Not such wicked leaks

[Antid Oto]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Not such wicked leaks
02 December 2010 Libération Paris

For the celebrated novelist and intellectual Umberto Eco, the Wikileaks affair
or "Cablegate" not only shows up the hypocrisy that governs relations between
states, citizens and the press, but also presages a return to more archaic forms
of communication.

Umberto Eco

The WikiLeaks affair has twofold value. On the one hand, it turns out to be a
bogus scandal, a scandal that only appears to be a scandal against the backdrop
of the hypocrisy governing relations between the state, the citizenry and the
press. On the other hand, it heralds a sea change in international communication
– and prefigures a regressive future of “crabwise” progress.

But let’s take it one step at a time. First off, the WikiLeaks confirm the fact
that every file put together by a secret service (of any nation you like) is
exclusively made up of press clippings. The “extraordinary” American revelations
about Berlusconi’s sex habits merely relay what could already be read for months
in any newspaper (except those owned by Berlusconi himself, needless to say),
and the sinister caricature of Gaddafi has long been the stuff of cabaret farce.

Embassies have morphed into espionage centres

The rule that says secret files must only contain news that is already common
knowledge is essential to the dynamic of secret services, and not only in the
present century. Go to an esoteric book shop and you’ll find that every book on
the shelf (on the Holy Grail, the “mystery” of Rennes-le-Château [a hoax theory
concocted to draw tourists to a French town], on the Templars or the
Rosicrucians) is a point-by-point rehash of what is already written in older
books. And it’s not just because occult authors are averse to doing original
research (or don’t know where to look for news about the non-existent), but
because those given to the occult only believe what they already know and what
corroborates what they’ve already heard. That happens to be Dan Brown’s success
formula.

The same goes for secret files. The informant is lazy. So is the head of the
secret service (or at least he’s limited – otherwise he could be, what do I
know, an editor at Libération): he only regards as true what he recognises. The
top-secret dope on Berlusconi that the US embassy in Rome beamed to the
Department of State was the same story that had come out in Newsweek the week
before.

So why so much ado about these leaks? For one thing, they say what any savvy
observer already knows: that the embassies, at least since the end of World War
II, and since heads of state can call each other up or fly over to meet for
dinner, have lost their diplomatic function and, but for the occasional
ceremonial function, have morphed into espionage centres. Anyone who watches
investigative documentaries knows that full well, and it is only out of
hypocrisy that we feign ignorance. Still, repeating that in public constitutes a
breach of the duty of hypocrisy, and puts American diplomacy in a lousy light.

A real secret is an empty secret

Secondly, the very notion that any old hacker can delve into the most secret
secrets of the most powerful country in the world has dealt a hefty blow to the
State Department’s prestige. So the scandal actually hurts the “perpetrators”
more than the “victims”.

But let’s turn to the more profound significance of what has occurred. Formerly,
back in the days of Orwell, every power could be conceived of as a Big Brother
watching over its subjects’ every move. The Orwellian prophecy came completely
true once the powers that be could monitor every phone call made by the citizen,
every hotel he stayed in, every toll road he took and so on and so forth. The
citizen became the total victim of the watchful eye of the state. But when it
transpires, as it has now, that even the crypts of state secrets are not beyond
the hacker’s grasp, the surveillance ceases to work only one-way and becomes
circular. The state has its eye on every citizen, but every citizen, or at least
every hacker – the citizens’ self-appointed avenger – can pry into the state’s
every secret.

How can a power hold up if it can’t even keep its own secrets anymore? It is
true, as Georg Simmel once remarked, that a real secret is an empty secret
(which can never be unearthed); it is also true that anything known about
Berlusconi or Merkel’s character is essentially an empty secret, a secret
without a secret, because it’s public domain. But to actually reveal, as
WikiLeaks has done, that Hillary Clinton’s secrets were empty secrets amounts to
taking away all her power. WikiLeaks didn’t do any harm to Sarkozy or Merkel,
but did irreparable damage to Clinton and Obama.

Technology now advances crabwise

What will be the consequences of this wound inflicted on a very mighty power?
It’s obvious that in future, states won’t be able to put any restricted
information on line anymore: that would be tantamount to posting it on a street
corner. But it is equally clear that, given today’s technologies, it is
pointless to hope to have confidential dealings over the phone. Nothing is
easier than finding out whether a head of state flew in or out or contacted one
of his counterparts. So how can privy matters be conducted in future? Now I know
that for the time being, my forecast is still science fiction and therefore
fantastic, but I can’t help imagining state agents riding discreetly in
stagecoaches along untrackable routes, bearing only memorised messages or, at
most, the occasional document concealed in the heel of a shoe. Only a single
copy thereof will be kept – in locked drawers. Ultimately, the attempted
Watergate break-in was less successful than WikiLeaks.

I once had occasion to observe that technology now advances crabwise, i.e.
backwards. A century after the wireless telegraph revolutionised communications,
the Internet has re-established a telegraph that runs on (telephone) wires.
(Analog) video cassettes enabled film buffs to peruse a movie frame by frame, by
fast-forwarding and rewinding to lay bare all the secrets of the editing
process, but (digital) CDs now only allow us quantum leaps from one chapter to
another. High-speed trains take us from Rome to Milan in three hours, but flying
there, if you include transfers to and from the airports, takes three and a half
hours. So it wouldn’t be extraordinary if politics and communications
technologies were to revert to the horse-drawn carriage.

One last observation: In days of yore, the press would try to figure out what
was hatching sub rosa inside the embassies. Nowadays, it’s the embassies that
are asking the press for the inside story.

http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/414871-not-such-wicked-leaks

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********