Julian Assange may not be Time magazine’s “Person of the Year,” but he certainly took the world by political storm. Assange is the notorious founder of Wikileaks – the new apple of international media’s eye owing to its recent leak of the Afghan War Diaries and sensitive US diplomatic cables. The result was a loud uproar from US diplomats who had, so to speak, been caught in the act. The US State Department went into war-room mode, readying itself to plug in where diplomacy lay most damaged, and pulling the plug on what had caused the most damage.
In this case, Julian Assange and US intelligence analyst Private Bradley Manning. The unprecedented peek into US diplomacy surrounding the superpower’s relations with Pakistan sent the local Pakistani media into creating its own broadcast pandemonium. “Whoa! Wikileaks,” read the cover of a Pakistani version of an international magazine, and this was a true reflection of Pakistani media’s knee-jerk reaction to Wikileaks. Local newspapers went a step further, creating their own leaks and blaming poor Wiki – but The Guardian was quick in its rebuttal. And the very next day, India-related leaks were gone without a whimper; in their place there was a small apology for “misprinting.”
In the digital world, however, doom and gloom were supreme. Pakistani media gurus looked grim, missing heartbeats with each newly-leaked leak. And soon heads were rolling – fortunately for those “leaking,” not literally. Leading media-men and -women in Pakistan believed every word of the leaked cables. For in Pakistan “seeing is believing” – and if you are seeing what you believe in (read: what serves your agenda), God help us all.
However, the man who seemed to have been the cause of so much noise was unusually quiet – until Nov 30. Suddenly, Julian Assange was not only the new 007 of journalism but “a 39-year-old male from Australia wanted for sex crimes,” as described in the Red Notice issued by Interpol. It is funny how Assange was suddenly top priority.
That opens up many new possibilities, like, how about turning Dick Cheney over to Interpol to face bribery charges in Nigeria or, for that matter, how about issuing a Red Notice for George W Bush for genocide, now that we know that the basis for war in Iraq were not WMDs? Doesn’t two million people dead in Iraq make it a war crime? Or, more locally, how about Interpol speeding up efforts to arrest terror kingpin Dawood Ibrahim? After all, Ibrahim has been identified as belonging to a criminal terrorism syndicate by the US Congress. How about making his arrest a priority this month? If Assange can be brought to court on allegations of violating a “condom law,” surely Dick Cheney, George W Bush and Dawood Ibrahim merit arrest and prosecution. Or will Interpol be focusing solely on sex crimes?
After a fortnight of high drama, Assange was granted bail, but conditions apply: reporting to the police daily and wearing an electronic tag. And the possibility of his extradition to the US has also arisen. That’s an option that Assange vehemently opposes, fearful that the “land of the free” may just set his spirit free! Asssnge is hoping that UK prime minister David Cameron will not bow to US pressure.
But pressure comes in many forms in the US. According to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Wikileaks and its champion has “threatened the US government’s security system.” The Economist warned its readers that the world would probably be a worse place because of Wikileaks. So much for its stance of freedom of speech. “Wikileaks has violated the Espionage Act,” growled US Senator Joe Lieberman. The New Yorker’s George Packer called Assange “super-secretive, thin-skinned and megalomaniacal.” And jumping on the bandwagon was Alaska’s cold former governor Sarah Palin who termed Assange an “anti-American operative with blood on his hands.” The CIA – with a reputation for never “leaking” any secret – and honoured with a few mentions in the Wiki-leaked cables, reacted with a three-letter word: WTF, meaning “Wikileaks Task Force.” According to the CIA spokesman, WTF will “examine whether the leaks could affect the agency’s operations or foreign relationships.
But the CIA has nothing to worry about if you go with what Fareed Zakaria had to say about the leaks. “It’s not so bad,” he writes. “Diplomatic cables made public by Wikileaks show the skills of American diplomats, not their failings.” Hmmm, I was wondering how he manages to get all those interviews of never-seen-anywhere US biggies.
If everyone is entitled to their own opinion on Wikileaks, let me give you mine. Less opinion, more facts. WikiLeaks has made no groundbreaking revelations. None whatsoever. If anything, some scholars and analysts might be thrilled that their comments and analyses today stand so true. Not elementary, dear Watson, just commonsense!
Hasn’t the world always known – but apparently denied – that the funding for Taliban comes from Saudi Arabia? Hasn’t Iran and the world known from the start that the US is cosying up with Saudi Arabia for many reasons, one of them Iran? Why are we in shock to learn that Gen Kayani is happier with Zardari in power compared to Nawaz? And do you really need to be Einstein to know that Nawaz Sharif is anti-establishment? And why the awe over revelations involving
Fazlur Rehman? Maulana Sahib is always toppling over to the other side when the need arises. For a journalist reporting or doing a programme based on facts, it has become impossible to praise Maulana Sahib’s efforts to leave the government, as no one knows when, how and where Maulana Sahib will find a way to get back into the government for the sake of national interest. By the way, we should give the man credit for using this term with more conviction than our generals.
Wikileaks’ cables revealed that in November 2009 Interior Minister Rehman Malik sought an urgent appointment to meet Ambassador Anne Patterson, only to tell her that ISI chief Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha was hatching plots against Zardari, adding that the latter needed political security. Zardari’s paranoia and ISI games are both old news. What’s new, however, is not a leak. A New York court has summoned Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha and Hafiz Saeed, among others, for appearance before the court next month in connection with the Mumbai attacks. The response from Prime Minister Gilani is clear: no force can make the ISI chief appear before a US court. Should the US be getting in touch with Interpol?
Wikileak’s mention of Rahul Gandhi’s warning of a bigger threat to India is definitely worth a mention. “The growth of radicalised Hindu groups, which create religious tensions and political confrontations with the Muslim community,” are the “bigger” threat than those who attacked Mumbai in 2008, warns Gandhi. This is reminiscent of what Arundhati Roy has been saying in relation to Kashmir, Indian “patshalas” and the BJP. But it takes a leak to get noticed.
But I don’t want to burst Assange’s Wikileaks bubble. Definitely not when the poor fellow is already suffering. I do like details that have emerged about what the US really thinks of some leaders. Why would the US care about details like Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi keeping a cadre of four blonde Ukranian nurses. Unless the individual writing that cable was actually wishing he was in Gaddafi’s shoes. Or that Berlusconi was termed by a US diplomat as a useless party animal.
Now, that sounds like a cable written by a party pooper – the US diplomat was obviously not invited. Kim Jong Il is flabby, revealed Wikileaks. Probably written by a US diplomat suffering from an “I hate fat people” syndrome. And the fact that the president of Argentina, Kristina Krichner, is “borderline psychotic.” Mental health is relative, isn’t it?
For once I find myself agreeing with American radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, who declared that Wikileaks has hidden all the good stuff. “Where is the cable revealing that the CIA invented AIDS? Where is Obama’s birth certificate?” he demands. “Where are the cables of other leftwing lies we’ve been hearing about all these years...where’s all the good stuff.” I guess Assange’s recent announcement of publishing hundreds of Israel-related cables might help. Not conservatives, obviously.
My last thought is simple – whether good, bad or ugly – the best-kept not-so-secret secrets have leaked. And they reek. Of jealousy. Of bias. Of hypocrisy. And remind us emotional beings of a simple fact: international relations are based on mutual interest – not on friendship or emotions, or even religion.
And for that, God save the King!
In the digital world, however, doom and gloom were supreme. Pakistani media gurus looked grim, missing heartbeats with each newly-leaked leak. And soon heads were rolling – fortunately for those “leaking,” not literally. Leading media-men and -women in Pakistan believed every word of the leaked cables. For in Pakistan “seeing is believing” – and if you are seeing what you believe in (read: what serves your agenda), God help us all.
However, the man who seemed to have been the cause of so much noise was unusually quiet – until Nov 30. Suddenly, Julian Assange was not only the new 007 of journalism but “a 39-year-old male from Australia wanted for sex crimes,” as described in the Red Notice issued by Interpol. It is funny how Assange was suddenly top priority.
That opens up many new possibilities, like, how about turning Dick Cheney over to Interpol to face bribery charges in Nigeria or, for that matter, how about issuing a Red Notice for George W Bush for genocide, now that we know that the basis for war in Iraq were not WMDs? Doesn’t two million people dead in Iraq make it a war crime? Or, more locally, how about Interpol speeding up efforts to arrest terror kingpin Dawood Ibrahim? After all, Ibrahim has been identified as belonging to a criminal terrorism syndicate by the US Congress. How about making his arrest a priority this month? If Assange can be brought to court on allegations of violating a “condom law,” surely Dick Cheney, George W Bush and Dawood Ibrahim merit arrest and prosecution. Or will Interpol be focusing solely on sex crimes?
After a fortnight of high drama, Assange was granted bail, but conditions apply: reporting to the police daily and wearing an electronic tag. And the possibility of his extradition to the US has also arisen. That’s an option that Assange vehemently opposes, fearful that the “land of the free” may just set his spirit free! Asssnge is hoping that UK prime minister David Cameron will not bow to US pressure.
But pressure comes in many forms in the US. According to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Wikileaks and its champion has “threatened the US government’s security system.” The Economist warned its readers that the world would probably be a worse place because of Wikileaks. So much for its stance of freedom of speech. “Wikileaks has violated the Espionage Act,” growled US Senator Joe Lieberman. The New Yorker’s George Packer called Assange “super-secretive, thin-skinned and megalomaniacal.” And jumping on the bandwagon was Alaska’s cold former governor Sarah Palin who termed Assange an “anti-American operative with blood on his hands.” The CIA – with a reputation for never “leaking” any secret – and honoured with a few mentions in the Wiki-leaked cables, reacted with a three-letter word: WTF, meaning “Wikileaks Task Force.” According to the CIA spokesman, WTF will “examine whether the leaks could affect the agency’s operations or foreign relationships.
But the CIA has nothing to worry about if you go with what Fareed Zakaria had to say about the leaks. “It’s not so bad,” he writes. “Diplomatic cables made public by Wikileaks show the skills of American diplomats, not their failings.” Hmmm, I was wondering how he manages to get all those interviews of never-seen-anywhere US biggies.
If everyone is entitled to their own opinion on Wikileaks, let me give you mine. Less opinion, more facts. WikiLeaks has made no groundbreaking revelations. None whatsoever. If anything, some scholars and analysts might be thrilled that their comments and analyses today stand so true. Not elementary, dear Watson, just commonsense!
Hasn’t the world always known – but apparently denied – that the funding for Taliban comes from Saudi Arabia? Hasn’t Iran and the world known from the start that the US is cosying up with Saudi Arabia for many reasons, one of them Iran? Why are we in shock to learn that Gen Kayani is happier with Zardari in power compared to Nawaz? And do you really need to be Einstein to know that Nawaz Sharif is anti-establishment? And why the awe over revelations involving
Fazlur Rehman? Maulana Sahib is always toppling over to the other side when the need arises. For a journalist reporting or doing a programme based on facts, it has become impossible to praise Maulana Sahib’s efforts to leave the government, as no one knows when, how and where Maulana Sahib will find a way to get back into the government for the sake of national interest. By the way, we should give the man credit for using this term with more conviction than our generals.
Wikileaks’ cables revealed that in November 2009 Interior Minister Rehman Malik sought an urgent appointment to meet Ambassador Anne Patterson, only to tell her that ISI chief Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha was hatching plots against Zardari, adding that the latter needed political security. Zardari’s paranoia and ISI games are both old news. What’s new, however, is not a leak. A New York court has summoned Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha and Hafiz Saeed, among others, for appearance before the court next month in connection with the Mumbai attacks. The response from Prime Minister Gilani is clear: no force can make the ISI chief appear before a US court. Should the US be getting in touch with Interpol?
Wikileak’s mention of Rahul Gandhi’s warning of a bigger threat to India is definitely worth a mention. “The growth of radicalised Hindu groups, which create religious tensions and political confrontations with the Muslim community,” are the “bigger” threat than those who attacked Mumbai in 2008, warns Gandhi. This is reminiscent of what Arundhati Roy has been saying in relation to Kashmir, Indian “patshalas” and the BJP. But it takes a leak to get noticed.
But I don’t want to burst Assange’s Wikileaks bubble. Definitely not when the poor fellow is already suffering. I do like details that have emerged about what the US really thinks of some leaders. Why would the US care about details like Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi keeping a cadre of four blonde Ukranian nurses. Unless the individual writing that cable was actually wishing he was in Gaddafi’s shoes. Or that Berlusconi was termed by a US diplomat as a useless party animal.
Now, that sounds like a cable written by a party pooper – the US diplomat was obviously not invited. Kim Jong Il is flabby, revealed Wikileaks. Probably written by a US diplomat suffering from an “I hate fat people” syndrome. And the fact that the president of Argentina, Kristina Krichner, is “borderline psychotic.” Mental health is relative, isn’t it?
For once I find myself agreeing with American radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, who declared that Wikileaks has hidden all the good stuff. “Where is the cable revealing that the CIA invented AIDS? Where is Obama’s birth certificate?” he demands. “Where are the cables of other leftwing lies we’ve been hearing about all these years...where’s all the good stuff.” I guess Assange’s recent announcement of publishing hundreds of Israel-related cables might help. Not conservatives, obviously.
My last thought is simple – whether good, bad or ugly – the best-kept not-so-secret secrets have leaked. And they reek. Of jealousy. Of bias. Of hypocrisy. And remind us emotional beings of a simple fact: international relations are based on mutual interest – not on friendship or emotions, or even religion.
And for that, God save the King!
