World Citizen: In Latin America, WikiLeaks Reveals No Real Surprises
Frida Ghitis | 12 May 2011
Last November, when the State Department learned that an outfit called WikiLeaks had acquired tens of thousands of secret U.S. diplomatic cables, the reaction in Washington bordered on panic. WikiLeaks had already released secret papers on the Afghanistan war, which the Pentagon said had gravely endangered many lives. Facing an impending torrent of classified documents covering U.S. interests on all continents, top American diplomats tried to brace the country for the harsh impact. They anxiously predicted the massive leak would be "harmful to our national security."
Five months after WikiLeaks broke the latch on its treasure trove and started scattering the contents across the globe, the impact has proven far different than what Washington feared. A look at what WikiLeaks has wrought in one region in particular, Latin America, shows that more than harming or even embarrassing the U.S., the leaked documents have embarrassed politicians in other countries. They have done it, for the most part, not by revealing secrets the public did not know, but by confirming already existing suspicions and highlighting the corruption and political shenanigans familiar to those who live in the region.
To be sure, the document dump, which continues to this day, has created some very awkward moments for American diplomats. The harshest repercussions, however, have fallen not on the U.S., but on the countries that the American diplomatic corps wrote about in the secret cables.
In the early days of the release, it seemed as if relations between the U.S. and Latin American nations would suffer grievous wounds. One of the first documents made public by WikiLeaks had Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking embassy personnel in Buenos Aires about the mental state of Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner. Clinton wanted to know what medication Fernandez de Kirchner might be taking to manage "her nerves and anxiety."
But subsequent documents have done much more to embarrass Latin American leaders themselves than U.S. diplomats or Washington. And there is little evidence that bilateral relations have suffered any significant damage, even as WikiLeaks continues to release the cables -- which combine information, allegation and opinion -- in a steady drip.
In Nicaragua, former Vice President Sergio Ramirez dismissed the revelations about the Nicaraguan government, saying they were "just a collection of information the people already talk about in the street . . . Nothing new." He may wish he had spoken differently -- even if he was right. His former boss, President Daniel Ortega, comes across in the WikiLeaks cables as the leader of a government rife with corruption, incompetence, media censorship and even anti-Semitism. The cables describe close connections with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, complete with suitcases full of cash arriving in Managua from Venezuela. Most, if not all of this, is widely known at home. And though the cables added tension to the already less-than-warm relationship between Managua and Washington, they mostly shined an unflattering spotlight on the Nicaraguan president.
In Panama, too, the revelations proved excruciatingly embarrassing for a number of prominent politicians and their families, beginning with President Ricardo Martinelli.
Panama's ambassador to the U.S., Jaime Alemán, suddenly quit his job after publication of one batch of cables. In one of the leaked documents, U.S. diplomats described high-level corruption in the awarding of a multibillion-dollar contract for expanding the Panama Canal to the Spanish firm Sacyr. The canal administrator, whose previous job had been with a Sacyr affiliate, reportedly chose the consortium only to enrich himself and his family. Alemán was Sacyr's Panamanian lawyer at the time of the deal, which explained his abrupt departure from Washington.
The leaks unleashed yet another political scandal in Panama. In a cable written in 2009, then-U.S. Ambassador Barbara Stephenson describes receiving a message from the Panamanian president, Martinelli, in which he simply requested help with tapping phones. The ambassador told her superiors in Washington that Martinelli made no distinction between legitimate security targets and political enemies. When the U.S. envoy suggested that wiretapping might be unacceptable, the president reportedly complained that she was being "too legal." Making matters worse, Martinelli tried blackmailing the U.S., reportedly threatening to cut off cooperation on drug interdiction if Washington refused to help.
Martinelli denied the accusations, and Stephenson quickly moved to a different post. But relations between the two countries remained strong.
In Ecuador, the government asked the U.S. ambassador to leave "as soon as possible," after publication of cables in which she accused President Rafael Correa of turning a blind eye to police corruption so that he could easily manipulate the police chief.
The WikiLeaks documents took center stage during the recent presidential campaign in Peru as well. As in so many other cables from Latin America, the ones dealing with Peru speak of corruption, saying money from drug traffickers has made its way into the military. Another one has an aide to former President Alejandro Toledo asking for Washington's help in stopping the presidential campaign of leftist candidate Ollanta Humala. The WikiLeaks cables detailed close connections between Humala and Venezuela's Chávez, his controversial mentor, even if Humala is now anxiously seeking to distance himself from his political soul mate ahead of the June 5 run-off election.
In Colombia, too, the documents merely confirmed what everyone knew or suspected. Leaked cables showed close allies of then-President Alvaro Uribe fretting about the possible loss of their U.S. visas because of allegations that they had links to right-wing paramilitary forces or even to drug traffickers. They also showed top aides to Uribe, a close ally of the United States, arranging for wiretaps of the opposition. Though distasteful and troubling, the revelations are hardly shocking to most Colombians.
One of the most high-profile conflicts generated by the leaked documents came in Mexico, where the U.S. ambassador had to resign in the middle of a very undiplomatic swirl of recrimination. Ambassador Carlos Pascual's written -- and now widely published -- observations complained about inefficiency and dysfunction in the Mexican government's war on drug-trafficking gangs. Pascual subsequently resigned, according to Clinton, for the sake of "the strong relationship" between Mexico and the U.S. However, in this case as in most others, the WikiLeaks material did not cause great harm to the relationship, and did not reveal any great surprises.
The Mexican novelist Carlos Fuentes agreed that there was really nothing new in the disclosures. "We already knew it all," he said. "WikiLeaks reveals things we knew or we suspected."
The releases from WikiLeaks continue, with the cables addressing all aspects of developments in Latin America in recent years. There is always the possibility that a real bombshell will detonate upon reaching the open air. So far, however, there is no sign that they have inflicted significant damage to America's image or to relations between Washington and the rest of the hemisphere. What they have done is remind many in Latin America that corruption persists at the highest levels of the region's governments.
Frida Ghitis is an independent commentator on world affairs and a World Politics Review contributing editor. Her weekly column, World Citizen, appears every Thursday.
Five months after WikiLeaks broke the latch on its treasure trove and started scattering the contents across the globe, the impact has proven far different than what Washington feared. A look at what WikiLeaks has wrought in one region in particular, Latin America, shows that more than harming or even embarrassing the U.S., the leaked documents have embarrassed politicians in other countries. They have done it, for the most part, not by revealing secrets the public did not know, but by confirming already existing suspicions and highlighting the corruption and political shenanigans familiar to those who live in the region.
To be sure, the document dump, which continues to this day, has created some very awkward moments for American diplomats. The harshest repercussions, however, have fallen not on the U.S., but on the countries that the American diplomatic corps wrote about in the secret cables.
In the early days of the release, it seemed as if relations between the U.S. and Latin American nations would suffer grievous wounds. One of the first documents made public by WikiLeaks had Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking embassy personnel in Buenos Aires about the mental state of Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner. Clinton wanted to know what medication Fernandez de Kirchner might be taking to manage "her nerves and anxiety."
But subsequent documents have done much more to embarrass Latin American leaders themselves than U.S. diplomats or Washington. And there is little evidence that bilateral relations have suffered any significant damage, even as WikiLeaks continues to release the cables -- which combine information, allegation and opinion -- in a steady drip.
In Nicaragua, former Vice President Sergio Ramirez dismissed the revelations about the Nicaraguan government, saying they were "just a collection of information the people already talk about in the street . . . Nothing new." He may wish he had spoken differently -- even if he was right. His former boss, President Daniel Ortega, comes across in the WikiLeaks cables as the leader of a government rife with corruption, incompetence, media censorship and even anti-Semitism. The cables describe close connections with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, complete with suitcases full of cash arriving in Managua from Venezuela. Most, if not all of this, is widely known at home. And though the cables added tension to the already less-than-warm relationship between Managua and Washington, they mostly shined an unflattering spotlight on the Nicaraguan president.
In Panama, too, the revelations proved excruciatingly embarrassing for a number of prominent politicians and their families, beginning with President Ricardo Martinelli.
Panama's ambassador to the U.S., Jaime Alemán, suddenly quit his job after publication of one batch of cables. In one of the leaked documents, U.S. diplomats described high-level corruption in the awarding of a multibillion-dollar contract for expanding the Panama Canal to the Spanish firm Sacyr. The canal administrator, whose previous job had been with a Sacyr affiliate, reportedly chose the consortium only to enrich himself and his family. Alemán was Sacyr's Panamanian lawyer at the time of the deal, which explained his abrupt departure from Washington.
The leaks unleashed yet another political scandal in Panama. In a cable written in 2009, then-U.S. Ambassador Barbara Stephenson describes receiving a message from the Panamanian president, Martinelli, in which he simply requested help with tapping phones. The ambassador told her superiors in Washington that Martinelli made no distinction between legitimate security targets and political enemies. When the U.S. envoy suggested that wiretapping might be unacceptable, the president reportedly complained that she was being "too legal." Making matters worse, Martinelli tried blackmailing the U.S., reportedly threatening to cut off cooperation on drug interdiction if Washington refused to help.
Martinelli denied the accusations, and Stephenson quickly moved to a different post. But relations between the two countries remained strong.
In Ecuador, the government asked the U.S. ambassador to leave "as soon as possible," after publication of cables in which she accused President Rafael Correa of turning a blind eye to police corruption so that he could easily manipulate the police chief.
The WikiLeaks documents took center stage during the recent presidential campaign in Peru as well. As in so many other cables from Latin America, the ones dealing with Peru speak of corruption, saying money from drug traffickers has made its way into the military. Another one has an aide to former President Alejandro Toledo asking for Washington's help in stopping the presidential campaign of leftist candidate Ollanta Humala. The WikiLeaks cables detailed close connections between Humala and Venezuela's Chávez, his controversial mentor, even if Humala is now anxiously seeking to distance himself from his political soul mate ahead of the June 5 run-off election.
In Colombia, too, the documents merely confirmed what everyone knew or suspected. Leaked cables showed close allies of then-President Alvaro Uribe fretting about the possible loss of their U.S. visas because of allegations that they had links to right-wing paramilitary forces or even to drug traffickers. They also showed top aides to Uribe, a close ally of the United States, arranging for wiretaps of the opposition. Though distasteful and troubling, the revelations are hardly shocking to most Colombians.
One of the most high-profile conflicts generated by the leaked documents came in Mexico, where the U.S. ambassador had to resign in the middle of a very undiplomatic swirl of recrimination. Ambassador Carlos Pascual's written -- and now widely published -- observations complained about inefficiency and dysfunction in the Mexican government's war on drug-trafficking gangs. Pascual subsequently resigned, according to Clinton, for the sake of "the strong relationship" between Mexico and the U.S. However, in this case as in most others, the WikiLeaks material did not cause great harm to the relationship, and did not reveal any great surprises.
The Mexican novelist Carlos Fuentes agreed that there was really nothing new in the disclosures. "We already knew it all," he said. "WikiLeaks reveals things we knew or we suspected."
The releases from WikiLeaks continue, with the cables addressing all aspects of developments in Latin America in recent years. There is always the possibility that a real bombshell will detonate upon reaching the open air. So far, however, there is no sign that they have inflicted significant damage to America's image or to relations between Washington and the rest of the hemisphere. What they have done is remind many in Latin America that corruption persists at the highest levels of the region's governments.
Frida Ghitis is an independent commentator on world affairs and a World Politics Review contributing editor. Her weekly column, World Citizen, appears every Thursday.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario