Wikileaks Discloses Thousands of Confidential Afghanistan Docs
support politics
Wikileaks Discloses Thousands of Confidential Afghanistan Docs
posted by: Jessica Pieklo
As anticipated and despite government maneuvering to prevent otherwise, on Sunday a six-year archive of classified military documents was posted on Wikileaks. The New York Times, The Guardian, and Der Spiegel were also given copies of the documents in what Wikileaks describes as an enormous effort toward transparency and accountability concerning the war in Afghanistan.
The organization had previously released an internal U.S. military video but Sunday published over 75,000 confidential files. While the news outlets who also received copies of the files are still pouring over them, the Guardian, after independently confirming the authenticity of the documents, said the document dump revealed a "devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan."
Wikileaks has reportedly delayed the release of about an additional 15,000 files to allow names and other sensitive information to be redacted. But in the documents made public today are revelations of how the U.S.-led coalition has killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents, Taliban attacks have risen, and NATO commanders concerns that both Pakistan and Iran are helping with the insurgency.
The documents apparently span from January 2004-December 2009, and in its response to the disclosure the Obama administration was quick to point out that this timeframe is before the change in strategy. In fact, according to the administration, some of the grim details in files are precisely why President Obama ordered a review and ultimate change in strategy.
The administration strongly condemned the disclosure of the files and called the disclosure "irresponsible". White House national security advisor James Jones said the disclosure could put both American lives and national security at risk.
The full impact of the disclosure will probably unfold in the coming weeks and months as the full substance of the files gets digested and reported. In some ways it probably comes as no surprise to learn that the violence in the region was worse than disclosed by the government and our "allies" in Afghanistan have their own shadowy interests in the region. Quite frankly, anyone who believes, uncritically, and of the information concerning the war efforts is doing so out of willful blindness and a total disregard to history. Spinning the war is just one of many Vietnam legacies, and even those roots go deeper in our military history.
Democracies can only function when there is a healthy level of transparency, and on that end I applaud the efforts of Wikileaks. I do so with some reservation though as Wikileaks has made it clear, under no uncertain terms, that it is wholeheartedly against the war in Afghanistan. To that end I think it is important to view the disclosure, and the files disclosed, with the same healthy dose of skepticism as the government's war narrative. Both have agendas and both have access to and the ability to manipulate huge troves of information.
There is also a real concern that the disclosure will simply result in this and future administrations assigning a higher level of confidentiality to less and less relevant and important information, thereby stymying the very transparency efforts Wikileaks advocates. I'm not sure the answer is to that problem is to avoid disclosure or abandon efforts at transparency, but I think it is a serious challenge and one that needs to be thought through.
Ultimately though I hope the disclosure solidifies and hastens the efforts to exit Afghanistan and end our occupation there before any more innocent lives are lost
The organization had previously released an internal U.S. military video but Sunday published over 75,000 confidential files. While the news outlets who also received copies of the files are still pouring over them, the Guardian, after independently confirming the authenticity of the documents, said the document dump revealed a "devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan."
Wikileaks has reportedly delayed the release of about an additional 15,000 files to allow names and other sensitive information to be redacted. But in the documents made public today are revelations of how the U.S.-led coalition has killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents, Taliban attacks have risen, and NATO commanders concerns that both Pakistan and Iran are helping with the insurgency.
The documents apparently span from January 2004-December 2009, and in its response to the disclosure the Obama administration was quick to point out that this timeframe is before the change in strategy. In fact, according to the administration, some of the grim details in files are precisely why President Obama ordered a review and ultimate change in strategy.
The administration strongly condemned the disclosure of the files and called the disclosure "irresponsible". White House national security advisor James Jones said the disclosure could put both American lives and national security at risk.
The full impact of the disclosure will probably unfold in the coming weeks and months as the full substance of the files gets digested and reported. In some ways it probably comes as no surprise to learn that the violence in the region was worse than disclosed by the government and our "allies" in Afghanistan have their own shadowy interests in the region. Quite frankly, anyone who believes, uncritically, and of the information concerning the war efforts is doing so out of willful blindness and a total disregard to history. Spinning the war is just one of many Vietnam legacies, and even those roots go deeper in our military history.
Democracies can only function when there is a healthy level of transparency, and on that end I applaud the efforts of Wikileaks. I do so with some reservation though as Wikileaks has made it clear, under no uncertain terms, that it is wholeheartedly against the war in Afghanistan. To that end I think it is important to view the disclosure, and the files disclosed, with the same healthy dose of skepticism as the government's war narrative. Both have agendas and both have access to and the ability to manipulate huge troves of information.
There is also a real concern that the disclosure will simply result in this and future administrations assigning a higher level of confidentiality to less and less relevant and important information, thereby stymying the very transparency efforts Wikileaks advocates. I'm not sure the answer is to that problem is to avoid disclosure or abandon efforts at transparency, but I think it is a serious challenge and one that needs to be thought through.
Ultimately though I hope the disclosure solidifies and hastens the efforts to exit Afghanistan and end our occupation there before any more innocent lives are lost
Comments