Politico just posted a new piece on the fall-out of the WikiLeaks document dump. Former Director of the CIA, Michael Hayden has gone record to say that
More importantly contrary to– or even consistent with– WikiLeak’s founder Julian Assanges’ claim that he has withheld 15,000 documents that reveal the identities of Afghan’s who have aided the U.S and NATO effort, Congresswoman Jane Harman has claimed that her staff have visited WikiLeaks and have found therein, actionable intelligence–names of Afghan’s State Department officials. Ms. Harman seems to be implying that a little bit of background research could make any of these data points come to life, as an existential threat to many Afghans and U.S. officials.
Consider the real consequences of the WikiLeak documents. Consider first that the leaks spread the facts on the ground in the U.S/NATO Af/Pak strategy to the broader public, in a contagious way –newspaper readers in three different countries got to know information that was contained within the fairly small policy wonk world. Nevertheless the consequence of the doc dump on the already loose and airy public discourse on the war, is somewhat benign in an important sense. The people know about the politics on the ground but at least here in the U.S. it is not at all obvious whether that knowing hum amongst the people of the United States, will immediately cause public opinion on the war to plummet. Afghanistan has not yet turned into an “unjust war” and there is still a store of national pride in the effort.
Consider then that the most important consequence of the leaks is a future oriented one. Former CIA Case Officer Robert Baer has said that the leaks will dissuade Afghans to work with ISAF forces.
Politico writer Josh Gerstein quotes Baer:
“If I was an Afghan, would I risk getting my ears cut off or my head cut off? Would I work for the [U.S.] military?”
He added leaving classified reports unsecured ” was “total sloppiness” on the part of the Pentagon. “This is exactly what you don’t want to have happen.”
This consideration does not require that one posit a mechanism whereby this is the case. Information has been outed. Information can be outed again, publicly, widely and in an uncontrolled manner (the Times, The Guardian and Der Spiegel have surely minimized the damage that could have been caused by a straight doc dump on the web). Fearing demonstration of their future complicity with NATO allies, any Afghan might pause and reconsider his options: Work with the Taliban and possibly live well. Work with NATO and possibly have my family massacred.
That’s the rub. That’s now become among the most important hurdles that the U.S. and its NATO allies have to overcome if the Af/Pak strategy is to work at all.
