLeaks has been inaccessable except through one Swiss domain. Julian Assange — the WikiLeaks founder who was arrested by British police on December 7 on a European warrant issued by Sweden — knows the American government and its collaborators are on a weak moral and legal ground and has struck back saying that the state has privatised censorship to avoid opprobrium: “These attacks will not stop our mission, but should be setting off alarm bells about the rule of law in theUS.” French company OVH, which hosts WikiLeaks, has warned it will consult lawyers to take on the French government, asking the court whether the government has the right to close down Octopuce.

WikiLeaks have done a lot of damage to America’s relations with friendly and unfriendly states alike; and the effort clearly is to foreclose on the leaks that are in the pipeline, some of them relating to nuclear weapons and, therefore, even more dangerous. American action is bound to meet a backlash from within America but the administration would be willing to weather that storm when it comes.

Damage control will, at best, be partial and its success will be judged against secrets that will not be put out for public consumption. Much also depends on how Mr Assange has arranged the storehouse of information in his possession. The leaks can surface again after some time; they are bound to resurface in the long run in any case. The damage done has been considerable, threatening the superpower’s diplomacy in the coming days. Always taking advantage of internal fissures in host countries, American diplomats gleaned crucial information from threatened politicians, pretending to help but practically deepening the rifts.

What has been revealed may not be as damaging to the US as to the leaders reported upon. In the case of Pakistan, it has brought into open the confusion of lack of trust among major players, especially three central figures: the army chief, the government and opposition leader Nawaz Sharif. Politics in Pakistan is a like a jungle where political instincts are centred on the survival of one at the cost of another. Among all kinds of ‘deficits’ in Pakistan, the one that should bother all citizens while facing the onslaught of a formidable al Qaeda is the deficit of trust in the basic tenets of the state.

What may be even more off-putting is the similarity between the conditions in Pakistan and those obtained in Afghanistan. The Americans are supporting President Karzai while talking about his corruption behind closed doors — now doors unlocked by WikiLeaks — and President Karzai leans on friends within Afghanistan who don’t really love him as their leader. This damage will not be controlled easily.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 8^th, 2010.

COMMENTS (5)

Mawali | 13 years ago | Reply Though a diplomatic disaster for the US however, if anything Wikileaks has only confirmed American Diplomacy we hear over open channels. Nothing has come out that would really startle the Public over the stated US position versus what the Wikileaks has confirmed. If anything Wikileaks has confirmed the underhanded policies of Countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. For example the US has been voicing its concern over the Nuclear program of Iran. Wikileaks now reveals that its the Arabs who are the ones suggesting harsh measures to curtail Iran's nuclear program. Not the US and no metion of Israel! While I do not support the US efforts to undermine Wikileaks disclosures under the "freedom of speech" act. However, I do recognize that this also falls well under the US laws against espionage. As far as the Wikileaks is concerned for me it has only conformed the credibility of the Americans in what they say publicly and what Wikileaks has now confirmed.

Syed Ijaz | 13 years ago | Reply Wiki Leak has served the cause of democracy and transparency by exposing the real face of those elected, or in uniform, or our paid bureaucracy. Imagine the former head of National Security passing on confidential briefs to American officials. This is treason and must be exposed. Such men must pay for such treason. This is what happens when we allow others like USA, UK, Saudi arabia or Gulf to intervene in our sensitive internal affairs. Why should the Americans or the Saudis, or Uk etc decide who should be our ambassadors. We need to maintain good relations with USA and the rest, but should never compromise on state sovereignity, Musharraf did this and his apologists try to justify it. Even the present sitting President, PM and Army Chief have been guilty of this sacrilege of state sovereignity. At least Nawaz Sharif had the courage not to succumb to US pressure on the issue of Chief Justice Iftikhar Ch. ZAB always stood up for our national interests ans state sovereignity, Even his opponents accept this.