WikiLeaks: Dangerous or Just Plain Embarrassing?
Posted: Saturday, December 11, 2010
by Dr Jeannette Kavanagh
Dr Jeannette Kavanagh and Daughter
It's almost impossible to keep up with the amount of media coverage being given to the latest press leaks from WikiLeaks. That in itself should tell us something.
It's also interesting to ponder what people one hundred years from now will be saying about a group of people who claim to be committed to one fundamental thing: informing the public.
First a bit of historical context: Australia and the United States of America (USA) are best friends. Some Australians think we’ve become another State of the US. But that’s another article. When America goes to war, in Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam (sorry to bring that one up), Australia tags along very quickly, even when over one million Australians marched to protest our involvement in the Iraq war.
Who can we believe?
In this article, I’m focusing only on leaked state department documents revealing what the US really thought of Kevin Rudd’s foreign affairs efforts, so I need to add that when he was PM, Mr Rudd visited the USA where his press was excellent. President Obama allegedly regarded him as one of “his best mates”.
On Tuesday 8th December 2010, our Australian newspaper headlines screamed “US Condemns Rudd”. Leaked state department documents detailed the brutal US assessments of Obama’s so-called “best mate” with Rudd portrayed as ‘a control freak’; ‘non-consultative with the USA; and out of line with his views on China’ – among other things.
On the same day, one of our most respected television journalists, Mr Kerry O’Brien, presenter of The 7.30 Report on the government-funded Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) introduced an interview about those damning assessments by telling his viewers that: “Kurt Campbell … the US State Department's most senior official….asked to come on the program to counter the damage from today's exposure in Fairfax newspapers of the US embassy cables critical of … then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's foreign policy record”.
O’Brien started by saying:“ … Australians woke up to a headline this morning that said 'US condemns Rudd'. What do you say to that?”
Poor Kurt. Then again, he had asked to come on the program. My expectation was that he’d deny, or at least challenge the veracity of the WikiLeaks information. Not at all.
Mr Campbell’s response to Kerry’s question was an irrelevant acknowledgement that “we've been living … with just enormous challenges. ....And to be perfectly honest, …. No relationship's more important to us than Australia”.
You see what I mean? Here’s the US assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs saying on national Australian television that “no relationship's more important to us than Australia.” He then went on to say that … “few people have made such an impression, ….like Kevin Rudd has done …. he has an enormous respectful following in the United States …. So I think ….it's important for both friends and admirers to stand up and speak out, and that's what I'm doing here tonight”.
Sorry Kurt, but standing up and speaking out won’t undo the immeasurable damage to Kevin Rudd’s foreign policy standing. Let’s be really clear here. That damage was not caused by WikiLeaks. It was caused by the duplicitous staff in the US state department. WikiLeaks merely let newspapers do their job – publish the truth.
When asked whether his praise of Rudd was out of step with the scathing sentiment at the State Department and the White House level, Mr Campbell replied: “… some of these cables come from a previous administration. ... And frankly, …. we don't know the validity of all of these in particular”. Relevance to question? Nil. Not at all believably, Mr Campbell went on to more hyperbole about how when Rudd speaks “people listen”. Watch the interview in full here http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s3088477.htm
It wasn’t damage control
Kerry O’Brien suggested that Mr Campbell’s claims will be seen “as … the things you have to say to undo the damage”. Of course Kurt Campbell denied that it was damage control. Quite correctly too, because nothing he said controlled the damage caused when the truth was revealed.
Mr Campbell said such lovely things about Mr Rudd who is now, of all things, our Foreign Minister. He told the Australian nation that in regard to Kevin Rudd, the USA feels “… not just respect, it's true affection." None of that came close to compensating for the cruel way the State Department had talked about Kevin Rudd when they thought no one would ever find out what they really believed, and what they actually communicated to each other.
It’s not a danger
(Some) Americans are in such a lather about WikiLeaks revealing US state department’s embarrassing assessments of well, just about everyone. Reminds me of adolescent friendships. You swear best friend status with one person from whom you’re almost inseparable. Then you tell another friend what you really think of your best friend. Trouble only arises if and when your so-called best friend finds out what you really think of her or him.
When people, Rudd in Australia, Putin in Russia, and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to name a few, find out what the US state department and by default America, really thinks, it’s highly embarrassing to America. It’s not a danger to anyone. The US state department should remember that that which hits the fan is never equitably divided. America’s reputation is the only target now that WikiLeaks has turned on the fan.
WikiLeaks is not the problem
Kevin Rudd’s response to the brouhaha over being so scathingly critiqued by the US state department was quite measured. His view, shared by many, is that the problem is not that WikiLeaks broadcast information given to it, but that the USA state department should have been more careful about guarding its sensitive information. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have not behaved as duplicitously as the US state department officials.
When Kerry asked if Rudd was still one of President Obama’s “best mates”, there are no prizes for guessing Campbell’s answer - “yes”. He told us that Rudd and secretary of state Hillary Clinton “have developed a very close relationship. They consult regularly. So, … his engagement with our administration is not just at the presidential level.” Trouble is that now we’re left wondering what Hillary really thinks about our Kev.
Assange has not broken any Australian law
O’Brien’s last question was about the State Department's current view as to what laws WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has actually broken. Kurt Campbell could only say “… I am not a lawyer. We have teams of lawyers … working on this. …All I can tell you is that … (the leaks) have been deeply … embarrassing…. I will also say …. I stand by the (US-Australia) relationship….”
Findings by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and reported by Dylan Welch in The Age newspaper on December 17th, were that neither Julian Assange nor WikiLeaks was guilty of any crime in Australia.
By the time it finished, I was convinced that this 7.30 Report interview had not been one of Kurt Campbell’s best ideas. With friends like that, we all need WikiLeaks.
This Article has been viewed 514 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (1 total)Dr Jeannette Kavanagh, Politician are not professionals and are trained to act or speak in public in accordance with its foreign policy Government.Friendship or hostility to any person or country to not come in their way.Politician around the world are like elephants which have different teeth for eating and entertainment.
Ambassador are professionals and are trained to report based on verified facts, good or bad, and based on logic and became record for future refrence to update foreign policy.
I am not talking on specific cases, quoted by you. But in general applicable everywhere.
Dr Jeannette Kavanagh, this is my opinion may be different from you.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.