WikiLeaks strikes again -- U.S. diplomacy stripped naked

MacGuffin

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
8,329
Location
Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Car(s)
'17 Ford Mustang GT Fastback
The US Diplomatic Leaks

A Superpower's View of the World

By SPIEGEL Staff

251,000 State Department documents, many of them secret embassy reports from around the world, show how the US seeks to safeguard its influence around the world. It is nothing short of a political meltdown for US foreign policy.

What does the United States really think of German Chancellor Angela Merkel? Is she a reliable ally? Did she really make an effort to patch up relations with Washington that had been so damaged by her predecessor? At most, it was a half-hearted one.

The tone of trans-Atlantic relations may have improved, former US Ambassador to Germany William Timken wrote in a cable to the State Department at the end of 2006, but the chancellor "has not taken bold steps yet to improve the substantive content of the relationship." That is not exactly high praise.

And the verdict on German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle? His thoughts "were short on substance," wrote the current US ambassador in Berlin, Philip Murphy, in a cable. The reason, Murphy suggested, was that "Westerwelle's command of complex foreign and security policy issues still requires deepening."

Such comments are hardly friendly. But in the eyes of the American diplomatic corps, every actor is quickly categorized as a friend or foe. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia? A friend: Abdullah can't stand his neighbors in Iran and, expressing his disdain for the mullah regime, said, "there is no doubt something unstable about them." And his ally, Sheikh bin Zayed of Abu Dhabi? Also a friend. He believes "a near term conventional war with Iran is clearly preferable to the long term consequences of a nuclear armed Iran."

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's emissaries also learn of a special "Iran observer" in the Azerbaijan capital of Baku who reports on a dispute that played out during a meeting of Iran's Supreme National Security Council. An enraged Revolutionary Guard Chief of Staff Mohammed Ali Jafari allegedly got into a heated argument with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and slapped him in the face because the generally conservative president had, surprisingly, advocated freedom of the press.

A Political Meltdown

Such surprises from the annals of US diplomacy will dominate the headlines in the coming days when the New York Times, London's Guardian, Paris' Le Monde, Madrid's El Pais and SPIEGEL begin shedding light on the treasure trove of secret documents from the State Department. Included are 243,270 diplomatic cables filed by US embassies to the State Department and 8,017 directives that the State Department sent to its diplomatic outposts around the world. In the coming days, the participating media will show in a series of investigative stories how America seeks to steer the world. The development is no less than a political meltdown for American foreign policy.

Never before in history has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of such sensitive information -- data that can help paint a picture of the foundation upon which US foreign policy is built. Never before has the trust America's partners have in the country been as badly shaken. Now, their own personal views and policy recommendations have been made public -- as have America's true views of them.

For example, one can learn that German Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, the Germany's most beloved politician according to public opinion polls, openly criticizes fellow cabinet member Guido Westerwelle in conversations with US diplomats, and even snitches on him. Or that Secretary of State Clinton wants her ambassadors in Moscow and Rome to inform her whether there is anything to the rumors that Italian President Silvio Berlusconi and Vladimir Putin have private business ties in addition to their close friendship -- whispers that both have vehemently denied.

America's ambassadors can be merciless in their assessments of the countries in which they are stationed. That's their job. Kenya? A swamp of flourishing corruption extending across the country. Fifteen high-ranking Kenyan officials are already banned from traveling to the United States, and almost every single sentence in the embassy reports speaks with disdain of the government of President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga.

Weighing Public Interest against Confidentiality

Turkey hardly comes away any less scathed in the cables. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the cables allege, governs with the help of a cabal of incompetent advisors. Ankara Embassy officials depict a country on a path to an Islamist future -- a future that likely won't include European Union membership.

As with the close to 92,000 documents on the war in Afghanistan at the end of July and the almost 400,000 documents on the Iraq war recently released, the State Department cables have also been leaked to the WikiLeaks whistleblower platform -- and they presumably came from the same source. As before, WikiLeaks has provided the material to media partners to review and analyze them.

With a team of more than 50 reporters and researchers, SPIEGEL has viewed, analyzed and vetted the mass of documents. In most cases, the magazine has sought to protect the identities of the Americans' informants, unless the person who served as the informant was senior enough to be politically relevant. In some cases, the US government expressed security concerns and SPIEGEL accepted a number of such objections. In other cases, however, SPIEGEL felt the public interest in reporting the news was greater than the threat to security. Throughout our research, SPIEGEL reporters and editors weighed the public interest against the justified interest of countries in security and confidentiality.

It is now possible to view many political developments around the world through the lens of those who participated in those events. As such, our understanding of those events is deeply enriched. That alone is often enough to place transparency ahead of national regulations regarding confidentiality.

Following the leaks of military secrets from Afghanistan and Iraq, these leaks now put US diplomats on the hot seat. It is the third coup for WikiLeaks within six months, and it is one that is likely to leave Washington feeling more than a bit exposed. Around half of the cables that have been obtained aren't classified and slightly less, 40.5 percent, as classified as "confidential." Six percent of the reports, or 16,652 cables, are labelled as "secret;" and of those, 4,330 are so explosive that they are labelled "NOFORN," meaning access should not be made available to non-US nationals. Taken together, the cables provide enough raw text to fill 66 years worth of weekly SPIEGEL magazines.

Gossip and the Unvarnished Truth

Much in the material was noted and sent because those compiling the reports or their dialogue partners believed, with some certainty, that their transcripts would not be made public for the next 25 years. That may also explain why the ambassadors and emissaries from Washington were so willing to report gossip and hearsay back to State Department headquarters. One cable from the Moscow Embassy on Russian first lady Svetlana Medvedev, for example, states that she is "generating tensions between the camps and remains the subject of avid gossip." It then goes on to report that President Medvedev's wife had already drawn up a list of officials who should be made to "suffer" in their careers because they had been disloyal to Medvedev. Another reports that the wife of Azerbaijan leader Ilham Aliyev has had so much plastic surgery that it is possible to confuse her for one of her daughters from a distance, but that she can barely still move her face.

What makes the documents particularly appealing, though, is that many politicians speak the unvarnished truth, confident as they are that their musings will never be made public.

What, though, do the thousands of documents prove? Do they really show a US which has the world on a leash? Are Washington's embassies still self-contained power centers in their host countries?

In sum, probably not. In the major crisis regions, an image emerges of a superpower that can no longer truly be certain of its allies -- like in Pakistan, where the Americans are consumed by fear that the unstable nuclear power could become precisely the place where terrorists obtain dangerous nuclear material.

There are similar fears in Yemen, where the US, against its better judgement, allows itself to be instrumentalized by an unscrupulous leader. With American military aid that was intended for the fight against al-Qaida, Ali Abdullah Saleh is now able to wage his battle against enemy tribes in the northern part of the country.

Insult to Injury

Even after the fall of Saddam Hussein, it still remained a challenge for the victorious power to assert its will on Iraq. In Baghdad, which has seen a series of powerful US ambassadors -- men the international press often like to refer to as American viceroys -- it is now up to Vice President Joe Biden to make repeated visits to allied Iraqi politicians in an effort to get them to finally establish a respectable democracy. But the embassy cables make it very clear that Obama's deputy has made little headway.

Instead, the Americans are forced to endure the endless tirades of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarek, who claims to have always known that the Iraq war was the "biggest mistake ever committed" and who advised the Americans to "forget about democracy in Iraq." Once the US forces depart, Mubarak said, the best way to ensure a peaceful transition is for there to be a military coup. They are statements that add insult to injury.

On the whole, the cables from the Middle East expose the superpower's weaknesses. Washington has always viewed it as vital to its survival to secure its share of energy reserves, but the world power is often quickly reduced to becoming a plaything of diverse interests. And it is drawn into the animosities between Arabs and Israelis, Shiites and Sunnis, between Islamists and secularists, between despots and kings. Often enough, the lesson of the documents that have now been obtained, is that the Arab leaders use their friends in Washington to expand their own positions of power.

Source and more on the topic: http://www.spiegel.de/international/

Personally I find this very amusing, because what I read so far, really just confirms what most people know and suspect anyway but never got to hear from "official" sides yet.

I guess I have to buy DER SPIEGEL tomorrow :D
 
Last edited:
This will be fun! They called Sarkozy a naked emperor, Putin an alpha-male (I don't think he'll object) and Ahmadinejad "Hitler" :D
Karzai is obviously incompetent, but he's also a drug trafficker.

This part is pretty embarrasing :clap:
Guardian said:
The cables published today reveal how the US uses its embassies as part of a global espionage network, with diplomats tasked to obtain not just information from the people they meet, but personal details, such as frequent flyer numbers, credit card details and even DNA material.

Classified "human intelligence directives" issued in the name of Hillary Clinton or her predecessor, Condoleeza Rice, instruct officials to gather information on military installations, weapons markings, vehicle details of political leaders as well as iris scans, fingerprints and DNA.

The most controversial target was the leadership of the United Nations. That directive requested the specification of telecoms and IT systems used by top UN officials and their staff and details of "private VIP networks used for official communication, to include upgrades, security measures, passwords, personal encryption keys".
Don't shake hands with american diplomats, they're after your fingerprints. I wonder how you do an iris scan without anyone noticing.

I'm going to have to go donate some money to Wikileaks again.
 
Last edited:
Isn't it somewhat naive to think all governments don't do the exact same thing?
 
It sounds like children playing in grammar school honestly. I am not surprised at all but thanks Wikileaks, makes for most amusing reading.
 
Isn't it somewhat naive to think all governments don't do the exact same thing?

This.

I'd be interesting what Germany has considering its role in the E.U...

I don't see a huge blowback from foreign governments because everyone does this. The public will be a different story however.
 
Last edited:
I find this whole incident rather funny, although by now it really seems that they are picking on the US.

It sounds like children playing in grammar school honestly. I am not surprised at all but thanks Wikileaks, makes for most amusing reading.

You may want to recheck the definition of a grammar school.;)
 
Isn't it somewhat naive to think all governments don't do the exact same thing?
Stealing peoples fingerprints and their passwords you mean? No, I find it extremely hard to believe that every government do that.
 
You may want to recheck the definition of a grammar school.;)

"The name "grammar school" was adopted by schools for children from 10 to 14 years of age, and later by elementary schools." <- This... I meant children like 6-10... just to clarify.
 
"The name "grammar school" was adopted by schools for children from 10 to 14 years of age, and later by elementary schools." <- This... I meant children like 6-10... just to clarify.

It's more like 11 to 18 in the UK, but I thought that you meant younger children.
 
Stealing peoples fingerprints and their passwords you mean? No, I find it extremely hard to believe that every government do that.

Maybe not Sweden. But if you really think that Germany, France, the UK, China, Japan, Russia, and India don't actively participate or attempt to participate in these activities...

On the one hand I'm glad to see the highly insulated career officials over at State get their skirts blown up, on the other I'd love to see wikileaks publish information of this depth from any other country. What did the rest of the world think we do with our huge swath of foreign service? Facilitate visas and consulate visits?
 
Stealing peoples fingerprints and their passwords you mean? No, I find it extremely hard to believe that every government do that.
If only because it's not within their power. Let me ask you a question, why do those people need those kinds of security measures? I mean, they work for the people, supposedly, why are they keeping secrets?

Probably because it's necessary, so they can discuss things openly amongst themselves candidly in private. It's essential. But still, they don't have to publish anything or make any of it public, so why the security? Because they're not stupid. They know that other governments would love to know what they're saying/doing behind closed doors, just like they would love to know what everyone else is saying/doing/thinking as well. Any flaw in any of their security measures and it will be found and exploited. How do you think these documents were stolen in the first place? Lots of unethical people in this world...
 
Maybe not Sweden. But if you really think that Germany, France, the UK, China, Japan, Russia, and India don't actively participate or attempt to participate in these activities...

Well, it seems like currently WikiLeaks has a strong source within the USA and is using information from that.

It's not very likely that they get an equal source in, say, Russia or China and I think that these two countries are at least equally active in that field but maybe do not have the technical resources the USA have. I also believe that France and the UK are very active. All those countries have in common, that they still have an ego the size of the moon.

Germany? Nah, we lost our competence in that sector 65 years ago. We are nowadays only good at selling our products to the world :lol:
 
Last edited:
In my view, things are kept confidential for a reason. I do not like Wikileaks, if such a thing were around in WWII who knows what would happen?

Jullian Asanage is more than happy to just tear into America and the coalition but when he's called up as a a rapist he calls it slander. To me he is just a slimy git,
 
It's not really news that diplomatic missions gather intelligence, political, military, economic etc. in their host countries. It's been done since the invention of diplomacy. When the Spanish Minister to Great Britian walked around the court of Henry VIII, he gathered intelligence on his court. And the English Minister in Spain did the same. It's part of the game, and no one really care about it.

I think this is weirdly amazing. I love it and hate it. I rarely let this on, but in some ways, I'm quite a hauk. Secrecy in diplomatic discourse is effing important. There's always the question of how much is kept back because it doesn't look good, and how much is kept back because of actual needs for secrecy.

Generally speaking, there's a need for secrecy. And I don't think it's all that good to see the US embarrased like this. Especially when all nations are the same, and this only strikes the US.

At the same time, I love history. And this is history in the making. I love it for that. Even if I'm not crazy about the potential security political and foreign political problems.
 
Isn't it somewhat naive to think all governments don't do the exact same thing?
Exactly. Diplomatic corps have always functioned as a hand of intelligence services.

I find this whole incident rather funny, although by now it really seems that they are picking on the US.
It's pretty damned funny. If politicians were this candid I think the world would be a better place. Or we'd have another world war every few years :lol:. And Assange has made it clear that he has an agenda; that his idea of 'transparency at all costs' only applies to whoever he chooses (and certainly not himself).

I'm sure plenty of politicians around the world are relishing the opportunity to take such an in-depth look at the workings of the US foreign service. On the other hand, this is going to put Wikileaks on the shit list of many diplomatic corps.

Stealing peoples fingerprints and their passwords you mean? No, I find it extremely hard to believe that every government do that.
Really man? I think the most optimistic way to put it would be that every nation does this sort of thing, some are just 'better' at it.
 
Well, it seems like currently WikiLeaks has a strong source within the USA and is using information from that.
Meh, I think it's the same reason why there are (almost) no viruses for Linux or Mac: nobody cares

Why collect information that could compromise the german government while nagging the US gov. is so much more prestigious?
 
Last edited:
This reminds me of General Stilwell who referred to Chiang Kai-shek as a peanut regularly in correspondence with D.C.
 
Meh, I think it's the same reason why there are (almost) no viruses for Linux or Mac: nobody cares

Why collect information that could compromise the german government while the US gov. is so much more prestigious?

Could be. The USA make a better target, than, say... Sweden.

But I really would like to see something like that happen to the government of China. I really do.
 
During the cold war, such a leak about Sweden would probably have brought down any Swedish government between 1945 and 1993.
 
Top