Professors concerned by recent cable leaks

The cables have been posted on the Internet by WikiLeaks, an organization launched in 2006 with the goal of increasing transparency of governments worldwide by leaking secure information.

The organization plans to leak more than 250,000 State Department cables from 1966 through February of this year in total. At least one cable written by a University professor is among the roughly 600 published by WikiLeaks so far.

On March 17, 2005, Wilson School professor Daniel Kurtzer, then the U.S. ambassador to Israel, sent a classified cable to State Department headquarters discussing Israel’s growing concern about Iran’s nuclear ambitions. He also noted that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon would likely keep any plans for a potential military attack on Iran secret even from many members of his cabinet. That information is among the documents, which will be periodically released in small batches, now publicly available.

While scholars said that the leak will make diplomats hesitant in discussing sensitive opinions, none expect U.S. relations with other countries to entirely crumble, and Kurtzer even noted potential benefits from airing some concerns in public.

Some of the leaks that have raised the most attention discussed Middle Eastern countries’ fears over Iran’s nuclear program, U.S. spying on the United Nations leadership, and American diplomats’ unflattering opinions of foreign heads of state including Afghan president Hamid Karzai and Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

Kurtzer, who was ambassador to Israel from 2001 to 2005 and ambassador to Egypt the four years before, said in an e-mail that many countries are concerned over the threat posed by Iran, as detailed in the cables.

“Now that these concerns — well known already — are in the public domain, it may be easier to marshal support for an even more determined effort to contain Iranian ambitions,” he said. “This could include a great willingness of the Iranians to talk, to engage, which is an important next step.”

Diane Snyder, a career Central Intelligence Agency officer who is now a politics professor and officer-in-residence at the University, said in an e-mail that while these leaks might “add fuel to the fire,” causing strain in relations with Middle Eastern countries, she “doubt[s] it will cause particular states to ‘do a 180’ in their relationship with the U.S., as most have such relationships due to how they benefit (e.g. foreign aid, trade, etc.).”

Support nonprofit student journalism. Donate to the ‘Prince.’ Donate now »

Diplomat-in-residence and Wilson School professor Barbara Bodine, who was U.S. ambassador to Yemen from 1997 to 2001, said in an e-mail that the release will hurt U.S. diplomacy efforts.

“We will be able to operate,” Bodine said, “but there will always be a lingering question in the minds of those we work with, and in the minds of diplomats communicating with their own governments that it may be leaked.”

Kurtzer voiced a similar concern. “Our interlocutors may be less willing to confide in our diplomats, our diplomats may be less willing to commit their thoughts and analyses in writing,” he said.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the leak an attack on U.S. foreign policy and on the international community but said she was “confident that the partnerships that the Obama administration has worked so hard to build will withstand this challenge” in a press conference Monday.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

One benefit of the release is that it could give President Barack Obama “a great springboard to re-energize his campaign stated efforts at ‘more transparent government,’ more openness and information available via the Freedom of Information Act,” Snyder said.

The U.S. government has not yet prosecuted WikiLeaks, though it has told other countries that the person who stole the documents is already under arrest, according to media reports. The likely culprit is Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, who was arrested in June for leaking a video to WikiLeaks showing a 2007 U.S. military attack that killed civilians and journalists.

Manning allegedly downloaded the cables while stationed outside of Baghdad, along with military documents regarding the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Those military documents were released on WikiLeaks in July and October, respectively.

“Ultimately, each administration has to balance protection of first amendment rights against its discretion to haul the press into court on a criminal warrant,” Snyder said of the government’s decision not to prosecute WikiLeaks.

Much of the information that has been publicized so far has come from The New York Times and several European media outlets, which received the documents in advance.

The New York Times and The Guardian are editing the cables they publish on their websites, redacting the names of sources who could face personal safety risks and information that could directly jeopardize national security.

In a preface to their coverage of the leaks in a series called “State’s Secrets,” Times editors explained that “As a general rule we withhold secret information that would expose confidential sources or reprisals or that would reveal operational intelligence ... On the other hand, we are less likely to censor candid remarks simply because they might cause a diplomatic controversy or embarrass officials.”

The decision of what to publish is a difficult one, however. Bodine said the news organizations ought to be congratulated for censoring the material. “However,” she added, “I do not think they gave proper and full regard to the impact on people’s lives (for example, activists in countries with less than tolerant governments) or national security.”