Let's start with what the U.S. embassy cables released by WikiLeaks this weekend are not.
They are not, as Hillary Clinton claimed, "an attack on America's foreign policy interests" that have endangered "innocent people." And they are not, as Robert Gibbs put it, a "reckless and dangerous action" that puts at risk "the cause of human rights."
And they do not amount to what the Italian foreign minister, in one of the sorrier moments in the history of hyperbole (or is it hysteria?), deemed the "September 11 of world diplomacy."
They are also not "top secret" since between 2 and 3 million government employees are cleared to see this level of "secret" document, and some 500,000 people have access to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRnet) where the cables were stored. Maybe they should think about changing the name to the Not-All-That Secret Internet Protocol Network (NATSIPRnet).
What's more, the revelations are not particularly revelatory. As Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, said: "Much of what we have seen thus far confirms more than it informs."
But here is what makes the leaked cables so important: they provide another opportunity to turn the spotlight on the war in Afghanistan, which, despite the fact that it's costing us $2.8 billion a week keeps getting pushed into the shadows -- even in this deficit-obsessed time. The cables are a powerful reminder of what this unwinnable war is costing us in terms of lives, in terms of money, and in terms of our long-term national security.
They don't deliver the punch in the gut or the chill down the spine that the Afghanistan war logs WikiLeaks released in July did, with their disturbing accounts of killed civilians, dead children, confused soldiers, and mounting chaos.
But the funny thing about tipping points is that you never know what fact, image, or story will bring things to a critical mass -- what small moment will cause a big idea to finally take hold.
Picture a very complicated combination lock, one that requires dialing up eight different numbers to open. And you have seven of the numbers -- but the lock still won't open until you hit upon that final number. 1/8th may not seem as "big" as 7/8ths, but without the final click of the combination, the tumblers won't fall into place.
"We need to prepare ourselves," wrote Malcolm Gladwell in The Tipping Point, "for the possibility that sometimes big changes follow from small events, and that sometimes these changes can happen quickly... Look at the world around you. It may seem an immovable, implacable place. It is not. With the slightest push -- in just the right place -- it can be tipped."
So maybe the tipping point will be the cables' reminder that we have placed our faith in the future of Afghanistan into the hands of a president our diplomats think is "extremely weak" and "driven by paranoia." Maybe it will be the news that President Karzai has freed many dangerous detainees -- including 29 who had been held at Guantanamo -- and pardoned numerous drug dealers. Maybe it will be yet another portrait of the president's half-brother as "corrupt and a narcotics trafficker." Maybe it will be the story of Afghanistan's former vice president being stopped in Dubai carrying $52 million in cash -- money he was allowed to keep. (Here's Dan Froomkin on the many other ways billions in American taxpayer money has gone down the drain in Afghanistan -- money desperately needed for some nation-building here at home.)
Or maybe it will be the bracing honesty of Anne Patterson, U.S. ambassador to Pakistan from 2007 until last month, who, without spin, sheds light on the complex relationship between our supposed allies in the Pakistan intelligence agencies and the Taliban, a relationship that poses a clear and present danger to American troops in Afghanistan. In the words of Simon Jenkins: "Patterson's cables are like missives from the Titanic as it already heads for the bottom."
If any of these revelations tip the scales, reminding people why bringing our troops home quickly needs to be more -- much more -- than "aspirational" (as the Pentagon recently termed the goal of being out by 2014), then this round of WikiLeaks will have been a very good thing, indeed.
Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff
Carne Ross: The End of Diplomacy As We Know It
Josh Ruebner: WikiLeaks: Israel's Security Concerns Often Clash With U.S. Interests
As for what we do. Well the world is not black and white. The choices that one nation makes to it's advantage are often detrimental to the interests of others. Yes we look after our own interests but we also have made an effort to try to resolve disputes but we're not always going to find palatable soutions to our problem. I think I would rather have us conducting diplomacy rather than letting the world spin out of control. While I support the right s of a free press and to a certain degree what Wikileaks stands for I cannot in good concious think that what has been doen was in any way shape or form helpful...does having a world that distrusts us really make us safer?
Well- all the servicemen have jobs and send money home to families. There may be lithium riches etc that could enrich US corps. It is a launch pad into Iran.
Perhaps the US in their naivete thought they could win this war and that Karzai was a good leader. All has been proved wrong.
why are we draining the US bank account to pay for this?? To enrich corps doing business there?? That is the most likely explanation now.
Sentimental talking points. It's always the "19 year old kids." Never an invading army. Never an Afghan woman and her sweet little innocent baby lying in the rubble of her collateral bombed out home. Whether your argument is valid or not, do not give me sentimentality. Using sentimentality is a prime sign of talking point memos.
1. It's on the other side of the world in a place most Americans can't find on a map.
2. White people aren't being killed (or killing each other) in mass numbers.
3. The children of the rich and powerful aren't being killed or maimed - it's the poor peoples' kids.
Until one of those changes, Afghanistan will continue to be a moneymaker for the arms dealers and a political expedient for the flag-wavin'-conservative-wrasslin fans.
There are no German, French, British equivalents. We are unique in allowing such events to happen
It looks a conspiracy somewhere down the murky political arena. US diplomacy inclusive. But it certainly has thrown shuddering chilly waves in this frosty festive season. It should also reveal the secrecy or duplicity of democracy. The general mass must find it confusing at the least and dangerous at the worst.
God bless
Dr. O. P. Sudrania
And as some posters have stated here, think of what all that wasted money could have done here in our own country?
We are not SAFE, in our own country and mostly we aren't safe, and it's our GOVERNMENT"S FAULT, due to screwed up policies that are focused, on giving stupid wasteful people crazy large amounts of cash, while our own people starve...
When did we turn into the Old Soviet State, the one the Russian's don't even have any longer? 2001, 2002......2006..2008..2010?
You don't need to answer any of these questions. There is only one answer: because too many are profiting from this m*dness and we the people are hamstrung to do anything about it!! So frustrating! ☮
Just get out, work with identifying and setting up an opposition group willing to take it to Karsai, the Pashtuns and the Taliban for ten percent of that, and see that they honor human rights within the territory they control and permit them to give the Taliban and its' allies everything they can handle. An Afghan group knows the culture, knows the topography, can blend in for intelligence gathering and their people can live well on salaries of $500 to $700 a month.
Assange is my candidate for Time's Person of the Year Award, that features and profiles a person, couple, group, idea, place, or machine that "for better or for worse, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year."
I certainly hope that no decent and conscientious people, or men and women serving in the U.S. Armed Services, or civilian bystanders are caught in the murderous crossfire that seems abuilding between the U.S., Assange, Wikileaks, etc. But after following this story for nearly a year, it seems like the real bad actors in this mess are the one's that claim the power of the truth to themselves in the White House, Defense, State, Homeland Security, and our "intelligence" operations.
You need to make it clear you are referring to Karzai.