Many have long spoken their verdict on the latest US intelligence affair: a debacle for Washington. Maximum diplomatic damage. And the leaked information could thwart the success of Ukraine’s spring offensive.
It may be worth taking a second look after the source of the leak was uncovered in an unusual way. It was not the secret services who found the leak, but the Washington Post through research on social media.
Some things are different here than in the usual thought patterns about the services, their meaning and their weak points. This invites you to brush the findings against the grain.
“OG” is a different guy from Manning and Snowden
Once again it was a person from our own ranks who gave top secret documents to the outside world. Like Chelsea Manning, who piped large amounts of classified papers to Wikileaks in 2010. Or Edward Snowden, who in 2013 provided international media with a treasure trove of documents on the extent of US surveillance and espionage techniques. Even the private cell phone of then Chancellor Angela Merkel was not safe from the NSA.
Now the US services are dealing with a different type of perpetrator. Manning and Snowden were close to the progressive camp and acted out of distrust of state superiority. Current suspect “OG” belongs to a right-wing group called “Discord,” whose members worship guns, the military, and God, according to the Post.
“OG” works at a military base and had access to documents there that are specifically “NOFORN”: not intended for foreigners. He wanted to provide his circle of friends with no-nonsense geopolitical analysis, particularly information about how foreign powers are trying to influence the United States.
Relief: No hacking by Russians
Such leaks are not pleasant for the US government. But did she take the biggest hit from this affair? Some insights into the circumstances of the affair and from the leaked documents have reassuring sides for the United States. Or are far more embarrassing for alleged partners.
First, fears that a hostile service had broken into secret US databases have not materialized. A hack by Russian or Chinese espionage would be a harder blow than a leak in their own ranks. Especially since it is about fresh information that is only a few weeks old.
Second, the leak was found relatively quickly because the US is an open society with a free media. It’s hard to imagine that the media brought into line by a dictatorship are capable of a similar research coup.
The US knows more about others than the other way around
Third, the released secret papers show once again that the US knows far more about other states than they do about them. This affects opponents, true allies and supposed partners alike. It has a chilling effect when states know they not long deceive the USA with a double game can.
Fourth, whose reputation will it harm if the world learns through Egypt, for example, that President al-Sisi officially gives to US allies but directs its military to covertly supply arms to Russia? But probably more Egypt than the USA.
Similarly, Saudi Arabia fared when Manning’s Wikileaks diplomatic cable showed that the Saudis were the strongest pushers for a US military strike against Iran, while officially preaching inter-Muslim solidarity and claiming that Israel was the warmonger.
Epic struggle for secrecy or disclosure
Fifth, the recent leak illustrates once again the epic struggle of major intelligence agencies to find the right balance between sharing information and notoriously keeping it secret. Before the terrorist attack on New York on September 11, 2001, the various US services had all the information they needed to prevent the attack. But they were not exchanged and brought together – partly because of concerns that the more people have access to top-secret documents, the greater the risk of secret betrayal.
So the instruction to share more information and allow more people access to protected databases followed. That made life easier for Manning and Snowden.
After every major betrayal, the insiders demand more secrecy. After every attack that could have been prevented by sharing existing knowledge, there is a call for more information to be passed on.
All in all, US intelligence work is perhaps better than its reputation. It also helps Germany to recognize the duplicity of supposed partners.
