Wink & Nod
Wiki Update 12/1/10: 2:50 pm: MJ Rosenberg on the Saudis, Israel and Iran: ”The revelation that the Saudi royals agree with the Israeli position adds exactly nothing to the case for war. The House of Saud? Whom exactly do they speak for? Not even the Saudi people, let alone anybody else in the Muslim world. In fact, the Saudi endorsement could be the kiss of death for Netanyahu’s plans.” http://politicalcorrection.org/fpmatters/201012010009
Wikileaks Quote of the Day (Wednesday):
Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates to French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, Paris, February 8, 2010: “… the Saudis always want to ‘fight the Iranians to the last American…’ “ HT: Juan Cole http://www.juancole.com/2010/12/gates-saudis-want-to-fight-iran-to-the-last-american.html
Stephen Walt who comments at Foreign Policy and is a “realist” in these matters has an even-handed and amusing take on the wikileaks. Some of the highlights, but worth reading the whole thing, especially those who are really excited about the leaks.
“It is still striking how many pies the United States has its fingers in, and how others keep expecting us to supply the ingredients, do most of the baking, and clean up the kitchen afterwards.”
More:Walt continued:
“And as for the possibility that American diplomats will be exposed as less than 100 percent honest: at this stage in our history, is all that even remotely surprising? I mean, after the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, Iran/Contra, the cruise missile attack on Sudan, Colin Powell’s cooked-up testimony to the Security Council in 2002, how many people are under that many illusions about the dark underbelly of U.S. foreign policy?”
“There’s an old line from Chicago city politics: “Don’t write if you can talk; don’t talk if you can nod; don’t nod if you can wink.” Somehow, I’m not sure our diplomacy will be enhanced if our representatives are reduced to making facial gestures, and communicating back home only through secure telephones.” But maybe worth a try! http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/11/29/dont_write_if_you_can_talk_the_latest_from_wikileaks
Gary Sick: http://garysick.tumblr.com/post/1729417211/wikileaks-iran-and-war
“Most of the documents are composed of little beyond hypocrisy, gossip and invidious comments about other leaders, the normal flotsam and jetsam of diplomatic discourse. But it is also true that the level of hysteria about Iran was exceptionally high. The United States received an avalanche of free advice from interested parties in Israel and the Arab world. They wanted to make sure we understood how urgent it was for America to launch a third disastrous war in the Middle East on their behalf. According to the documents we have seen so far, Washington seemed bemused but utterly unenthusiastic.
“This may be the most important fact about the WikiLeaks documents so far. If Washington can keep its head while everyone around it is losing theirs, perhaps we need not yet yield to despair.”
Off message, but Whispers in the Loggia reminds us that today is the 30th anniverasry of Dorothy Day’s death. She’s always worth thinking seriously about.
(Hi, Bernard. It’s also the feast of St. Andrew, the day on which to start saying the Hail and Blessed prayer fifteen times a day. “Hail and blessed be the hour and moment in which the Son of God was born of the most pure Virgin Mary, at midnight, in Bethlehem, in piercing cold. In that hour vouchsafe, O my God, to hear my prayer and grant my desires, through the merits of Our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of His blessed Mother. Amen.”)
——–
Hi, Margaret:
Interesting lead editorial in the NYT this morning, too.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/opinion/30tue1.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
I don’t know anyone who is surprised by any of it. Just as the Romans used barbarians to fight other barbarians, of course those people who regard us as dumb barbarians are willing to use us to do their dirty work. And when we live down to their expectations, by sending them planeloads of cash and young soldiers, why would anyone be surprised that they take the money and allow the young soldiers to spill their blood in the sand?
Gerelyn: “of course those people who regard us as dumb barbarians are willing to use us to do their dirty work.” I think you’ll find Gary Sick slightly enlarging your view.
Feastwise: I’m observing the first Tuesday in Advent!
I read both. And agreed with nearly all of what they said. (Not the criticism of Israel, of course.)
According to this article, http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=40244, Wikileaks is a threat to our National Security and has no interest in exposing classified documents from al-qaeda, the taliban, or North Korea but would rather illuminate American policy.
I’m off message, too, but Bernard D’s off message reminder about the 30th anniversary of Dorothy Day’s passing motivated me to post the link for one of the most ordinary/extraordinary photos I’ve ever seen, taken at the Maryhouse Office in NYC on June 17, 1979:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/speakingoffaith/3657530901/sizes/o/in/photostream/
Interesting point, Nancy. I wonder if the Islamist systems are so fool-proof that they can’t be hacked. I doubt it.
William Collier, that is a remarkable photo, a true meeting of equals. Rare to see a photo with Mother Teresa in which she doesn’t stand out completely on her own, over and above, in her humble way.
I entered the Catholic world after Day’s passing, but I enjoyed the few times I visited the Lower East Side houses for stories. One memorable woman there told me she danced burlesque at Minsky’s before her Catholic Worker days. I’d like to believe it was so.
But my favorite moment was when we went into the dining room and they noted that Dorothy was laid out on the table there after her death. Longtime AP writer Rick Hampson (I believe) said he was most proud of convicning the AP editors, after quite a battle, to allow him to use the passive phrase, “was waked,” when referring to Day’s funeral rites. I doubt it’s been allowed again.
Islamist “systems” for communications are disposable cell phones. Effective, but not sure we want to go the drug dealer route. Besides, imagine all that would be lost to history? Is not recording things vital to our memory?
Thanks, William, for the great photo.
Margaret: “Feastwise?” But I did appreciate your fine article in the most recent Commonweal. The last paragraph was especially delicious.
“Feastwise”? Old German!
But how about wikileaks–I guess the story’s over! The one-day wonder, once again.
” — no interest in exposing classified documents from al-qaeda, the taliban, or North Korea but would rather illuminate American policy.”
Those 3 entities have nowhere further down to fall. The US has been sliding downward for the past few years but still has a way to go.
Ergo, we are the target. Besides Julian Assange makes absolutely no claims to be objective, fair or balanced (hence, you won’t see him on Faux Non-news.)
There is this interesting point raised by Zbigniew Brezezinski Monday night on the Newhour. He asked: apart from the leaked (and “authentic”) documents are there document that were given to WL and inserted that are disinformation? That is, they are made up or perhaps inserted in the document dump from some other source than the leaker, such as another intelligence service.
Here from the transcript: “[WikiLeaks is] getting a lot of information which seems trivial, inconsequential, but some of it seems surprisingly pointed.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, what are you referring to?
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: Well, for example, there are references to a report by our officials that some Chinese leaders favor a reunified Korea under South Korea.
This is clearly designed to embarrass the Chinese and our relationship with them. The very pointed references to Arab leaders could have as their objective undermining their political credibility at home, because this kind of public identification of their hostility towards Iran could actually play against them at home. ”
“… It’s, rather, a question of whether WikiLeaks are being manipulated by interested parties that want to either complicate our relationship with other governments or want to undermine some governments, because some of these items that are being emphasized and have surfaced are very pointed.
“And I wonder whether, in fact, there aren’t some operations internationally, intelligence services, that are feeding stuff to WikiLeaks, because it is a unique opportunity to embarrass us, to embarrass our position, but also to undermine our relations with particular governments.
“For example, leaving aside the personal gossip about Sarkozy or Berlusconi or Putin, the business about the Turks is clearly calculated in terms of its potential impact on disrupting the American-Turkish relationship.” http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs/july-dec10/weakileaks2_11-29.html
Now there’s an issue!
Quoting:
Josh Block of the centrist Progressive Policy Institute (and formerly of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) notes that these revelations ought to embarrass Israel-bashers:
One of the most interesting overall themes is the restraint seen to typify the Israelis on Iran, in contrast to the typical Brzezinski, Scowcroft, Walt/Mearsheimer, Glenn Greenwald-Neo-progresive, netroots claims Israel is trying to prod us to fight and bomb Iran for them.
In the end, one of the most obvious take-aways from these WikiLeaks documents is devastating to the whole Left/Realist narrative about Israeli manipulation. The Israelis come off as cool customers, while the Arabs are the ones freaking out, justifiably many would argue, and literally demanding the U.S. bomb the Iranian nuclear program.
Actually!!! Ehud Barak comes across as the man who keeps announcing deadlines for action before the window of bombing opportunity closes. We are approaching the latest one.
A variant on the chicken little story.
Jimmy Mac –
I was thinkng of releasing Islamist documents in the Islamic countries to the general population maybe The documents would no doubt not make national TV, but don’t people in thosecountries have DVDs and other electronic gizmos available? Surely there must.be an underground system interested in such stuff. Of such are revolutions started.
No matter how you spin this, the leaks are an embarrassment to US efforts. It is important that individuals and countries be honest and transparent and of course Americans should be upset if their government is lying. Countries, like individuals, need to be honest and forthright about their respective positions. Granted positions can change and frequently relationships are in flux. Still, there needs to be expectations of privacy and trust with sensitive political information and the publication of these undermines that and is regrettable.
I support dialogue and honest private conversations some of which are better done in private. if countries feel that they cannot trust information will be confidential, it makes diplomacy much harder.
Ann:
I think they would have to be released outside of those countries in order for anything to happen.
Assange is just lucky that he can get away with it because Western news agencies are falling all over themselves to be the quickest, firstest and most breathless to publish what they think are the modern version of the Pentagon Papers. Assange is no Daniel Ellsburg in any way, shape or form.
” of course Americans should be upset if their government is lying”
Ironically, the diplomatic cables actually show that our nation is rather naive and idealistic in comparison to other nations:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/myth_of_the_ugly_american_exploded_0qdYJXA3ivRdqdtPxNz8cO
…ineptitude is not the only aspect of the US government revealed by the Wiki dump. One also gets an overpowering sense of just how well-intentioned the United States is. The cables I’ve read so far show our diplomats trying to make sense of a Bizarro World in which the United States tends to say what it means while almost every other nation is essentially allergic to candor or straight talk…
If the pop-culture version of the US government had any basis in reality, it would be revealed in these documents. These are, after all, written for a tiny audience of governmental high-ups, and are supposed to be frank and unadorned. If we were plotting to overthrow governments, or figure out ways to divert precious resources for our own use, such things would appear in these cables.
They don’t, because that’s not what really goes on — at least not so far as the United States is concerned. From the bits I’ve been able to read, the WikiLeaks documents open a window onto a US government trying to keep weaponry out of the hands of bad actors, to help bring peace and stability to Iraq and Afghanistan, to figure out the constitutional basis of a coup in Honduras.
This isn’t the Ugly American. It’s the Smiley-Face American…
I would not go that far. The US interest is not benign. Nor are the communications of other countries with the US. It is necessary to understand the intricacies of the world and leaders in order to control and shape it in specific ways.
For example, i have heard that there are or have been concerns flagged about Karzai and wanting to understand the opposition. Also spying was requested by the state dept (apparently).
When the Russians were exposed in the US it was a major story. Can we trust Russia? Etc, etc. The implication was how could a country with whom we are supposedly a lied with do that. What are their true motivations? Good questions.
the very fact that these communications are being solicited signals that the US does not trust anyone and will commits resources to obtaining information some of which is embarrassing. This is an aspect of statecraft that….well let’s just say fails to reflect our better nature.
PS
Spying on allies is bad form. It would be like an employer viewing work e mails- technically within bounds but does not create a trusting organization. It is embarrasing and undermines trust.
“If we were plotting to overthrow governments, or figure out ways to divert precious resources for our own use, such things would appear in these cables.
They don’t, because that’s not what really goes on — at least not so far as the United States is concerned.”
Not necessarily. Those would be in communications marked “TOP SECRET”. But still all this does not seem such a big deal. I am sure almost every government does something similar. Just makes us aware that anything these people say should be taken with more than a pinch of salt.
I think Flanagan and the NY Post have it about right, this has turned out to be a win for America. The documents released simply confirm what everybody has known all along. The world is full of liars, thugs, cowards and perverts and the only good, decent, honest actor on the stage is the USofA. OK, maybe we’re not the brightest bulbs on the chandelier, but the universe can go a long way on goodness, honesty and decency.
This is mainly an obvious from the silence. Can you hear the deafening silence of four hundred million Europeans not shrieking? Not shrieking about our secret death camps, our secret assassinations, all those wars we’re supposedly secretly waging in South America, all those invisible piles of Afghans we supposedly murdered and secretly buried? All those secret diplomatic documents and not one single European can be found Eurosqueaking the standard Eurononsense? Does anybody think “the world” would be making this enormous fuss about American incompetence if they had succeeded in producing one scintilla of evidence of American malevolence?
There’s no news in any of it. Everybody always knew we were the good guys. Tomorrow’s headline will be “Christmas Trees Illuminated In December.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/28/wikileaks-diplomacy-us-media-war
From the other side of the Atlantic. A couple of money quotes. Quoting them doesn’t necessarily mean I agree with the article, but it is worth reading.
—
In fact, my personal opinion of the state department has gone up several notches. In recent years, I have found the American foreign service to be somewhat underwhelming, reach-me-down, dandruffy, especially when compared with other, more confident arms of US government, such as the Pentagon and the treasury. But what we find here is often first rate.
One thing I’d bet on, though: the US government must surely be ruing, and urgently reviewing, its weird decision to place a whole library of recent diplomatic correspondence on to a computer system so brilliantly secure that a 22-year-old could download it on to a Lady Gaga CD. Gaga, or what?
Here is the issue. For those who say that the US is a kind of naif in a world of thieves and liars…..ummmm…..
First, in order to secure sanctions against Iran, the US through intermediaries promised that Saudi Arabia would give them a steady flow of oil. So that is a PROMISE.
People in China, according to a Chinese person I know and from reports, are by and large poor. The only rich are certain governments and corporations. By feeding this economy and this structure, the US is giving tacit and active support to its current economic and political machine which oppresses many people.
Dissidents in China who seek to make it more democratic and rely on American for support are going to be left ultimately with cold comfort.
Today Iran and Nl. Korea are the boogey men
Tomorrow??
Self-congratulations about our terrific State Department overlooks the real skulduggery carried out by our very own CIA.
Curious that so far there is no news in the document dump of the Italian caper in which the CIA kidnapped a Muslim cleric, and which violation of Italian law seems to be wending its way through the Italian courts (CIA agents being tried in absentia).
Some posters here seem to be running the latest conservative line: America is exceptional and it is soooo great! What a blessing.
Felapton: “European countries have reacted with irritation to the release by whistle-blowing website Wikileaks of secret memos written by US diplomats.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11861964
Ah, Mrs. Steinfels, you’re on to something here: State and CIA are different but not always mutually exclusive. This article, however, focuses on State at the exclusion of the CIA.
In the meantime, the CIA has protected its materials much better job than State. But imagine WikiLeaks got a hold of a large batch of CIA materials… Then one could really fear for Assange.
The CIA has probably protected its materials far better than state. Do we see an irony here: State loosened up after 9/11 according to news stories to facilitate intra-agency communications. But it was the CIA and FBI that messed up before 9/11 in large part because of little intra-communication. So what does this tell us about the right hand and the left hand, Peter and Paul, etc.?
P.S. I am tempted to point out and will express my temptation: the last three secretary of states have been women. Does that make a difference in the willingness to communicate?
Colon Powell is a woman? Somebody better tell his wife.
(Three of the last four, of course.)
For once, you’re right!!
Well, I was close. His name is actually Colin, not Colon.
Not to worry. We all make mistakes!
Well, I see that the Coalition Against the Evil One is already splintering: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,732212,00.html
They must be Republicans.
I also heard on the news today that Putin has said to the US: “Don’t worry about it; we’ll take care of it (Assange?)”
If I were that boy I’d start to become very, very worried. His days of fame and fortune may be very numbered.
George D said: ” First, in order to secure sanctions against Iran, the US through intermediaries promised that Saudi Arabia would give them a steady flow of oil. So that is a PROMISE.”
Maybe I’m misreading this, but —Huh?
SA would give WHOM a steady flow of oil?
China for one.
Thanks Margaret, Yes it was China.. sorry missed that.
They also agreed to change a defence system which the Russians objected to in exchange for Russians supporting sanctions.
Who knows what other leverage there was. Maybe in exchange for being quiet and not making a big issue on restrictions on press freedoms in Russia.