This past weekend, the website Wikileaks released about 200 of the 251,287 confidential documents and cables from within the U.S. military computer system it plans to release in the near future. Only a few news sources, including the New York Times, have had access to the entire collection of confidential files. These reveal personal conversations, actions and details of American diplomacy within the past 3 years.
The information uncovered exposes (among many other issues): the international concern and discussion over the Iranian nuclear program, the diplomatic haggling over Guantanamo prisoners, and even a request from Secretaries of State Rice and Clinton for the investigation of UN representatives and key figures.
The leak is at the very least embarrassing, and at the most an international game-changer. Personal relationships, flaws, and doubts are exposed, as are real conversations about war, and the potential for more of it. In a country that is exhausted by a media that seems to care more about Kim Kardashian's boyfriend (or lack of one) than about international diplomacy, it can be refreshing to see someone pursuing investigative journalism to its core.
However, it does make me wonder whether this is a positive movement. Conflict resolution and diplomacy involve personal relationships, and trust. Communication is key to resolve or balance an kind of conflict. But forced full disclosure can lead to feelings of betrayal. Is the damaging of relationships a productive action? Is it possible that by releasing these secrets, wikileaks founder Julian Assange and others are doing more harm than good?
Again, this is something I cannot make my mind up about. I am entirely for investigative journalism, and consider figures like Carl Bernstein, Bob Woodward, and Edward R. Murrow some of the most important public servants in our history. However, wikileaks seems to go a bit past journalism, towards voyeurism. I am suspicious of recent "activism" as a self-serving movement, which can actually cause more misunderstanding and further violent conflict and distrust. So I am curious to see what you all think. Are the leaks productive? Could it be done more tactfully or is full exposure the correct way of addressing errors in diplomacy?
"It just means that it’s easier for honest CEOs to run an honest business, if the dishonest businesses are more effected negatively by leaks than honest businesses. That’s the whole idea. In the struggle between open and honest companies and dishonest and closed companies, we’re creating a tremendous reputational tax on the unethical companies." - Julian Assange
ReplyDeleteSource: http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/5/
I'm not sure how to feel about WikiLeaks either. In a way, it's a huge push towards transparency and ethics. Privacy will be the biggest issue of this new decade. TSA, Google, WikiLeaks. Technological advancement has defined how we wage war, and how we protect ourselves.