Wikipunk'd

Last week, a massive trove of American classified documents were released by Wikileaks, and published by the UK's Guardian newspaper. What did they reveal about the views of American intelligence officials? Among other things, America's Arab allies in the Middle East would apparently like the US to take out Iran; China is probably anxious to see the back of its North Korean ally; the Americans think Canada has an inferiority complex; Russia is controlled by criminal gangs, Italy's prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, is corrupt; and Argentine President Cristina Kirchner might be a bit bonkers.

Like, du-uh. I hardly needed Wikileaks to tell me all that. With the occasional qualification - the Chinese attitude to North Korea is a bit surprising, and the extent of the "mafiyeh's" hold on Russia would be worrisome, if it is in fact true - by and large, the leaks revealed what informed speculation had already concluded, or what was already an open secret. All in all, the revelations have so far caused embarrassment more than danger.

International relations

Nonetheless, in international relations, embarrassment is a problem. The Americans have put a brave face on it, maintaining - probably correctly - that the damage done by this set of revelations will probably not amount to a great deal. However, some of their informants are going to be more reticent about sharing information.

In diplomacy, discretion is the better of valour. People say things behind closed doors, and to their own confidantes and colleagues, that they wouldn't say in public. These leaks are the governmental equivalent of trashing your boss on your Facebook page, only to be reminded you once friended him. Vladimir Putin probably won't be too shocked about what the Americans think of him. Surely, he says equally critical things of them. But he'll be vexed they went public. And he'll probably also try to find out who has been passing information to the US.

Curiously, while Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has been accused of carrying out a vendetta against the Americans, for the most part the leaks don't cast the US in a negative light. On the contrary, their intelligence gathering and analysis look reasonably well-informed (although, it has to be said, its mission in Tbilisi seems to have saved money by asking the Georgian president to write its dispatches). Instead, it's mostly the countries on which the US reports that look bad.

What would be really revealing is if Wikileaks was able to release a cache of Russian or Chinese documents, telling us what they think the Americans are up to. That seems a pipe-dream, because of the stranglehold on intelligence those countries maintain. Ironically, that could be a weakness.

Some three million Americans had the security clearance needed to see these documents. That's why an army private was able to put his hands on them, copy them onto a Lady Gaga CD, and pass them on to Wikileaks. By this simple means, this lowly soldier managed the remarkable feat of creating a global diplomatic crisis while simultaneously lifting the intelligence quotient of a Lady Gaga CD (although, my fondness for Lady Gaga aside, I have to confess that copying a David Beckham interview onto one of her CDs would have probably achieved much the same effect).

But while one might wonder if the Americans were seriously careless, such wide access was deliberate. The events of 9/11 revealed that a lack of information-sharing among intelligence agencies kept the US security community from connecting the dots leading up to the al Qaeda attack. By widening access this way, the US sought to forestall such an eventuality recurring.

They may have succeeded in improving the efficiency of information delivery. But as with any efficiency gain, the price of information went down, and it was therefore more easily acquired. The US will have to pay a high price in restoring diplomatic relations, and recruiting new informants. My guess is that Washington will decide it is a price worth paying.

John Rapley is president of the Caribbean Policy Research Institute (CaPRI), an independent research think tank affiliated with the University of the West Indies, Mona. Feedback may be sent to columns@gleanerjm.com.