WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

The treachery of Julian Assange
(Nick Cohen, The Observer, Opinion Essay, 17 September 2011)

You did not have to listen for too long to Julian Assange's half-educated condemnations of the American "military-industrial complex" to know that he was aching to betray better and braver people than he could ever be.

As soon as WikiLeaks received the State Department cables, Assange announced that the opponents of dictatorial regimes and movements were fair game. That the targets of the Taliban, for instance, were fighting a clerical-fascist force, which threatened every good liberal value, did not concern him. They had spoken to US diplomats. They had collaborated with the great Satan. Their safety was not his concern.

David Leigh and Luke Harding's history of WikiLeaks describes how journalists took Assange to Moro's, a classy Spanish restaurant in central London. A reporter worried that Assange would risk killing Afghans who had co-operated with American forces if he put US secrets online without taking the basic precaution of removing their names. "Well, they're informants," Assange replied. "So, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it." A silence fell on the table as the reporters realised that the man the gullible hailed as the pioneer of a new age of transparency was willing to hand death lists to psychopaths. They persuaded Assange to remove names before publishing the State Department Afghanistan cables. But Assange's disillusioned associates suggest that the failure to expose "informants" niggled in his mind.

It is hard to believe now, but honest people once worked for WikiLeaks for all the right reasons. Like me, they saw the site as a haven; a protected space where writers could publish stories that authoritarian censors and libel lawyers would otherwise have suppressed.

James Ball joined and thought that in his own small way he was making the world a better place. He realised that WikiLeaks was not what it seemed when an associate of Assange – a stocky man with a greying moustache, who called himself "Adam" – asked if he could pull out everything the State Department documents "had on the Jews". Ball discovered that "Adam" was Israel Shamir, a dangerous crank who uses six different names as he agitates among the antisemitic groups of the far right and far left. As well as signing up to the conspiracy theories of fascism, Shamir was happy to collaborate with Belarus's decayed Brezhnevian dictatorship. Leftwing tyranny, rightwing tyranny, as long as it was anti-western and anti-Israel, Shamir did not care.

Nor did Assange. He made Shamir WikiLeaks's representative in Russia and eastern Europe. Shamir praised the Belarusian dictatorship. He compared the pro-democracy protesters beaten and imprisoned by the KGB to football hooligans. On 19 December 2010, the Belarus-Telegraf, a state newspaper, said that WikiLeaks had allowed the dictatorship to identify the "organisers, instigators and rioters, including foreign ones" who had protested against rigged elections.

The proof of Assange and Shamir's treachery was strong but not conclusive. Given Shamir's history, there were reasonable grounds for fearing the worst. But even now, you cannot show beyond reasonable doubt that the state has charged this pro-democracy politician or that liberal artist with treason or collaborating with a foreign power because WikiLeaks named names.

One can say with certainty, however, that Assange's involvement with Shamir is enough to discredit his claim that he published the documents in full because my colleagues on the Guardian inadvertently revealed a link to a site he was meant to have taken down. WikiLeaks put the cables on the web last month with evident relish, and ever since I have been wondering who would be its first incontrovertible victim. China appeared a promising place to look. The authorities and pro-regime newspapers are going through the names of hundreds of dissidents and activists from ethnic minorities. To date, there have been no arrests, although in China, as elsewhere, the chilling effect WikiLeaks has spread has caused critics of the communists to bite their tongues.

In Ethiopia, however, Assange has already claimed his first scalp. Argaw Ashine fled the country last week after WikiLeaks revealed that the reporter had spoken to an official from the American embassy in Addis Ababa about the regime's plans to intimidate the independent press. WikiLeaks also revealed that a government official told Arshine about the planned assault on opposition journalists. Thus Assange and his colleagues not only endangered the journalist. They tipped off the cops that he had a source in the state apparatus.

Once we have repeated Orwell's line that "so much of leftwing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot", there is work to do. First, there needs to be relentless pressure on the socialist socialites and haggard soixante-huitards who cheered Assange on. Bianca Jagger, Jemima Khan, John Pilger, Ken Loach and their like are fond of the egotistical slogan "not in my name." They are well-heeled and well-padded men and women who know no fear in their lives. Yet they are happy to let their names be used by Assange as he brings fear into the lives of others.

We need also to question the motives of the wider transparency movement. Anti-Americanism is one of its driving inspirations and helps explain its perfidies. If you believe that the American "military-industrial complex", Europe or Israel is the sole or main source of oppression, it is too easy to dismiss the victims of regimes whose excesses cannot be blamed on the west. Assange's former colleagues tell me that the infantile leftism of the 2000s is not the end of it. Never forget, they say, that Assange came from a backwater Queensland city named Townsville. He's a small-town boy desperate to make the world notice.

The grass or squealer usually blabs because he wants to settle scores or ingratiate himself with the authorities. Assange represents a new breed, which technology has enabled: the nark as show-off. The web made Assange famous. It allows him to monitor his celebrity – I am told that even the smallest blogpost about him rarely escapes his attention. When he sees that the audience is tiring, the web provides him with the means to publish new secrets and generate new headlines. Under the cover of holding power to account, Assange can revel in the power the web gives to put lives in danger and ensure he can be what he always wanted: the centre of attention.

A silence fell on the table as the reporters realised that the man the gullible hailed as the pioneer of a new age of transparency was willing to hand death lists to psychopaths.

The Wikileaks Diversion
(Arthur Kobina Kennedy, 19th September, 2011, University of Cape Coast)

Over the last couple of weeks, Ghana’s media, political establishment and punditocracy have been obsessed with wikileaks. It is as if nothing else of importance is happening.

In excited shouting matches that have gone on between the parties and sometime within the parties, a lot of allegations from wikileaks have been repeated.

- The sitting President has been accused of lying about his health
- A former President has been accused of plotting to murder a journalist
- Another former President has been accused of being a drug user
- A Presidential candidate has been accused of drug use
- The Speaker of Parliament has been described as nothing more than a puppet
- People of a particular faith were written off for the Presidency

These accusations are not all that have been alleged but these would suffice.

I have been stunned by three things.

First, we seem to hate one another a lot. There was hardly an instance in the wikileaks when people had positive things to say about one another. These cables were a classic manifestation of the politics of Pull-him-down. It would have been nice, for a change if quite a few people had been in the cable praising others. Would it not have been heart-warming for someone at the state department to read about Mills’ brilliance or Nana’s leadership or how Kufuor made this or that great decision? Unfortunately, the gossipers were only interested in negatives.

Second, we seem to think that getting a chance to gossip to Americans about other Ghanaians is an honour and a privilege. At heart, it seems too many of us look for approval from the West and its institutions. While we can watch and learn from them, we must never subordinate our pride or national interest to them.

Third, we seem to be creeping towards the kind of Justice System in which one can be accused of anything and asked to prove his or her innocence. Our nation, according to our constitution has a justice system that is based on due process and the presumption of innocence. It used to be that we required proof from those who alleged things against others. It seems we no longer permit the need for proof to stand in the way of using unsubstantiated allegations to destroy others. Take my small and tangential involvement in wikileaks for instance. Someone alleged, during discussions of wikileaks that while I was a Presidential aspirant, I had paid Mr. Ben Ephson money to conduct a poll for me. In the good old days, before being asked to respond to this allegation, someone would have demanded proof and it would have been provided. However, despite the fact that no poll has ever been conducted for me, by anyone, and both Mr. Ephson and I denied it, serious news organizations gave their platforms to those making this unfounded allegation.

Both former Presidents Rawlings and Kufuor have felt it necessary to come out to defend themselves against unsubstantiated rumours contained in wikileaks.

Before we continue this self-immolation we have embarked upon with the help of wikileaks, we must pause to reflect a bit.

What is contained in wikileaks about Ghana that we have seen is not some truth from on-high. It is not backed up by any evidence. Most of it is uncorroborated.

Indeed, to be blunt, for the most part, the wikileaks cables consist of nothing more than wicked and idle gossip by Ghanaians about other Ghanaians reported by American diplomats to the State department. Somehow, it appears that just because these gossips were then put in diplomatic cables, they have attained the status of incontrovertible facts.

Sadly, while we have been obsessed by wikileaks, the Americans have moved on. I just returned from the United States. While there, they were concerned about jobs. They were concerned about their economy. They were concerned about healthcare. They were concerned about the amount of borrowing by their government. And they did not think borrowing was a good thing. Whether it was President Obama giving a speech or Republican Presidential candidates having a debate, these were the topics of concern to Americans. Mr. Obama, with an election looming on the horizon is doing his best to bring unemployment, which is now above 9% to below 8% to improve his chances of being elected. His record in office is being dissected and debated across the United States. Last time I checked, we do have an election in 2012—just like the Americans.

Unfortunately, we have many Ministers who are not sure what our unemployment rate is. But they know a lot about wikileaks.

This obsession with wikileaks seems to be a diabolical plot concocted by those who want to divert us from the important problems that confront Ghana and Ghanaians. By this, I do not mean that all those involved are conspirators. I believe many have become innocent tools of this grand diversion that is only hurting our nation. What our political leaders do not realize is that the more a party uses wikileaks to attack other parties and leaders, the more credible they make wikileaks.

Why is it that here in Ghana, we are not interested in serious issues? Why are we more interested in wikileaks than jobs? Is it because unlike America Ghana does not need to worry about jobs?

Why is wikileaks more important than the education of our children? Is it because unlike America, our educational system is not facing any problems? A ranking of African Universities released recently had the best University in Ghana ranking 39th in Africa! Thirty-ninth and we are talking about wikileaks?

Why are we more interested in Nana Akufo-Addo’s personal problems than the programs he is putting out for his future government?

Why are we more interested in the President’s health than what he has done to improve our healthcare?

Why are these wicked wiki-leaks rumours more important than our parties not filing statements of accounts with the Electoral Commission as required by our laws?

I believe that a number of factors are responsible for the trivialization of our politics.

First, our politicians have put insults ahead of ideas. Instead of engaging one another in the serious issues that confront our nation, we prefer to trade wild accusations about one another. Day after day, the public tunes into T.V. and radio stations that have become, in most cases, nothing more than outlets for garbage. Our parties must stop sending into our media houses—people who are celebrated more for making noise than for making sense.

Second, in search of sensationalism, the media have become unwitting accomplices to political elites who are more interested in hiding their dismal records behind insults than solving our problems. They should stop inviting onto their programs those who are only interested in insults.

Third, the institutions that should hold the media and politicians accountable for this dereliction have gone to sleep. Amongst these are the political parties, the National Media Commission and the Ghana Journalists association.

Fourth, we have a general public that at best tolerant of mediocrity and at worst feeds on the mediocrity. News programs and news analysis have become nothing more than entertainment, viewed on the same level with situational comedies.

It was very refreshing to watch shows on T.V. in the United States and listen to debates. One really gets educated by watching and listening to those. Before anyone says that Ghana is not America, let me acknowledge that myself. My response is that we must aspire to be the best if we hope to be the nation our founders meant us to be. We should not aspire to be like Mali or Niger or Chad. We must reach upwards and forwards—all the time.

How can we begin to focus on the important priorities of this nation?

First, we must stop treating wikileaks like Biblical verses. It is just gossip.

Consequently, we must stop demanding that people proof their innocence when no one has put forth evidence of their guilt. The political parties have been most guilty of this twisting of wikileaks in order to tar or embarrass others. To those whose unflattering gossip got revealed in wikileaks, let them apologize to those they slandered and beg for forgiveness—from those they maligned as well as from God. The Bible admonishes us not to bear false witness.

We need our two major parties to stop focusing on wikileaks and start debating how to get our people working and going to school. The exchange of insults based on wikileaks will never get a job for one unemployed young person or educate a child or prevent an accident.

To this end, we should ask Nana Addo questions about his Liberty lecture instead of wikileaks. We should ask President Mills about accidents and jobs and Liquified gas—not about wikileaks.

Second, our media must focus more on our development rather than our collective defilement. The treatment of politics as entertainment with the goal of cheering on activists as they insult and denigrate each other’s party and leaders is disgraceful. Let the Press houses sit up and live up to their responsibilities and let the National Media Commission and Ghana Journalist Association rise up and meet their historic responsibilities. I look forward to the day when Jake Obetsebi Lamptey and Dr. Kwabena Adjei will debate jobs on metro. I want Sir John and General Mosquito to debate the “Bui dam” in the context of our energy needs.If the media does not police itself responsibly, we will wake up one day to find that someone has introduced another Libel law and that no one objects to it.

Third, our civil organizations must raise their voices in helping Ghana get to the politics of substance. They should encourage a discussion of the nation’s problems. I hope that one of these days, there would be a symposium at Legon or the British Council or UCC to discuss the proposals put forward by Nana Akufo-Addo in his “Liberty Lecture”.

Finally, without a public that insists that our politicians must address important issues, our politicians will continue to focus on trivia. We must insist that our politicians focus on the business of the people instead of their own quarrels. People like those who lost loved ones in the Yarkwei accident—People like the taxi drivers queuing for liquefied gas--- People like the farmers being terrorized by Fulani headsmen.

Ultimately, the public can speak through the ballot box. When our politics reward those who believe in insults more than ideas, we will get more of the same.

Let us insist that the “Yutong bus” driver move forwards, not backwards or sideways.

Let us get on with the unfinished business of building a “Better Ghana”. That job remains undone, to a very significant extent.

Let us move forward—together.

did not think borrowing was a good thing.

Which suggests Americans are masochists.

Consider just who the purveyor of all these malicious lies is.

Wikileaks. (The State Department wanted them to be kept secret.)

(The State Department wanted them to be kept secret.)

and since it supposed to feel righteous and just, people just trim off the parts that create discomfort and brush them off as "irrelevant."

which don't assign motives to wandel and I in which we are a part of some effort to cover up or distract.

Beth said: I'm interested in turning people's attention toward the information and the original authors, not the publishers.