BY EDWARD P. DJEREJIAN, CHRISTOPHER BRONK | NOVEMBER 30, 2010

In the days of crisis following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, many experts criticized the failures of the U.S. intelligence community to share information regarding the threat posed by al Qaeda and its confederates. Since then, much work has been done to improve the flow of intelligence among U.S. governmental agencies as they work to disrupt terrorist organizations worldwide. Now, in a classic case of unintended consequences, we have discovered the enormous potential downside to aggregating large quantities of sensitive information in digital form. One low-ranking Army intelligence specialist with the proper clearance and sufficient guile has allegedly undermined this enhanced mode of coordinating classified information, inflicting serious harm to the conduct of American diplomacy.

The ongoing release of more than a quarter-million State Department reporting cables by WikiLeaks highlights the risks involved in broadly sharing classified information. Transferred to the custody of the U.S. Defense Department under the Net Centric Diplomacy program, the cables leaked to WikiLeaks and passed on to El País, Le Monde, Stern, the Guardian, and the New York Times provide a wide sample of the contemporary diplomatic communications of the United States. Their release will negatively affect the business of diplomacy conducted by America's foreign-affairs professionals, inhibiting the candor, frank assessments, and policy recommendations that its decision-makers need. An ambassador in the field who is involved in providing the secretary of state and the president with sensitive insights in the course of delicate peace negotiations must have the confidence and trust in the system that what he is reporting in a cable will not be disclosed publicly. And embassies must be able to report candidly on the internal political situation in a given country without fear of unauthorized disclosure harming official state-to-state relations. Self-censorship by U.S. diplomats and intelligence personnel will diminish the country's capacity to engage in foreign affairs immeasurably.

The leaked cables constitute a serious breach in the system to protect the sensitive communications of American diplomats. And for what? To learn that U.S. allies in the Middle East are seriously concerned by Iran's nuclear ambitions? To find out that there is contingency planning in case North Korea collapses or that North Korea is a matter of serious concern to China? To gawk at the personality quirks of foreign leaders? As the Times itself admits, "to read through them is to become a global voyeur." The Times also states that the cables illuminate "the inner workings, and sharp elbows, of diplomacy."

JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: DIPLOMACY, NORTH AMERICA
 

Edward P. Djerejian is the founding director of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University, former U.S. assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, and former U.S. ambassador to Syria and Israel. Christopher Bronk is the Baker Institute's fellow in information technology policy.

SLIGHTLY_OPTIMISTIC

8:55 AM ET

December 1, 2010

Pakistan

The Wikileaks disclosures will no doubt affect calculations in the FP index of failed states. Nuclear armed Pakistan should be a higher risk. Link: WikiLeaks cables expose Pakistan nuclear fears

In a BBC interview this morning, Pakistan still insists it is sovereign, does not need help, and can look after its [unofficial] nuclear arsenal despite its serious problems in the past. However others see it as a threat to the world.

 

SLIGHTLY_OPTIMISTIC

6:00 AM ET

December 2, 2010

Interesting response, Khalid.

Interesting response, Khalid. Apart from the undiplomatic language, it is more or less the official line conveyed yesterday to the BBC by the High Commissioner for Pakistan.

Re nuclear weapons, the essence of Pakistan's defence seems to be: "Every sovereign country can decide what technology it can give to others." But surely this is wrong - in an attempt to reduce terminal risks to the world most countries have signed up to nuclear safeguards. Pakistan has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).

Foreign Policy? "Pakistan has become a powder keg," Hussain explains, "and the fragmentation of the country has become a real possibility." Link: The Scorpion's Tail

 

OLDSCHOOLGUY

5:44 PM ET

December 2, 2010

don't do unto others and all that..

How many countries have been embarrassed by US intelligence operations? Now a non-state actor has done what the US and every other nation has done for years, and there is a hue and cry.

 

ASAFULT

10:48 AM ET

December 3, 2010

WikiLeaks and the Espionage Laws

If the quarter million leaked cables are indeed classified documents, they should be covered under the espionage laws, and the individual people responsible for leaking these documents to the press and Wiki should be arrested and tried for treason. Since diplomatic cables are all State Department issued and Hillary is the head of the State Department, we could start with her for blatant disregard of the security of sensitive documents through her agents (state department employes).
DOD contractors who commit similar infractions get charged with capital offenses and typically get very long prison sentences; the is no reason that State Department employes and high officials should not get similar treatment.