Wikileak in Afghanistan {Carl Packman}

Spread the love

Julian Assange won’t find himself on any leaked document, but he should be under no illusion: he is enemy number 1 now. The owner of Wikileaks may have just tickled a ball too many with his latest release; 90,000 records of incidents and intelligence reports about the conflict in Afghanistan.

Homeless Assange, whose profile on the Guardian notes him as confessing a genetic disposition to rebel, has spent the last 24 hours justifying his acts, in light of fierce criticism from the White House, who have said the leaks – probably the result of hacking (their assumption) – which contains classified and sensitive information could put the war effort in jeopardy.

The twitter hashtag #warlogs has had discussions ranging from whether to see Wikileaks forever more as a champion of free speech, or as a danger, more intent on causing naive damage and anarchy rather than any grown up appeal to classical liberal motifs.

Having seen a sample of the records myself I can conclude one thing for the nice readers at Frost Magazine: we are at war.

If you want to find out anymore, say if you want to see what Osama Bin Laden told intelligence in his poetic, tyrannical phraseology, or perhaps you’d like to see how much carnage the Taliban have caused with roadside bombings, go and see the files for yourself.

Though when you see them remember one of the main reasons why this stuff isn’t on public display (other than the issue of a national threat, or sensitivity to families): war is rubbish, people die, and it is often better to put it to the back of one’s mind, for otherwise the emotional proximity to what is really going on can have deleterious effects on a reasonable and rational opinion of the war effort in Afghanistan.

I call this the problem of overproximity, and I first spoke about it last year with regard to the camps in Calais that were home to many migrants. Photojournalist Jason Parkinson, a good guy, was frustrated by then immigration Minister Phil Woolas’ response to the camp. He wrote in the Guardian:

It is easy for Woolas, back in London, to arrogantly state these men don’t deserve asylum in the UK. But in doing so he exposes his distance from the issue. If he had bothered to go to the camps and squats around Calais and talk to these people, hear their stories first hand – perhaps then he would remember they are human beings and not just a statistic or price tag on a government spreadsheet.

It is my contention that it didn’t matter where Woolas made the decision if it involved taking a look at what the UK could do, but certainly visiting the camp was not going to help, only other than putting Woolas in a situation where his proximity to the problem would influence his reponse (we all know his stomach for pressure, just see Joanna Lumley take him down).

The leaked documents have the potential to change people’s mind in the wrong way, it will remind people that death is common to war, and that strategy has not always been good in Afghanistan.

The shock of the reality has the potential to delete from our emotional minds the cost of not challenging the Taliban – this network of extremists will not stop until every son of every scared parent in Afghanistan has forcefully been signed up to fight in their fascist wars.