September 1st, 2011
Wikileaks is not a vulnerability of the Internet, but of politics. Until now, the democratic citizen assumes that only dictatorships have to explain their actions with false justifications; far from it. The events of recent weeks reveal relentlessly that politicians also have a significant deficit in relation to the assessment of the enforcement power of media – especially the electronic kind That can bear bitter fruit.
It was not the burglary in a very limited, only data structure that has led to the spectacular releases of “secret” information to Wikileaks – the opposite. Many employees have been informed officially about the assessment of the policies of other countries and various more or less covert operations. It is a bad strategy, really secret or confidential information in one system – no matter what kind – to provide. The confidentiality of information, no guarantee can be given if so many people get glimpse. Certainly the procedure of publication would have been costly, if the inspection with the hand-written transfer of the contents would have to connect. But even this has been practiced for centuries and the transition from quill pens to ballpoint pens, the copying also simplified without having to make the inventor of the steel spring Johannes Janssen and the pen Laszlo Biro for the social revolutions of the past two centuries in charge.
Courageous achievements of information technology and its potential to inform many people will again scapegoat. The difference between a protected exchange of ideas between a few people and the provision of data for an army of employees is not seen. What is this? If the statements of other persons, institutions and countries are so important that they are necessarily so many public officials must be made available, then they can or should be published. But are they really confidential, then they must also be disclosed in confidence only to the few continues, with whom one is familiar.
The spirits that I called …
The last few weeks have made it very clear that the public anger over political grievances can organize with Facebook and Twitter to respectable demonstrations. Since no Western politician dares give an adverse statement, although many do not fit the development. Even the American president should come into doubt because he has but his victory also thanks to the Twitter of his followers. It should not be judged by different standards.
Fortunately, today many more people able to read and have equipment for immediate exchange of information. They expect to be taken seriously. The so-called diplomacy is exhausted but in parts is to not reveal the true assessment of the situation. Who or what will you protect it? Perhaps a diplomatic argument: avoid panic in the population. But what can be worse than civil war? Enlightened citizens should be familiar with the realities. The policy has to pass even the responsible task of the facts, not so nonsensical speculations run wild.
The use of illegally obtained and given further information from the confidential environment of the banks and their clients was one of the sides of politics without scruples. There is clearly still: QUOD licet NON JOVI licet BOVI. The common people do not deserve the same protection against eavesdropping, as his representative. Interestingly, the response to the advance of the banker Rudolf Elmer, who has taken the final step and the confidential data of its working environment is not as Judas sold for money to the captors, but they also just released.