The problem with wikileaks is they don’t lie

I am the first to admit that I read wikileaks cables (and advise my students to do so, provided they don’t mind the risk of never getting a job with the US government). But anyone who doubts the damage leaking them will do need only contemplate the recent spate of minor revelations, which have caused the American ambassador in Mexico City to leave and the one in Ecuador to be declared persona non grata (that’s PNG in diplomatese).  Both were guilty of essentially the same sin:  telling the truth about criminality and corruption in their host governments.

Then today there are the non-revelations about the former Prime Minister, now President, of Republika Srpska, the Serb 49 per cent of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  The cables from the US embassy in Sarajevo illustrate clearly that Milorad Dodik is serious about secession of his genocidally created fiefdom from Bosnia, a move that could precipitate another war there. This will not surprise readers of www.peacefare.net, where we have regularly noted that Dodik is serious.

So what’s wrong with our ambassadors reporting criminality, corruption and threats to peace and security?  Nothing of course.  But they won’t be able to do it much longer if confidentiality cannot be maintained.  I am comforted to know that Chuck English, our ambassador in Sarajevo during the period the cables were sent, clearly understood the seriousness of Dodik’s threat to Bosnia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.  But how free will his successor feel to report the truth if he runs the risk of being PNGed for it?