The New York Times in the US and the Guardian in the UK have put on the table an extraordinary set of leaked Guantánamo bay military prison documents they say are not from Wikileaks. The publication of the files on the prisoners have prompted a stiff criticism from the US government, which appears to believe that the information was provided by Wikileaks (more on the source, Guardian). Wikileaks also published the information, including some material edited out by the NY Times and the Guardian. Media reactions have ranged from Huffington Post’s rummage through the who-posted-what-when look at media to a total eclipse on Fox News, which by midnight Sunday New York time did not even mention the published files on its home page.
Links to other sites: Guardian, New York Times, NPR, Wikileaks
“A huge cache of secret US military documents” is how the Guardian describes the “war logs” released to it, the New York Times and Der Spiegel by WikiLeaks.
The British newspaper details much of the material in the 90,000 documents obtained by the whistleblowers’ web site, six years of unpublished archives, citing previously unreported civilian deaths and generally damning the war in Afghanistan, calling it a “failing” effort.
The New York Times, however, while making it front page news, does not run it as the lead story and has a less sensational headline of “View is more bleak than official story”, writing that “Some 92,000 reports from 2004 through 2009, disclosed by WikiLeaks.org, illustrate why, after nine years of war, the Taliban are stronger than at any time since 2001.”
The US newspaper states that “Over all, the documents do not contradict official accounts of the war. But in some cases the documents show that the American military made misleading public statements — attributing the downing of a helicopter to conventional weapons instead of heat-seeking missiles or giving Afghans credit for missions carried out by Special Operations commandos.”
The White House reacted strongly to the publication of the material: “We strongly condemn the disclosure of classified information by individuals and organizations, which puts the lives of the US and partner service members at risk and threatens our national security. WikiLeaks made no effort to contact the US government about these documents, which may contain information that endanger the lives of Americans, our partners, and local populations who cooperate with us.”
The Guardian, however, says that “the reports, many of which the Guardian is publishing in full online, present an unvarnished and often compelling account of the reality of modern war. Most of the material, though classified “secret” at the time, is no longer militarily sensitive. A small amount of information has been withheld from publication because it might endanger local informants or give away genuine military secrets.”
WikiLeaks has led a cat and mouse game with authorities in various countries over its leaked materials, and it has struggled to raise funds despite winning several new media awards.
Wikipedia describes the organization behind it: “Wikileaks is an amorphous, international organization, originally based in Sweden,[1] that publishes anonymous submissions and leaks of sensitive documents from governments and other organizations, while preserving the anonymity of their sources. Its website, launched in 2006, is run by The Sunshine Press.[2] The organization has stated it was founded by Chinese dissidents, as well as journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the U.S., Taiwan, Europe, Australia, and South Africa.[3] Newspaper articles and The New Yorker magazine (June 7, 2010) describe Julian Assange, an Australian journalist and Internet activist, as its director.[4]
© British Red Cross/Ash Sweeting/af-
Geneva, Switzerland and Washington DC (GenevaLunch) – The US military has begun a policy of handing over to the International Red Cross (ICRC) the names of detainees held in two camps in Iraq and Afghanistan, the New York Times reports. ICRC has broad access to all detainees held by the US military, but two camps that are part of the US Defense Department’s Special Operations programme are off-limits, until the detainees are formally transferred to a prison in either country. The military name for the camps is “temporary screening sites”, camps in which high-level combat detainees are interrogated. The new policy affects about 30 to 40 prisoners at any time in camps at Balad, Iraq and Bagram air force base in Afghanistan, according to the newspaper, which cites unnamed sources.
The Pentagon in the US is considering banning all smoking by soldiers, including those in battle, and stopping sales of cigarettes at military bases. A study done for the Pentagon is recommending the ban saying that in the short term it harms battle readiness and in the long term the cost to the health of soldiers is high, which also creates a financial burden for the government. CNN
US President Barack Obama has provoked the ire of Amnesty International and civil liberties groups by saying he has stopped the planned 28 May release of photos showing US soldiers abusing prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama said (BBC video) that the photos are not as sensational as those seen at Abu Ghraib in Iraq but they do not conform to acceptable behaviour in the army manual. However, he noted, the cases of abuse have been dealt with by the military and there is “no benefit” to be gained by releasing them, a change from his earlier stance.
Gen. David McKiernan is being replaced by Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, after only 11 months as the chief of US military forces in Afghanistan and as head of the Nato forces there. McChrystal was until recently director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Senate must approve the change. Secretary of Defense William Gates said the timing was right to change the military leadership in Afghanistan along with new military thinking and a new ambassador, the BBC reports.
According to the New York Times and based on information from senior US officials, in July President George W Bush for the first time sent US troops on raids inside Pakistan without prior permission from the Pakistani government. The decision highlights concern in the White House about Pakistan’s lack of control and the increasingly solid Al Queda and Taliban bases in the tribal areas in Pakistan. According to writers of the front page story, Eric Schmitt and Mark Mazzetti, the US will now notify Pakistan, but not ask for permission for future raids.
