Wikileaks and Afghanistan

Julian Assange, the founder of wikileaks.org, believes that courage is contagious. But, what is he referring to when he talks about "courage?" That would be the 91,000 classified intelligence documents that he leaked to major newspapers in the U.S., U.K. and Germany. These files described, amongst a slew of wartime failures, the shaky nature of the ISI, or Pakistan's intelligence agency. Assange has already threatened to release thousands of more documents, and hopes that more whistle-blowers will come out, because his "courage" will inspire others. Hence, his statement.

This sounds familiar. In 1971, Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers, about the secret extension of the Vietnam War into Laos and Cambodia under the Nixon administration. As Nixon was talking about Vietnamization and the return of troops, he was upping bomber missions over sovereign countries who were geographically subject to elements of the Ho Chi Minh trail. There have been some newsworthy opinions that have compared the Wikileaks documents to the Pentagon Papers and even the Tet Offensive. The Tet offensive was a series of attacks (1968) by the Vietcong which penetrated deep into South Vietnam. Although it was a military failure, it showed that the situation in Vietnam was deteriorating.

But, were Assange and whomever leaked the documents acting with courage or reckless disregard? How will the leakage of theses documents affect the war effort?

In order to even consider an answer to these loaded questions, we need to understand some of the important points of the leaked documents:

1. ISI - Claims that the ISI is in cahoots with elements of the Taliban at the same time they were purported to be helping pinpoint drone strikes on the porous A-P border. One of their main commanders, Gen. Hamid Gul, was said to have supplied motorcycles and plans for suicide bombings.
2. Pakistan/India - Claims that the ISI and elements of Pakistan military helped insurgents bomb the Indian embassy in Afghanistan because of India's plans to help build roads in the country.
3. Double Agents? - Claims that ISI was working with elements of Al Qaida.
4. Civilian Casualties - Claims that civilian casualty numbers have been purposefully reported as lower than they actually are. Wikileaks claims that there is enough evidence to bring war crimes charges against the U.S.
5. Useless Spending - Claims that former Pakistan pres. Musharraf was using counter-terrorism funds provided by the U.S. to bolster security against India.

The documents show that Pakistan has not clamped down on corruption and extremism in its own ranks. If intelligence instability occurs in Pakistan, then the entire war effort is put in jeopardy. Pakistan's unreliability and corruption have made it both a liability and a necessity in fighting the war. These claims would also explain why the situation in Afghanistan was in shambles when the new Administration created its war strategy.

This is why the documents are so volatile. Eve if Pakistan is not the perfect, terror-fighting ally we want them to be, our diplomatic relationship must remain stable in order to make any improvements. The documents showed that neglect led to continued intelligence failure, and a drastic downfall in Afghanistan. But, the documents do not cover the current strategy. Reports about civilian casualties (albeit still occurring) have been drastically reduced, and there have been significant gains in the targeting and killing of Taliban leaders, sometimes with the help of ISI or the Pakistani military.

War crimes and other hyperbolic statements aside, these documents reflect what we already know: the situation in Afghanistan is a result of negligence and corruption, but it can be improved. Because of that, it does not warrant any comparison to the damning results of the Tet Offensive and the Pentagon Papers.