Posted by Bruce Bourgoine who blogs at Dirigo Blue and Kennebec Blues.
Count this writer among those who respect the actions taken by WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange. The whistleblower role in our society has a long tradition and functions to remind us that much of what the government does in our name, especially in foreign endeavors, is not transparent. We live in a country of state secrets.
Many of the revelations are pedestrian and the cries about putting people, especially soldiers, in harm’s way as a result is a predictable officialdom rapid reaction attempt to tamp down leaking and to predispose opinion toward condemnation of it. State secrecy has always played the patriotic trump card in such instances.
Thanks to WikiLeaks, we do have some exposure now, especially in foreign affairs, of information that we as citizens need to have knowledge of to determine our level of support for our government’s activities. Whatever is done by our government is undertaken in our name. We supply the blood and treasure; we deserve the bigger picture.
If China’s relationship with North Korea is more nuanced than the fears we’ve been fed, we have a right to know. If the Afghan government is corrupt and our government is channeling our vital resources into that corruption, we have a right to know. If high placed Saudi officials are urging us to attack Iran for their regional interests when their own policies breed contempt for us in the same region, we ought to know. The list of what we ought to know is extensive.
It isn’t the coordinates of a forward strike base or the resume of a CIA operative that concerns us. Those micro pieces of highly specific information are appropriate matters to cloak in the present. It is the present and ever evolving overview, the macro pieces, which should concern us and prompt demand for great transparency.
Who are our true allies and why? What is in our actual best interest beyond what we are told? The good that sober revelation, at the time of any incident rather than later leaks, would do for democracy and the democratic exercise of a foreign policy in advance of committing blood or treasure would be immeasurable.
A default predisposition to secrecy versus a commitment to great transparency ought to be the debate now ignited by WikiLeaks. In order to get a sense of the KOS community’s overview, please do contribute your thoughts and convictions to create our WikiOpinion.