A few days after the publication of over 250,000 classified cables of the U.S. State Department on Wikileaks, the storm of controversy that struck the figure of its founder, Julian Assange, has not yet subsided. Many people rail against the irresponsibility of Assange while many others, at the same time, defend him. But there is something wrong in his quest for transparency and truth. Assange has translated the contents of the cables uniquely as an ambiguity underlying the behavior of the U.S. government in its relations with the rest of the world.
At a casual glance, this assumption may seem correct and acceptable, but only if you completely ignore that the very essence of diplomacy is to safeguard the interests of a country, while maintaining a certain balance of political and economic terms in international relations with other countries. It’s not a proof of ethics or morals. It is a game of mediation, compromises, concessions and demands made of negotiations that are based on anything but transparent information for those sitting across the negotiating table.
Being surprised by the American government representatives located in various embassies around the world, sending confidential information to Washington that’s filled with strong criticism for other countries, is pure childishness. The same thing happens to all the foreign delegations of any other state against countries hosting them. It is a consolidated monitoring and reporting activity well-known among the intelligence services.
Believing that this prerogative is ethically reprehensible and exclusively confined to American foreign policy is a gross mistake, based on blatant prejudice that’s made of anti-Americanism dressed up as love for transparency and truth. This is Assange’s biggest mistake. His one-sided accusation against the United States itself undermines the credibility and defensibility of his mission.
No comments:
Post a Comment