Op-Ed: Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has it all wrong

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has explained his decision to publish the names of hundreds of Afghans working with Nato forces. The reasons he gives are vague, naive, disingenuous, and he is now way out of his depth.

Put black leather trousers and a jacket on him, then hang a guitar around his neck, and you’re looking at a baby-faced and aquiline-featured rock star. His blond locks and charming smile could have seen his poster on any kid’s bedroom wall. As things are though, the more doomsday-oriented among us are betting that his photo is stuck on CIA hit squad briefing room walls with darts in it. Julian Assange is one of the most sought-after men on the planet. Whether Obama’s henchmen are looking for him or not is debatable, but journalists certainly are. Since Wikileaks decided to publish thousands of uncensored intelligence documents the press has been playing at schizophrenics, wanting on the one hand to publish juicy news but also – and credit must be given here for the most part – aware of the issues raised by publishing data which could put lives directly at risk. That seems to be the least of Assange’s worries however, as he has released documents containing the names of hundreds of Afghans working for Nato in Afghanistan. Not just informants, but those involved in more mundane tasks too. Included are the names of their villages, names of relatives and even GPS locations, according to an interview he gave to The Times, which now has a paywall. Excerpts of it have also been published by The Australian however, which doesn’t. This information obviously puts the lives of many of those people at risk from Taliban killers but, amazingly, he is pretending he doesn’t, or didn’t, consider that to be a reason not to publish. His answers to questions on the subject are so confused that they beggar belief, such is their lack of depth and clarity. If Wikileaks was ever supposed to represent a model for objective and substantiated leaks of information for the public good by responsible whistle-blowers, he smashed that model up in that one interview. Saying as he does that he would “deeply regret” any harm that may come to those people as a result of his leaks smells vaguely of cynicism. He has repeatedly said in the past that his leaks would not put people’s lives at risk. Was he lying or isn’t he in a position to control what his employees are doing any more? He says that many Afghan informers were “acting in a criminal way” by sharing information and that they were “telling soldiers false stories ... creating victims themselves.” But he conveniently – or rather negligently - offers no evidence to back that statement up. Strange behavior that, for a man who extols the use of ethical standards in leaking data. It’s also incomprehensible, coming as it does from someone who insists that his work is not designed to judge people by the negative effects it may have upon them. In this instance, he clearly does. According to his own statement, by “telling stories” and “creating victims” he considers that the people he has named have effectively given him the right to throw them to the dogs, so I suppose he wants us to believe that he wouldn’t have done that if they’d been nice and gentle informants who always told the truth. In a stock-answer effort he lamely trotted out to justify his responses, he declared that any risk to informants' lives was outweighed by the overall importance of publishing the information. It’s all very well for him to say that, but I don’t know if anyone who may be killed as a result of his actions would agree. One of his more nonsensical pearls came in the form of the extremely disingenuous assertion that he had asked the White House to help him to “minimise the chances of innocent informers being named.” So let’s be clear here. He asked the authorities to help “minimise” the risks of people dying and then when – as he claims – they didn’t respond, he went ahead and put their lives at risk anyway by publishing their names? Next thing we know, he’ll be blaming Obama for any reprisal killings which may follow. Or did he mean that he chivalrously wanted to protect the “innocent” informers, but not those who were “telling false stories”? Then, in a rather clumsy attempt to show that he does in fact have some sense of respect for people’s lives, he claims that he could hold back documents that “clearly jeopardized innocent people" and that . "If we made a mistake we will (sic) review our procedures and react.” So it’s just a crying shame that he admits himself that any action taken to put things right by taking data off the Internet would have no effect whatsoever because it’s already been downloaded by people all over the world, including, surely, the Taliban. Again, is this incompetence, cynicism or a little of both? Even Reporters Without Borders is surprised by recent Wikileaks actions, with a spokesman saying that “"Our first impression is that it seems a little surprising to see Afghan names here. Clearly, when we work on reports on sensitive stories there is always attention that local innocent names are not mentioned." I have never in my life read such a set of unprepared and negligently cavalier answers to questions on such a serious matter as those given by Assange. The right side of his brain doesn’t know what his left side is doing, he’s twisting around like a kid caught stealing candy, his excuses are not credible and his knowledge of the real world is apparently so limited that he’s a liability to any attempts by serious investigating sources to convince the public to support those who work in the field of releasing sensitive information into the public domain. This embarrassing interview demonstrates just how gullible he thinks the public is. But the public is not as gullible as he thinks and it’s about time he realized it. Mr Assange, it’s high time you took your responsibilities much more seriously. You are not a rock star playing hard to get for the press, you are a man who has tried his best to further the public interest but you are now running away scared from the enormous mistakes you have made whilst doing it. It’s time to man up.