Sol Invictus
12-07-2010, 06:43 AM
December 5 2010 | The Daily Telegraph
When the Daily Telegraph first published details of MPs’ expenses, it was almost impossible to disentangle two very different issues.
One concerned MPs’ conduct, and it was clear that an unacceptably large number had indeed abused the allowance system. It was a legitimate public interest to publish evidence of their conduct.
However, there was also the issue of technology which allowed the record of
MPs’ claims to be taken as a whole and transferred to the custody of the newspaper. A generation earlier, it would have required a truck to carry away the files.
Now we have had an even larger exposure of confidential information – the publication of 250,000 American diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks. This demonstrates that it is no longer possible to rely on the confidentiality of any sources, government or otherwise.
The concept of privacy may be enshrined in human rights legislation, but it cannot be made effective. The hacker will find a way.
It is interesting that the newspapers that have been most closely involved in the transmission of the WikiLeaks files have been high-minded newspapers of the Left, such as The Guardian and the New York Times.
There has been some talk of public interest. My view is that WikiLeaks would not have been able to make good a public interest justification. The damage to the diplomatic process has been disproportionate to the public benefit.
The actual files contained a lot of stale diplomatic gossip, exemplified by mildly embarrassing quotes from the Duke of York, an amiable man who uses his good access to promote British trade. Whatever else he may be, he is not one of the movers and shakers of international affairs.
There were, however, some very sensitive subjects that were dealt with, including nuclear proliferation by Iran and the relations between China and North Korea.
These are subjects that could lead to serious international conflict. There is no argument to suggest that WikiLeaks will help to prevent nuclear proliferation or create a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the West and Iran.
It has been alleged in Iran that the whole thing has been an American plant to embarrass America’s enemies. This seems most unlikely. The leaks damage the reputation and the diplomacy of the United States.
They do harm to everyone who relies on confidentiality, but they harm the United States the most.
In the past, the United States has suffered countless leaks but the State Department has been relatively successful in keeping its partners’ secrets to itself, at least in the post-Vietnam period.
There is certainly a popular point of view in America that regards this latest episode as a disaster. The Republican Sarah Palin, who often strikes a populist note, has denounced WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange as ‘an anti-American operative with blood on his hands’. She thinks he should be hunted down like Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders.
Considering that some Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders have been killed by US guided missiles, that would be an extreme policy, but Palin has put forward one interesting proposal: she has suggested that ‘cyber tools’ be used to shut down WikiLeaks permanently.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1335699/WikiLeaks-cables-These-leaks-spell-doom-web-freedom.html#ixzz17PQCiZjW
When the Daily Telegraph first published details of MPs’ expenses, it was almost impossible to disentangle two very different issues.
One concerned MPs’ conduct, and it was clear that an unacceptably large number had indeed abused the allowance system. It was a legitimate public interest to publish evidence of their conduct.
However, there was also the issue of technology which allowed the record of
MPs’ claims to be taken as a whole and transferred to the custody of the newspaper. A generation earlier, it would have required a truck to carry away the files.
Now we have had an even larger exposure of confidential information – the publication of 250,000 American diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks. This demonstrates that it is no longer possible to rely on the confidentiality of any sources, government or otherwise.
The concept of privacy may be enshrined in human rights legislation, but it cannot be made effective. The hacker will find a way.
It is interesting that the newspapers that have been most closely involved in the transmission of the WikiLeaks files have been high-minded newspapers of the Left, such as The Guardian and the New York Times.
There has been some talk of public interest. My view is that WikiLeaks would not have been able to make good a public interest justification. The damage to the diplomatic process has been disproportionate to the public benefit.
The actual files contained a lot of stale diplomatic gossip, exemplified by mildly embarrassing quotes from the Duke of York, an amiable man who uses his good access to promote British trade. Whatever else he may be, he is not one of the movers and shakers of international affairs.
There were, however, some very sensitive subjects that were dealt with, including nuclear proliferation by Iran and the relations between China and North Korea.
These are subjects that could lead to serious international conflict. There is no argument to suggest that WikiLeaks will help to prevent nuclear proliferation or create a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the West and Iran.
It has been alleged in Iran that the whole thing has been an American plant to embarrass America’s enemies. This seems most unlikely. The leaks damage the reputation and the diplomacy of the United States.
They do harm to everyone who relies on confidentiality, but they harm the United States the most.
In the past, the United States has suffered countless leaks but the State Department has been relatively successful in keeping its partners’ secrets to itself, at least in the post-Vietnam period.
There is certainly a popular point of view in America that regards this latest episode as a disaster. The Republican Sarah Palin, who often strikes a populist note, has denounced WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange as ‘an anti-American operative with blood on his hands’. She thinks he should be hunted down like Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders.
Considering that some Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders have been killed by US guided missiles, that would be an extreme policy, but Palin has put forward one interesting proposal: she has suggested that ‘cyber tools’ be used to shut down WikiLeaks permanently.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1335699/WikiLeaks-cables-These-leaks-spell-doom-web-freedom.html#ixzz17PQCiZjW