The Foreign Service Journal, March 2011

22 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / M A R C H 2 0 1 1 these messages has done to our credi- bility with local audiences around the world. Yet in the classroom I found a bright side to all of this — increased attention to the conduct of diplomacy by the In- ternet generation. This incident just might improve our image, at least among those members of our domes- tic audience with suspicions about the quality of our work in support of the na- tional interest. Lillian deValcourt-Ayala Public Affairs Officer Embassy Guatemala City A Silver Lining I’m no longer in the field and so cannot comment about foreign opin- ions of WikiLeaks. However, from a U.S. university town perspective, the reaction has been very negative. But the reaction to the content has been general approval of the reporting, and belief in the accuracy of the reports. American diplomats are perceived as professional and well-informed. James Carter FSO, retired College Station, Texas Consult FRUS Those in the media who have com- mented that one good thing that came out of the leaks was that it showed how qualified and erudite our diplo- mats are should be made aware of the Foreign Relations of the United States publications. If they are interested in learning more about the high quality of our work, they can avail themselves of released documents without doing harm to our national security. Carol A. Colloton FSO, retired Bureau of Administration Washington, D.C. A Firing Offense I think those who decided to put secret cables all over the Pentagon site should be fired for cause. I also be- lieve those who allowed for insecure computers to have access to classified material should be fired. And I hope those who never bothered to look into this massive breach just waiting to happen will be reprimanded. The naive enlisted man charged with the theft should be given a trial and, if found guilty, should serve a meaning- ful, but not overly severe, sentence. Finally, State deserves a massive slap on the wrist for trusting the Pentagon on what appears to have been a one- way street. “You share with us, we share with the world.” John R. Savage FSO, retired Charlotte, N.C. So Much for Securing Documents I was reading Bob Woodward’s lat- est book, Obama’s War , as the Wiki- Leaks diplomatic cables began to ap- pear, and was struck by the irony as I read the following passages in the book: p. 153: The Pentagon received [Gen- eral Stanley] McChrystal’s classified as- sessment of the Afghanistan War on Monday, Aug. 31. Secretary of Defense Gates was responsible for giving a copy to President Obama. The document was so sensitive that even parts of the review team who had helped draft parts of it and held security clearances could not obtain a copy. p. 175: In mid-September, after a nearly two-hour interview, I asked one person, “You’ve got a copy of the Mc- Chrystal report here?” “Yeah, it’s on my desk,” was the answer, and that per- son photocopied the report for me. Michael D. Thomas FSO Board of Examiners Arlington, Va. It’s Not Whistleblowing With regard to the ongoing soap opera of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, many commentators are calling this whistleblowing. But that term applies to revelations of evil or illegal acts. While some of the previously hidden military errors in Iraq or Afghanistan might fit that definition, what evil or il- legality is the flood of American diplo- matic cables revealing? Diplomatic confidentiality has been respected by the whole world, going back to the Greek city-states, for more than two millennia. We accord similar rights to journalists to protect commu- nications with their sources, lawyers with their clients, or doctors with their patients. Assange’s defenders should ask themselves what qualifies such contin- uing excesses and blowhard hubris as “whistleblowing.” ■ George Lambrakis FSO, retired London S P E A K I N G O U T Despite promises to protect vulnerable cable sources, some redactions from WikiLeaks and its partner media have been comically inept.