WikiLeaks release of war documents is an act of political warfare

The release of thousands of classified documents by WikiLeaks is an act of political warfare against the United States.  It was a publicity stunt to promote the organization’s leader, but also an attempt by non-US citizens to manipulate American perceptions of our soldiers’ actions and political leaders’ policies.  Luckily the American public WikiLeaks intended to demoralize is savvy enough not to be thrown off balance by classified reports confirming the difficult factors of the current war.  They also understand that some information must be restricted: our enemies do not operate from an open playbook and neither should the U.S.  However, the leak will result in serious damage to national security and is yet another crisis in which the Obama administration has been caught utterly unprepared for the dangerous world we confront and the malefactors throughout.  To prevent further damage, the WikiLeaks web site should be shut down—via cyberwarfare if necessary.

While WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange has sanctimoniously invoked the virtues of transparent government, he in fact has an anti-American agenda.  The fact that the release of the documents was carefully coordinated with three leftwing news organizations says much.  The Guardian (London), Der Spiegel (Hamburg) and the New York Times are three key pillars of the Left intelligentsia and consistent opponents of a strong U.S. foreign policy and national defense.  They want an America constrained by self-doubt and able to act abroad only with an international permission slip.  This is an agenda presumably shared by Mr. Assange, with whom the organizations allied in this matter.

Liberal news outlets spared no time in comparing the dissemination of classified information to the leak of the “Pentagon Papers” during the Vietnam War, which aided that era’s antiwar movement.  Mr. Assange himself made the claim.  However the comparison does not appear to be apt and the effect on U.S. support for the war appears to be minimal.

Indeed, on Capitol Hill, the revelation has been a sort of Rorschach test into which people will read what they like.  War opponents perceive vindication in the travails revealed by the reports, even though they exist in any war.  Others who believe in the need to pursue the Afghan War have taken notice of reports that the anti-Taliban effort has not been optimal.  There is little that is not consistent with what Pentagon leaders have already reported to Congress and the American people.  Congress calmly passed a supplemental appropriation for the Afghan War after the WikiLeaks revelation.

Nonetheless, WikiLeaks and its accomplices have done real damage to national security.  A small number of the reports have been discovered to contain “sources and methods”—two factors that make intelligence much more damaging if leaked.  Unlike most classified memoranda, which is restricted from the public because its release might conceivably impair the formation or execution of national security policy, the more dangerous release of sources and methods of intelligence collection can get people killed and have a measurable and prompt impact on national security.  WikiLeaks provided the public with both kinds of material—so much so that even the New York Times chose to redact some reports with names of Afghan information-providers.