[News] Afghan War Leaks Expose Costly, Deceitful March of Folly

[Anti-Imperialist News]

OpEdNews

Original Content at 
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Afghan-War-Leaks-Expose-Co-by-Ray-McGovern-100726-999.html

----------
July 26, 2010

Afghan War Leaks Expose Costly, Deceitful March of Folly

By Ray McGovern

The brutality and fecklessness of the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan 
have been laid bare in an indisputable way just days before the House 
of Representatives is scheduled to vote on whether to throw $33.5 
billion more into the Afghan quagmire, when that money is badly 
needed at home.

On Sunday, the Web site Wikileaks posted 75,000 reports written 
mostly by U.S. forces in Afghanistan during a six-year period from 
January 2004 to December 2009. The authenticity of the material 
published under the title 
"<http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Afghan_War_Diary,_2004-2010>Afghan War 
Diaries" is not in doubt.

The New York Times, which received an embargoed version of the 
documents from Wikileaks, devoted six pages of its Monday editions to 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/26/world/asia/26isi.html?_r=1&hp>several 
articles on the disclosures, which reveal how the Afghan War slid 
into its current morass while the Bush administration concentrated 
U.S. military efforts on Iraq.

Wikileaks also gave advanced copies to the British newspaper, The 
Guardian, and the German newsmagazine, Der Spiegel, thus guaranteeing 
that the U.S. Fawning Corporate Media could not ignore these 
classified cables the way it did five years ago with the "Downing 
Street Memo," a leaked British document which described how 
intelligence was "fixed" around President George W. Bush's 
determination to invade Iraq.

The Washington Post also led its Monday editions with a lengthy 
article about the Wikileaks' disclosure of the Afghan War reports.

Still, it remains to be seen whether the new evidence of a foundering 
war in Afghanistan will lead to a public groundswell of opposition to 
expending more billions of dollars there when the money is so 
critically needed to help people to keep their jobs, their homes and 
their personal dignity in the United States.

But there may be new hope that the House of Representatives will find 
the collective courage to deny further funding for feckless bloodshed 
in Afghanistan that seems more designed to protect political flanks 
in Washington than the military perimeters of U.S. bases over there.

Assange on Pentagon Papers

Wikileaks leader Julian Assange compared the release of "The Afghan 
War Diaries" to Daniel Ellsberg's release in 1971 of the Pentagon 
Papers. Those classified documents revealed the duplicitous arguments 
used to justify the Vietnam War and played an important role in 
eventually getting Congress to cut off funding.

Ellsberg's courageous act was the subject of a recent Oscar-nominated 
documentary, entitled "The Most Dangerous Man in America," named 
after one of the less profane sobriquets thrown Ellsberg's way by 
then-national security adviser Henry Kissinger.

I imagine Dan is happy at this point to cede that particular 
honorific to the Wikileaks' leaker, who is suspected of being Pfc. 
Bradley Manning, a young intelligence specialist in Iraq who was 
recently detained and charged with leaking classified material to Wikileaks.

An earlier Wikileaks' disclosure also reportedly from Manning 
revealed video of a U.S. helicopter crew cavalierly gunning down 
about a dozen Iraqi men, including two Reuters journalists, as they 
walked along a Baghdad street.

Wikileaks declined to say whether Manning was the source of the 
material. However, possibly to counter accusations that the leaker 
(allegedly Manning) acted recklessly in releasing thousands of secret 
military records, Wikileaks said it was still withholding 15,000 
reports "as part of a harm minimization process demanded by our source."

After Ellsberg was identified as the Pentagon Papers leaker in 1971, 
he was indicted and faced a long prison sentence if convicted. 
However, a federal judge threw out the charges following disclosures 
of the Nixon administration's own abuses, such as a break-in at the 
office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist.

In public speeches over the past several years, Ellsberg has been 
vigorously pressing for someone to do what he did, this time on the 
misbegotten wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ellsberg also has praised 
Assange for providing a means for the documents to reach the public.

Ellsberg and other members of The Truth Telling Coalition established 
on Sept. 9, 2004, have been appealing to government officials who 
encounter "deception and cover-up" on vital issues to opt for 
"unauthorized truth telling." [At the end of this story, see full 
text of the group's letter, which I signed.]

Emphasizing that "citizens cannot make informed choices if they do 
not have the facts," the Truth Telling Coalition challenged officials 
to give primary allegiance to the Constitution, and noted the 
readiness of groups like the ACLU and The Project on Government 
Oversight (POGO) to offer advice and support.

What's New?

In a taped interview, Assange noted in his understated way that, with 
the Internet, the "situation is markedly different" from Pentagon 
Papers days. "More material can be pushed to bigger audiences, and 
much sooner."

Also, the flow of information can evade the obstructions of 
traditional news gatekeepers who failed so miserably to inform the 
American people about the Bush administration's deceptions before the Iraq War.

People all over the world can get "the whole wad at once" and put the 
various reports into context, which "is not something that has 
previously occurred; that is something that can only be brought about 
as a result of the Internet," Assange said.

However, Assange also recognized the value of involving the 
traditional news media to ensure that the reports got maximum 
attention. So, he took a page from Ellsberg's experience by creating 
some competitive pressure among major news outlets, giving the 75,000 
reports to the New York Times, the Guardian and Der Spiegel. 
Beginning Sunday afternoon, all three posted articles about the huge 
dump of information.

Assange noted that the classified material includes many 
heart-rending incidents that fit into the mosaic of a larger human 
catastrophe. These include one depicted in Der Spiegel's reportage of 
accidental killings on June 17, 2007, when U.S. Special Forces fired 
five rockets at a Koran school in which a prominent al-Qaeda 
functionary was believed to be hiding.

When the smoke cleared, the Special Forces found no terrorist, but 
rather six dead children in the rubble of the school and another who 
died shortly after.

Role of Pakistan

Perhaps the most explosive revelations disclose the double game being 
played by the Pakistani Directorate for Inter-Service Intelligence 
(ISI). Der Spiegel reported: "The documents clearly show that this 
Pakistani intelligence agency is the most important accomplice the 
Taliban has outside of Afghanistan."

The documents also show ISI envoys not only are present when 
insurgent commanders hold war councils, but also give specific orders 
to carry out assassinations -- including, according to one report, an 
attempt on the life of Afghan President Hamid Karzai in August 2008.

Former Pakistani intelligence chief, Gen. Hamid Gul, is depicted as 
an important source of aid to the Taliban, and even, in another 
report, as a "leader" of the insurgents. The reports show Gul 
ordering suicide attacks, and describe him as one of the most 
important suppliers of weaponry to the Talban.

Though the Pakistani government has angrily denied U.S. government 
complaints about Gul and the ISI regarding secret ties to the Taliban 
and even to al-Qaeda, the new evidence must raise questions about 
what the Pakistanis have been doing with the billions of dollars that 
Washington has given them.

Two Ex-Generals Got It Right

We have another patriotic truth-teller to thank for leaking the texts 
of cables that Ambassador (and former Lt. Gen.) Karl Eikenberry sent 
to Washington on Nov. 6 and 9, 2009, several weeks before President 
Barack Obama made his fateful decision to send 30,000 more troops to 
Afghanistan.

In a somewhat condescending tone, Eikenberry described the request 
from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, then commander of allied forces in 
Afghanistan, for more troops as "logical and compelling within his 
narrow mandate to define the needs" of the military campaign.

But then Eikenberry warned repeatedly about "unaddressed variables" 
like militants' "sanctuaries" in Pakistan. For example, the ambassador wrote:

"More troops won't end the insurgency as long as Pakistan sanctuaries 
remain " and Pakistan views its strategic interests as best served by 
a weak neighbor."

In Eikenberry's final try at informing the White House discussion (in 
his cable of Nov. 9), the ambassador warned pointedly of the risk 
that "we will become more deeply engaged here with no way to 
extricate ourselves."

At the time, it seemed that Eikenberry's message was getting through 
to the White House. On Nov. 7, Der Spiegel published an interview 
with National Security Adviser (former Marine General) James Jones, 
who was asked whether he agreed with Gen. McChrystal that a 
substantial troop increase was needed. Jones replied:

"Generals always ask for more troops; I believe we will not solve the 
problem with more troops alone. You can keep on putting troops in, 
and you could have 200,000 troops there and Afghanistan will swallow 
them up as it has done in the past."

However, McChrystal and his boss, then-Central Command chief Gen. 
David Petraeus pressed the case for more troops, a position that had 
strong support from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, former Vice 
President Dick Cheney, key hawks in Congress and Washington's 
neoconservative-dominated opinion circles.

After months of internal debate, President Obama finally caved in and 
gave McChrystal nearly all the troops that he had requested. 
(McChrystal has since been replaced by Petraeus as commander of 
forces in Afghanistan.)

Despite the fact that the Wikileaks disclosures offer fresh support 
for the doubters on the Afghan War escalation, Jones acted as the 
good soldier on Sunday, decrying the unauthorized release of 
classified information, calling Wikileaks "irresponsible."

Jones also lectured the Pakistanis:

"Pakistan's military and intelligence services must continue their 
strategic shift against insurgent groups. The balance must shift 
decisively against al-Qaeda and its extremist allies. U.S. support 
for Pakistan will continue to be focused on building Pakistani 
capacity to root out violent extremist groups."

[Note: Okay; he's a general. But the grammatical mood is just a shade 
short of imperative. And the tone is imperial/colonial through and 
through. I'll bet the Pakistanis are as much swayed by that approach 
as they have been by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's admonitions 
not to be concerned about India just terrorists.]

And regarding "progress" in Afghanistan? Jones added that "the U.S. 
and its allies have scored several significant blows against the insurgency."

However, that's not the positive spin that Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. 
Mike Mullen was offering just four weeks ago. On his way to Kabul, 
again, Mullen spoke of "recent setbacks in the Afghan campaign."

"We underestimated some of the challenges" in Marja, the rural area 
of Helmand province that was cleared in March by U.S. Marines, only 
to have Taliban fighters return. "They're coming back at night; the 
intimidation is still there," Mullen said.

Of the much more ambitious (and repeatedly delayed) campaign to 
stabilize the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar, Mullen said: "It's 
going to take until the end of the year to know where we are there."

Would you say yes to an additional $33.5 billion for this fool's errand?

This article appeared first on Consortiumnews.com.

Text of 2004 Appeal from Truth Telling Coalition follows:

September 9, 2004

APPEAL TO: Current Government Officials

FROM: The Truth-Telling Coalition

It is time for unauthorized truth telling.

Citizens cannot make informed choices if they do not have the 
facts--for example, the facts that have been wrongly concealed about 
the ongoing war in Iraq: the real reasons behind it, the prospective 
costs in blood and treasure, and the setback it has dealt to efforts 
to stem terrorism. Administration deception and cover-up on these 
vital matters has so far been all too successful in misleading the public.

Many Americans are too young to remember Vietnam. Then, as now, 
senior government officials did not tell the American people the 
truth. Now, as then, insiders who know better have kept their 
silence, as the country was misled into the most serious foreign 
policy disaster since Vietnam.

Some of you have documentation of wrongly concealed facts and 
analyses that--if brought to light--would impact heavily on public 
debate regarding crucial matters of national security, both foreign 
and domestic. We urge you to provide that information now, both to 
Congress and, through the media, to the public.

Thanks to our First Amendment, there is in America no broad Officials 
Secrets Act, nor even a statutory basis for the classification 
system. Only very rarely would it be appropriate to reveal 
information of the three types whose disclosure has been expressly 
criminalized by Congress: communications intelligence, nuclear data, 
and the identity of US intelligence operatives. However, this 
administration has stretched existing criminal laws to cover other 
disclosures in ways never contemplated by Congress.

There is a growing network of support for whistleblowers. In 
particular, for anyone who wishes to know the legal implications of 
disclosures they may be contemplating, the ACLU stands ready to 
provide pro bono legal counsel, with lawyer-client privilege. The 
Project on Government Oversight (POGO) will offer advice on whistle 
blowing, dissemination and relations with the media.

Needless to say, any unauthorized disclosure that exposes your 
superiors to embarrassment entails personal risk. Should you be 
identified as the source, the price could be considerable, including 
loss of career and possibly even prosecution. Some of us know from 
experience how difficult it is to countenance such costs. But 
continued silence brings an even more terrible cost, as our leaders 
persist in a disastrous course and young Americans come home in 
coffins or with missing limbs.

This is precisely what happened at this comparable stage in the 
Vietnam War. Some of us live with profound regret that we did not at 
that point expose the administration's dishonesty and perhaps prevent 
the needless slaughter of 50,000 more American troops and some 2 to 3 
million Vietnamese over the next ten years. We know how misplaced 
loyalty to bosses, agencies, and careers can obscure the higher 
allegiance all government officials owe the Constitution, the 
sovereign public, and the young men and women put in harm's way. We 
urge you to act on those higher loyalties.

A hundred forty thousand young Americans are risking their lives 
every day in Iraq for dubious purpose. Our country has urgent need of 
comparable moral courage from its public officials. Truth telling is 
a patriotic and effective way to serve the nation. The time for 
speaking out is now.

SIGNATORIES
Appeal from the Truth-Telling Coalition

Edward Costello, Former Special Agent (Counterintelligence), Federal 
Bureau of Investigation

Sibel Edmonds, Former Language Specialist, Federal Bureau of Investigation

Daniel Ellsberg, Former official, U.S. Departments of Defense and State

John D. Heinberg, Former Economist, Employment and Training 
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor

Larry C. Johnson, Former Deputy Director for Anti-Terrorism 
Assistance, Transportation Security, and Special Operations, 
Department of State, Office of the Coordinator for Counter Terrorism

Lt. Col Karen Kwiatowski, USAF (ret.), who served in the Pentagon's 
Office of Near East Planning

John Brady Kiesling, Former Political Counselor, U.S. Embassy, 
Athens, Department of State

David MacMichael, Former Senior Estimates Officer, National 
Intelligence Council, Central Intelligence Agency

Ray McGovern, Former Analyst, Central Intelligence Agency

Philip G. Vargas, Ph.D., J.D., Dir. Privacy & Confidentiality Study, 
Commission on Federal Paperwork (Author/Director: "The Vargas Report 
on Government Secrecy" -- CENSORED)

Ann Wright, Retired U.S. Army Reserve Colonel and U.S. Foreign Service Officer




Author's Bio: Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing 
arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. 
He was an Army infantry/intelligence officer and then a CIA analyst 
for 27 years, and is now on the Steering Group of Veteran 
Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

Back




Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

www.Freedomarchives.org  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20100726/c7498b99/attachment.htm>