What the Wikileak Means for the Afghanistan War

Reuters

The Obama White House is furious this morning about the massive leak of military documents chronicling the unvarnished truth about the Afghanistan war. At the same time, though, there must be a certain sense of relief around the West Wing. When they first learned that the whistleblower website WikiLeaks had given the New York Times, among others, an astonishing 92,0000 documents, senior Obama officials must have been in a panic about what terrible secrets might emerge. But it turns out that most of the terrible aspects of the Afghanistan war–at least those detailed by this trove of insider accounts–are already pretty well known.

It’s never been a secret, for instance, that the Taliban have proven more resilient than anyone expected; that U.S. special forces hunt and eliminate Taliban leaders without the courtesy of a fair trail; that elements within our putative ally Pakistan play a sinister double game with radical Islamists; that our troops kill innocent Afghans on a regular basis. It’s not even a secret, as anyone familiar with the Pat Tillman saga knows, that the military sometimes manipulates facts about the war.

The trove of leaked documents affirms all these facts. And in their texture and detail–which it will take some time for other new outlets to sift in full–certainly offer a new appreciation for how difficult the war effort is. But based on their presentation by the news organizations given time by Wikileaks to study them before their release, the documents don’t seem to reveal fundamental new truths. (Also giving solace to the Obama team: the docs cover a time period from January 2004 to December 2009, meaning that the vast majority predate Obama’s tenure, and end just around the time of the address he gave last winter at the conclusion of his Afghanistan policy review.)

Take, for instance, perhaps the most explosive charge, and the one which led the Times website in a headline late Sunday night: Pakistan Aids Insurgency in Afghanistan, Reports Assert. Here’s the story’s opening paragraph:

Americans fighting the war in Afghanistan have long harbored strong suspicions that Pakistan’s military spy service has guided the Afghan insurgency with a hidden hand, even as Pakistan receives more than $1 billion a year from Washington for its help combating the militants, according to a trove of secret military field reports made public Sunday.

This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone who even skims the front pages of major newspapers. Consider, for instance, this story which appeared on page A1 of the NYT on March 26 of last year:

Afghan Strikes by Taliban Get Pakistan Help, U.S. Aides Say

The Taliban’s widening campaign in southern Afghanistan is made possible in part by direct support from operatives in Pakistan’s military intelligence agency, despite Pakistani government promises to sever ties to militant groups fighting in Afghanistan, according to American government officials.

This isn’t to say that the documents are irrelevant. Sometimes it can be crystallizing to see hard truths articulated not by reporters covering a war but in the real-time reports of the men and women on the ground. Moreover, the media frenzy about the documents–we’re already seeing comparisons to the Vietnam-era Pentagon Papers–is bound to startle the public and put a further dent in support for the war.

And that’s not nothing. In recent months we’ve seen a steady drumbeat of bad headlines  from Afghanistan, from the mixed success of the ballyhooed Marjah offensive to the spectacular flame out of General Stanley McChrystal. The Wikileak dump is certain to accelerate the feeling, both around the country and here in Washington, that the war effort isn’t sustainable for much longer. And right now, the biggest secret of all, the one no one is leaking, is whether Barack Obama agrees.

Related Topics: Afghanistan, Barack Obama
  • Latest on Swampland

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Morning Must Reads: Haunted

  • maverick2k9

    wow.. a post on a Sunday night.. Must be very important. Many moons ago, I raised this topic about wikileaks and how the govt is going after the “alleged” whistle blower.
    .
    That aside, I have been crying myself hoarse on how Taliban is an Frankenstein created by the Pak ISI (with American aid and weapons) – Those SAMs that the leaked reports talk about – may be the Stinger missiles left over from the “Mujaheddin are freedom fighters” era of the CIA’s covert war in AfPak.
    .
    Yesterday’s freedom fighter is today’s terrorist!!

  • malthuswasright

    Whatever Obama privately “agrees” with is irrelevant. What is relevant is that he will do, with very few and very minor deviations, whatever he thinks is the politically “smart” thing to do. He’s a puppet on strings of his own invention.

  • http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com stuartbramhall

    In my humble opinion, Wiki Leaks rocks. What I find really ironic is that Congress can’t get good information from the Obama administration about what’s really going on in Afghanistan. But now that they have Wiki Leaks to turn to, our elected representatives can finally get good information – and finally represent our interests and end this bloody useless war that’s destroying our economy. I think Americans made a serious mistake electing a president whose past was virtually a closed book. I blog about this at http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com

  • Cliff

    Also giving solace to the Obama team: the docs cover a time period from January 2004 to December 2009, meaning that the vast majority predate Obama’s tenure
    .
    Seems like Team Obama has had at least one Grand Offensive that’s failed utterly
    .
    Seems like Team Obama’s still relying on Karzai, who’s got a drug lord brother.
    .
    Seems like Team Obama’s still got UAV’s blowing the hell out of civilians in two countries.

  • http://lostinkabul.wordpress.com lostinkabul

    Mullah Omar has been quoted comparing the US to Polyphemus, blinded by an enemy that he unable to name. Indeed, up to now the U.S. could not spell out the embarrassing truth that Pakistan supports the Taliban, i.e. that the enemy is a far more complex entity than a ragtag insurgency.
    I have a question: does anyone believe that the ISI ignores Osama Bin-Laden’s whereabouts?

  • kathy

    Well at least it ought to give the lie to Michael Steele’s “this isn’t a war we were engaged in” nonsense.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    This isn’t really news. Seems that everything in those documents are already common knowledge, or at the very least suspicions. To me this entire story boils down to the argument of the “people’s right to know” vs. the government’s need (sometimes unnecessary desire) to keep some secrets. It’s an argument as old as this country and sadly, we’ve not to be able to balance this equation.

    Old news being revealed is nothing new. And it seems that when the government really wants to keep something under wraps, it happens, just look at Area 51. But in today’s environment when even high level government officials use “the leak” as a means of revenge, things are out of control.

  • sevenoaks07

    This documents dump says little that has not been reported here, in the UK, Germany and France. The killing of civilians, wedding parties and farmers out doing their work has been reported. The Pakistan ISI involvement in extending protection and cover to the Taliban: again not news. The best coverage: Indian newspapers, The “we are in trouble in Afghanistan” is also a common theme. Our citizens have so much to do coping with bad times here that they have tuned our wars abroad (which include Somalia and Yemen).

    This is a made for Washington story and may well create problems for the neocons (if they can ever be made to see reason – which I doubt.)

  • http://cordopolitin.wordpress.com cordopolitin

    I hope that this does some good in the end as My two sons and i have very personal reasons to want a calm enviroment in Afganistan. That said I cant see first hand (Honest voices rather than the normal “impartial”press) information will do more harm than those who Spin from the left and right without consern for the Worlds future.

    I have seen words kill thus the Wiki ego denyical leadership will someday have blood on there hands but not this time.

    Balance in volume should be intresting.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    One lesson learned, if you become an enemy of the US make sure you have nukes, because then you will not be invaded.

  • nibblybits

    “I think Americans made a serious mistake electing a president whose past was virtually a closed book.”
    .
    Are you talking about Bush? Because he was in charge during the years these documents cover.

  • nibblybits

    “Indeed, up to now the U.S. could not spell out the embarrassing truth that Pakistan supports the Taliban, i.e. that the enemy is a far more complex entity than a ragtag insurgency.”
    .
    Anybody who’s been paying even cursory attention to Afghanistan knew this was going on. It’s been “spell(ed) out.” Are you just waking up now?

  • rimcollian

    Ever since the nation of Pakistan was carved out of India in 1947 – their rulers have been “conning” the Americans out of billions of dollars every year on the pretext of fighting poverty, organising development, tackling the Mujahideen and even for their defence against India.!

    We are all aware where all this aid – whether financial or military has gone.

    When will the US of A realise that they’re being made the suckers all the time.
    Even if they do – there’s nothing they can or will do to set things right.

    Good luck to your troops in Afghanistan – they’re fighting an useen and invisible enemy and are totally surrounded.

  • grape_crush

    What the Wikileak Means for the Afghanistan War
    .
    Hmm…Given that:

    “most of the terrible aspects of the Afghanistan war…are already pretty well known”

    and

    “the docs cover a time period from January 2004 to December 2009, meaning that the vast majority predate Obama’s tenure”

    has anyone given any thought to the reason why these documents were leaked?

    How would you ‘un-sell’ a war to make it politically easier to get out of it?

    …the biggest secret of all…is whether Barack Obama agrees.

    I think the decision might have already been made.

  • michaelfury
  • scoobydube

    Vietnam had “The Pentagon Papers” and now WE have WikiLeaks and their excellent expose about the GWOT in Afghanistan. I say the only SMART(Nixon) thing to do is “to declare VICTORY”, make like shepards, and get the FLOCK out of there…………

  • http://krishgovind.wordpress.com krishgovind

    Sadly Americans are reaping what they have sown rather they sowed wind and reaping whirl wind! With out second thought the US cold warriors galloped in to use Pakistan for settling score with USSR at Afghanistan and ended up creating a Frankenstein monster called Al- Qaeda/Taliban actively nurtured by Pakistan. Now the monster is uncontrolled and threatening to destroy civilization as we know it. Any lessons learnt? None! Amazingly Americans are repeating the same mistake of pumping in enormous quantity of arms in to Pakistan and calling it an ally in fighting terrorism. Undoubtedly the US arms will end up with insurgents to kill American soldiers in Afghanistan. Gullibility thy name is America!

  • http://nowherecalifornia.wordpress.com andrewdavidking

    Great piece. Just wondering: how many is “92,0000 documents”?

  • http://kayjeebee.wordpress.com kayjeebee

    Time’s report on WikiLeak is a fascinating reminder on Time’s style of journalism, particularly when the content relates to US foreign policy. What we have here is a government comfortably ensconced in Washington repeatedly asserting that Pakistan is an ally in the war on terrorism, and therefore deserves as much assistance as possible (including – but not limited to – billions of dollars as aid from US taxpayers, and sophisticated weaponry to beat the daylights out of terrorists). Now that it has been established beyond any doubt that most – if not all – the assistance was used by Pakistan to actually strengthen the terrorist movement, Time lucidly states that never was or even is of any significance, since everyone else (apart from Time) had been reporting it and even denouncing it for a long time.

    It is easy to see now why MacChrystal did what he did, and why the White House reacted – as ever – to keep up discipline and morale, not just in the ranks of the army but also among expert journalists who know that it is best to be the last to report misbegotten happenings in foreign policy.

  • quityercryin

    Once again America proves to be its own worst enemy- The enemy within.

  • dids43

    Hey Michael Crowley, how many is 92,0000? ever hear of proof reading?

  • dids43

    Oh, he’s a Yale grad no wonder

  • marnejameson

    too bad wikileak cannot get obama’s birth records, college transcript, thesis/dissertation, or michelle’s college records…hmmm. I am NOT a birther, but it would sure put that one argument to an end.

blog comments powered by Disqus