US diplomatic cables to be dropped by wikileaks; US doing pre-emptive damage control

[archibaldcrane]

Oh, you're talking about naughty things the US government is doing. So far, that would be the strikes on Yemen and spying in the UN.

Or naughty things other countries are doing, that's fine too.

Sure is a lot of "Putin and Berlusconi are tight" and "Iran is a liar!" though - it's just, while somewhat amusing, not particularly earth-shattering.

I am excite for these banking misdeeds leaks though.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Julian Assange is a national hero. eh leaks secret documents and doesn't afraid of treason

[Athas]

While I was for the release of documents dealing with Iraq and Afghanistan, as I believe that is information that citizens of America deserve to know - I don't really see the reason for this release.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I've heard about this leak thus far is that there are no cases of America saying it's policy is X when it's really Y or cases out and out immoral activity (I'm not counting spying in this instance because really if a government has the resources it's a given they're going to spy on whomever they are able and collect as much information as is possible). But most of the cables seem to be dealing with information given to diplomats in confidence i.e. China not so supportive of North Korea and for the idea of a united Korea so long as the unified country is an ally to the US or neighboring middle east countries pressuring the US to halt Iran's nuclear program by any mean - including military action.

Or things that really don't seem to warrant being publicly disseminated i.e. President Hamid Karzai being called weak and paranoid or calls Berlusconi a European mouthpiece for Putin. There seems to be a point when you're basically just releasing gossip.

In the end it seems to only hamper relations between a myriad of nations, not only the US and possibly pushes North Korea further towards war if they know they can't rely on China's support in negations or galvanizes Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons if they know the US is being pressed for military action. I really can't see the benefit.

Like I said if I’m wrong on any count correct me, but the claim from the first few pages of US support of Turkey separatists seems to be lacking any verification and I haven’t seen anything being reported on flat out wrong doing (the closest I’ve seen was offering countries incentives for taking Guantanamo Bay prisoners), and really when Hugo Chavez is giving you props, I can’t help but think things have went wrong somewhere.

[Kuya]

Or naughty things other countries are doing, that's fine too.

Sure is a lot of "Putin and Berlusconi are tight" and "Iran is a liar!" though - it's just, while somewhat amusing, not particularly earth-shattering.

I am excite for these banking misdeeds leaks though.

Well, these are diplomatic cables and not really methodic assessments by say, the CIA. So the "Washington Consensus" chatter is expected, as well as the gossip. Some bits of information are clearly more valuable than others, even though it doesn't hurt to know that two fascists have a bromance going on, and that the US still really hates Iran.

As for as naughty things other countries are doing: either i haven't seen it yet or it's limited to commentary on how Pakistan is playing multiple games, but that has been mentioned multiple times not only by sources outside the US government, but by the previous Wikileaks leak. The only thing else that comes close it Saudi Arabia's (or rather, the monarchy's) war pushing, but they haven't exactly made their animosity towards Iran a secret, although i'm sure they much would have rather preferred that the fact that they're explicitly and actively pushing for an attack against Iran remain a secret and not out in the open for Iran to see. Because even if two countries may be "enemies" they would often rather not let the other know that it is actively seeking to have it attacked.

[Kuya]

While I was for the release of documents dealing with Iraq and Afghanistan, as I believe that is information that citizens of America deserve to know - I don't really see the reason for this release.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I've heard about this leak thus far is that there are no cases of America saying it's policy is X when it's really Y or cases out and out immoral activity (I'm not counting spying in this instance because really if a government has the resources it's a given they're going to spy on whomever they are able and collect as much information as is possible). But most of the cables seem to be dealing with information given to diplomats in confidence i.e. China not so supportive of North Korea and for the idea of a united Korea so long as the unified country is an ally to the US or neighboring middle east countries pressuring the US to halt Iran's nuclear program by any mean - including military action.

Or things that really don't seem to warrant being publicly disseminated i.e. President Hamid Karzai being called weak and paranoid or calls Berlusconi a European mouthpiece for Putin. There seems to be a point when you're basically just releasing gossip.

In the end it seems to only hamper relations between a myriad of nations, not only the US and possibly pushes North Korea further towards war if they know they can't rely on China's support in negations or galvanizes Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons if they know the US is being pressed for military action. I really can't see the benefit.

Like I said if I’m wrong on any count correct me, but the claim from the first few pages of US support of Turkey separatists seems to be lacking any verification and I haven’t seen anything being reported on flat out wrong doing (the closest I’ve seen was offering countries incentives for taking Guantanamo Bay prisoners), and really when Hugo Chavez is giving you props, I can’t help but think things have went wrong somewhere.

I don't care, and neither should you, since neither of us is a diplomat and therefore largely unaffected by this leak. What we got is more info in their inner dealings, thoughts, and behavious, and they had their jobs made harder.

We got a net gain, they (the diplomats) lost. I shed not a single tear.

[Athas]

I was under the impression that diplomats occasionally help the countires they work for/with.

Their loss seems to be our loss as well.

[archibaldcrane]

they had their jobs made harder.

We got a net gain, they (the diplomats) lost. I shed not a single tear.

Diplomats jobs being harder...is a bad thing. Diplomacy should be our main crutch to avoid warmongering. Assange is British, he doesn't owe Americans anything - but since it seems there's very little info painting the US in a bad light that further informs the citizenry, and a lot of catty bullshit that doesn't really gain us anything but makes diplomacy harder...is it really a net gain?

I'm just saying, I don't feel particularly enriched by this - and I want our diplomats to have "easy" jobs - that's good for America.

[Doombard]

where the fuck does he get all these documents?

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Diplomats jobs being harder...is a bad thing. Diplomacy should be our main crutch to avoid warmongering. Assange is British, he doesn't owe Americans anything - but since it seems there's very little info painting the US in a bad light that further informs the citizenry, and a lot of catty bullshit that doesn't really gain us anything but makes diplomacy harder...is it really a net gain?

I'm just saying, I don't feel particularly enriched by this - and I want our diplomats to have "easy" jobs - that's good for America.

He's Australian, mate.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

where the fuck does he get all these documents?

http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenber...ulian-assange/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11047811

[Kuya]

In the most abstract way possible, yes. Diplomats help achieve policy goals that may or may not directly or indirectly benefit the individual citizen. Whether having their contacts revealed damaged the well being of average citizens would have to be analized in detail in a case by case basis.

In order to hold up the argument that these leaks are harmful to actual people, you would have to hold that the interests of the State are more often than not the same interests of the nation. This is an unlikely scenario, and any argument that insists on this is reaching.

[archibaldcrane]

He's Australian, mate.

>implying there's an important distinction to be drawn

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Well if you can't pay attention to minor details like that I can't rely on your opinion on what to derive from thousands upon thousands of diplomatic cables.

[archibaldcrane]

In order to hold up the argument that these leaks are harmful to actual people, you would have to hold that the interests of the State are more often than not the same interests of the nation. This is an unlikely scenario

I'm just not quite as cynical as you.

I don't see this as a deathblow to diplomacy, more of a speedbump. And I don't see a goldmine of value from the documents, just a little piggybank. Neither is -that- big of a deal, I just see the speedbump as a little worse than the piggybank gain.

[Doombard]

I'm just waiting for him to release documents on aliens. srsly

[Kuya]

Diplomats jobs being harder...is a bad thing. Diplomacy should be our main crutch to avoid warmongering. Assange is British, he doesn't owe Americans anything - but since it seems there's very little info painting the US in a bad light that further informs the citizenry, and a lot of catty bullshit that doesn't really gain us anything but makes diplomacy harder...is it really a net gain?

I'm just saying, I don't feel particularly enriched by this - and I want our diplomats to have "easy" jobs - that's good for America.

1. Diplomacy, being a negotiation between parties representing States, is not the main crutch to avoiding warmongering. This is a silly statement. Many other things avoid wars, such as the cultural affinity between nations, economic interdependence, and the use of foreign policy such as sanctions or even the threat of force.

2. The job of American diplomats has been made harder. Not permanently, nor has it been made impossible. It has been made harder precisely because other countries might feel less inclined to confide in American diplomats, and also because of the specific things said or done by the US.

3. There's a lot of information that informs the citizenry on US foreign policy. Most of it even. You're simply only interested in illegal things done. Knowing how the US handles its middle eastern allies within the context of Iran's potential nuclear weapons and how these allies think and act is something that precisely informs on what exactly is going on in foreign policy and on the effects this may have on future action. If you don't think this is important, the failure is not in the information, but in you.

4. Diplomats having an easier job with policy is good when the policy they are promoting benefits most Americans. Let's not be simplistic here. Let us not be stupid enough to say that easier jobs for diplomats = good for the american people. Yes, the fact that allies might worry about having information leak will have a general effect of making diplomacy, probably, more difficult, which means that even diplomacy with good policy goals for average americans might be negatively affected. But all of this is based on pure supposition. The damage is quite intangible, and the average American will likely not see any inmediate or long term damage caused by this leak.

The precise damage caused by this leak is purely an academic adventure, as is most of the information gained via this leak. In other words, tempest in a teacup.

[Kuya]

An example on the kind of diplomatic relationship that in theory might have been damaged by this leak is a situation where an Arab State negotiated to have an American base on its land by secret in order to avoid public backlash from such a deal. In other words, the diplomatic relationships that are most likely affected are, to think that i would have to say this, the ones that States would want to keep a secret due to embarassment or disadvantage that openness might provide.

Like Archi said, if this is an issue over speedbumps and piggybanks, then the discussion over whether this is a net good or net bad is probably more worthless than the piggybank itself.

[Rhinox]

Sure is some foreign policy experting going on up in hur.

[Max™]

Information is power, your government hides information from you, it specifically prefers to maintain as much power as possible over the citizens.

How is it bad for the government to be forced into a position of accountability, even slightly?

[archibaldcrane]

Information is power, your government hides information from you, it specifically prefers to maintain as much power as possible over the citizens.

How is it bad for the government to be forced into a position of accountability, even slightly?

The government can't give the citizens information without also giving it to the world.

Are you implying that "forced accountability" is more important for everything than hiding some things that America does from other countries' eyes?

Vague statements are vague, and therefore meaningless.