Um, I Think It's Time for a Thread on WikiLeaks

not sure if a few dozen ppl skimreading stuff with very localized information can 100% determine what information is potentially revealing to concerned intelligence agencies/other unfriendly ppl who will know exactly what to look for

THERE ARE SEVERAL LESSONS FOR THOSE WHO WOULD NEGOTIATE
WITH PERSIANS IN ALL THIS:

- --FIRST, ONE SHOULD NEVER ASSUME THAT HIS SIDE OF
THE ISSUE WILL BE RECOGNIZED, LET ALONE THAT IT WILL
BE CONCEDED TO HAVE MERITS. PERSIAN PREOCCUPATION WITH
SELF PRECLUDES THIS. A NEGOTIATOR MUST FORCE RECOGNITION
OF HIS POSITION UPON HIS PERSIAN OPPOSITE NUMBER.

- --SECOND, ONE SHOULD NOT EXPECT AN IRANIAN READILY
TO PERCEIVE THE ADVANTAGES OF A LONG-TERM RELATIONSHIP
BASED ON TRUST. HE WILL ASSUME THAT HIS OPPOSITE
NUMBER IS ESSENTIALLY AN ADVERSARY. IN DEALING WITH
HIM HE WILL ATTEMPT TO MAXIMIZE THE BENEFITS TO HIMSELF
THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY OBTAINABLE. HE WILL BE PREPARED
TO GO TO GREAT LENGTHS TO ACHIEVE THIS GOAL, INCLUDING
RUNNING THE RISK OF SO ALIENATING WHOEVER HE IS DEALING
WITH THAT FUTURE BUSINESS WOULD BE UNTHINKABLE, AT
LEAST TO THE LATTER.

- --THIRD, INTERLOCKING RELATIONSHIPS OF ALL ASPECTS
OF AN ISSUE MUST BE PAINSTAKINGLY, FORECEFULLY AND
REPEATEDLY DEVELOPED. LINKAGES WILL BE NEITHER READILY
COMPREHENDED NOR ACCEPTED BY PERSIAN NEGOTIATORS.

- --FOURTH, ONE SHOULD INSIST ON PERFORMANCE AS THE
SINE QUA NON AT ESH STAGE OF NEGOTIATIONS. STATEMENTS
OF INTENTION COUNT FOR ALMOST NOTHING.

- --FIFTH, CULTIVATION OF GOODWILL FOR GOODWILL'S SAKE
IS A WASTE OF EFFORT. THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE AT ALL
TIMES SHOULD BE IMPRESSING UPON THE PERSIAN ACROSS THE
TABLE THE MUTUALITY OF THE PROPOSED UNDERTAKINGS, HE
MUST BE MADE TO KNOW THAT A QUID PRO QUO IS INVOLVED
ON BOTH SIDES.

- --FINALLY, ONE SHOULD BE PREPARED FOR THE THREAT
OF BREAKDOWN IN NEGOTIATIONS AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT AND NOT
BE COWED BY THE POSSIBLITY. GIVEN THE PERSIAN
NEGOTIATOR'S CULTURAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL LIMITATIONS, HE
IS GOING TO RESIST THE VERY CONCEPT OF A RATIONAL
(FROM THE WESTERN POINT OF VIEW) NEGOTIATING PROCESS.

that whole document delivers on lulz

I was about to post that Mordy, it's great. It's from 1979 btw.

Iraq: Any plan B?
------------------

3.(C) MbR restated the UAE's support for the US in the region,
noting "the UAE is the only country that is 100 percent with the
US." MbR said UAE support for the US effort remained firm, but
asked what is "plan B" should the current US approach not
stabilize Iraq. Senator Lieberman quoted the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff as saying "plan B is to make plan A work."

http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/lieberman1.jpg
http://moonprismpowermakeup.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/tim-gunn-the-ideal-man.jpg

make it work!

¶6. (C) Zhang asked the Ambassador whether the U.S. would
negotiate to keep the Base open. The Ambassador answered
that the U.S. side was evaluating its options. Zhang then
offered his "personal advice," "This is all about money," he
said. He understood from the Kyrgyz that they needed $150
million. The Ambassador explained that the U.S. does provide
$150 million in assistance to Kyrgyzstan each year, including
numerous assistance programs. Zhang suggested that the U.S.
should scrap its assistance programs. "Just give them $150
million in cash" per year, and "you will have the Base
forever." Very uncharacteristically, the silent young aide
then jumped in: "Or maybe you should give them $5 billion and
buy both us and the Russians out." The aide then withered
under the Ambassador's horrified stare.

holy shit that one is amazing

WHAT WILL THE END LOOK LIKE?

¶6. (C) This is the big, unanswerable question. One thing
at least is certain, Mugabe will not wake up one morning a
changed man, resolved to set right all he has wrought. He
will not go quietly nor without a fight. He will cling to
power at all costs and the costs be damned, he deserves to
rule by virtue of the liberation struggle and land reform and
the people of Zimbabwe have let him down by failing to
appreciate this, thus he neednQt worry about their
well-being. The only scenario in which he might agree to
go with a modicum of good grace is one in which he
concludes that the only way to end his days a free man is
by leaving State House. I judge that he is still a long
way from this conclusion and will fight on for now.

from the same:

Morgan Tsvangarai is a brave, committed man and, by and
large, a democrat. He is also the only player on the scene
right now with real star quality and the ability to rally
the masses. But Tsvangarai is also a flawed figure, not
readily open to advice, indecisive and with questionable
judgment in selecting those around him. He is the indispensable
element for opposition success, but possibly an albatross around
t heir necks once in power. In short, he is a kind of Lech Walesa
character: Zimbabwe needs him, but should not rely on his executive
abilities to lead the country's recovery.

¶5. (C) With all this in view, I'm convinced the end is not
far off for the Mugabe regime. Of course, my predecessors
and many other observers have all said the same thing, and
yet Mugabe is still with us. I think this time could prove
different, however,

(13 july 2007)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-wikileaks

The job of the media is not to protect power from embarrassment. If American spies are breaking United Nations rules by seeking the DNA biometrics of the UN director general, he is entitled to hear of it. British voters should know what Afghan leaders thought of British troops. American (and British) taxpayers might question, too, how most of the billions of dollars going in aid to Afghanistan simply exits the country at Kabul airport.

it's kind of lol mostly sad that this whole thing is gonna get preempted by leslie nielsen

nah

so between this and fake taliban last week any shot of diplomacy playing a role in ending the war in afghanistan is shot right?

more like kind of sad mostly lol

The Downing Street source said: “We don’t think there will be much about the Coalition Government. There might be some slightly embarrassing things about David Cameron’s time in opposition but it will be nothing compared with what was said about Brown.

“The diplomatic cables were more about Labour. Brown was seen as paranoid and weak and unstable. These files are going to be embarrassing for him.”

fucking hell, what a classy operation they have going at downing street

Brown was seen as paranoid and weak and unstable

... by everyone on the planet. Some revelation there.

• Silvio Berlusconi laughed when he was told about the cables (9.09am).

(this fucking guy)

So did I though. Although probably not in the same way or for the same reasons.

William Hague likes to have sex with men lol.

Volumptuous blonde lol.

Iran oh shit, even Saudi Arabia is scared. World gonna 'splode.

lol.

Great bit of essential info in the Graun this morning, of shocking exclusive news that Silvio Beezy likes to party. Wikileaks is important.

Actually, the Saudis pressuring on Iran comes as no surprise to those of us who've noted a Saudi prince owns seven per cent of News International, and thus Fox.

aren't there like 500 saudi princes?

i think saudi pressure on iran probably has more to do with saudi arabia being worried about iran than it does with NI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Waleed_bin_Talal

think saudi arabia h8s iran because they are the main regional players and well there ya go #thomas_hobbes

nah pretty sure it has something to do with news international

I didn't say that - but al-Q's *are* high on a particularly harsh strain of Wahhabism exported from Saudi Arabia and they *are* undermining all these countries' ability to govern and trade. Rich Saudis finance them! I find the whole thing very manipulative.

as i say, they are both regional players with fingers in many unpleasant pies. iran funds, you know, hezbollah, hamas...

while i love good conspiracy, isnt p much every country in the middle east freaked out about a nuclear iran? i dont think im being a 'drumbeat to war' here

+ natural shiite/sunni conflict undergirding it all

ehh idk about that

wouldn't over do it

regional big dicks always hate each other -- now *that's* nature

today's times implies otherwise

3 Charitable activities
3.1 World Trade Center attacks

You've got to be cruel to be kind.

'Rude' Prince Andrew shocks US ambassador

Very weak stuff I think. Esp. for the lead story.

all in the perception i guess

new yorker grandee George Packer:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker/2010/11/the-right-to-secrecy.html

On the whole, the trove makes American diplomacy look pretty good. Obama’s Iran strategy of engagement-leading-to-isolation is shown to have succeeded. Bush—contrary to the impression left on every page of his new memoir—had enough self-awareness about the disaster in Iraq to put the brakes on military action against Iran. And American diplomats are capable of writing blunt, vivid, even amusing assessments of world leaders. Berlusconi is feckless, Sarkozy thin-skinned, Mugabe a megalomaniac: the accounts seem spot-on. The faceless corps of tight-lipped American embassy officials turn out to be an alert and discerning bunch.

professional insane person David Goldman ("Spengler"):

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LK30Ak02.html

American career diplomats have been telling their masters in the Obama administration that every theater of American policy is in full-blown rout, forwarding to Washington the growing alarm of foreign leaders. In April 2008, for example, Saudi Arabia's envoy to the US Adel al-Jubeir told General David Petraeus that King Abdullah wanted the US "to cut off the head of the [Iranian] snake" and "recalled the king's frequent exhortations to the US to attack Iran and so put an end to its nuclear weapons program".

Afghani President Hamid Karzai warned the US that Pakistan was forcing Taliban militants to keep fighting rather than accept his peace offers. Pakistani government officials, other cables warn, might sell nuclear material to terrorists.

The initial reports suggest that the US State Department has massive evidence that Obama's approach - "engaging" Iran and coddling Pakistan - has failed catastrophically. The crisis in diplomatic relations heralded by the press headlines is not so much a diplomatic problem - America's friends and allies in Western and Central Asia have been shouting themselves hoarse for two years - but a crisis of American credibility.

id go w/ the nyers assessment on the whole: this dump has not really made the US look bad

imho it's made Wikileaks look pretty bad (like, what was the point of making diplomatic docs public again? I fail to see the political angle)

like this isn't stuff that's exposing abuses of power or coverups or lies really, its just y'know diplomats bein diplomats.

anyway how long before Assange goes to jail

*wrings hands* ffs a political point needn't be made - and that's not the goal, as far as i've gathered - like alfred said if these are indeed trivial it just goes to show how ridiculous this secrecy fetish is. and when it exists as a matter of policy it's anti-democratic

eh I can see the virtue of confidentiality for diplomats - sometimes you don't want to have to show your hand to whoever you're negotiating with. is there something inherently morally wrong with that? I don't really think so.

Look, I'm totally in the Moynihan camp -- the US' fetish for secrecy is abhorrent -- but these latest releases, I don't know, undermine the gravity of the previous ones?

of course they "don't want to" show their hands, but that's not wikileaks' problem. as a voter i'm not entitled to know what my government is up to? i'm just supposed to get all my news from what robert gibbs tells me? that's not how a demcracy should work imo xp

insofar as their release makes Assange look like a petty, embittered crank without much concern for how foreign policy actually functions, I would say yeah.

xp

xxp only if you think about everything like a rock critic

of course they "don't want to" show their hands, but that's not wikileaks' problem. as a voter i'm not entitled to know what my government is up to? i'm just supposed to get all my news from what robert gibbs tells me? that's not how a demcracy should work imo

dude I don't want to know EVERYTHING the government knows. What would I gain from having access to the daily threat matrix, for example? Or other people's tax returns? Or these diplomatic communiques, which are largely inconsequential and of little interest?

and it IS kind of Assange's problem, he's responsible for his actions, and directly responsible for any fallout as well.