Julian Assange and the hard truth about Wikileaks that many ignore

Julian Assange, whose health is seriously damaged and scarred, is defending himself against extradition to the US by all means necessary. This is his right and reminds many people of David’s battle against Goliath.

And now, to the relief of many observers, a British court ruled in favor of the Wikileaks founder on Tuesday. Assange will not be extradited for the time being and can continue to hope.

In the sometimes heated public discussions, the 52-year-old Australian is repeatedly referred to as a whistleblower and journalist. But is that true?

the essence in short

The German TV talk show “Markus Lanz” recently discussed the founder of Wikileaks intensively. Law professor Kai Ambos gave a pleasantly differentiated opinion about Wikileaks. Because this much is certain: in the case of Julian Assange there is not only black and white, but many nuances that are often forgotten.

Whistleblowers – real and alleged

The American political scientist Allison Stanger has studied intensively the question of what a whistleblower is – ‘informant’ in German.

For her non-fiction book ‘Whistleblowers: Honesty in America from Washington to Trump’ (2019), she also interviewed Edward Snowden, who worked with major media companies to expose mass surveillance by American secret services. Stanger said of Snowden that he could one day be seen as “America’s first traitor patriot.”

The same year that her book on whistleblowers was published, Stanger published a well-received essay in the Washington Post explaining why Wikileaks founder Julian Assange was not a whistleblower.

Your definition is:

Julian Assange was and is also described as a whistleblower. However, his behavior over time shows that this is not the case, the political scientist explains.

As a reminder, Wikileaks was founded in 2006 by Assange and colleagues. In the following years, the disclosure platform published explosive information that third parties had uploaded anonymously, including classified documents about the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

At least in the early days of Wikileaks, Assange and his colleagues fulfilled their journalistic responsibilities and worked with professional journalists to pre-screen documents.

Whistleblower Chelsea Manning provided particularly explosive texts and videos documenting American war crimes. She was later convicted by a US court, spent several years behind bars and was eventually pardoned by President Barack Obama, only to find herself in trouble with the US legal system again for refusing to testify against Julian Assange.

What makes real journalists?

The media is considered the fourth branch of the state: journalists keep an eye on those in power and Wikileaks was once founded to expose authoritarian regimes worldwide. But then those responsible lost sight of this noble goal.

Journalist is not a protected professional title. Anyone who describes themselves in this way must accept that their own activities are closely monitored.

One thing is certain: In his early years, Assange worked with renowned media companies such as the New York Times, the Guardian in Great Britain and the Spiegel in Germany. Then they withdrew their trust from him.

One reason: Wikileaks published explosive material on the Internet unedited, that is, without blackening names – endangering innocent people.

Kai Ambos, professor at the University of Göttingen, has been intensively involved in the Assange case. The lawyer reminded “Markus Lanz” of the deadly side effects of certain Wikileaks publications. For example, the Taliban evaluated leaked American documents to find people who collaborated with the Americans.

It should be noted that Wikileaks has made material available on the Internet without making any prior attempt to independently verify its veracity. In addition, those named in leaked documents were not given an opportunity to comment. This would also be standard journalistic procedure. In contrast, Wikileaks’ ‘data dumping’ was grossly negligent. It was probably simply about harming the hated US government.

And therefore also Assange’s connection with Russia.

The striking proximity to Putin’s Russia

Assange had an early affinity with Putin’s Russia. In 2012, the Australian presented his own talk show on the Russian state broadcaster RT (formerly Russia Today), which spread conspiracy theories and anti-Western stories and is still allowed to do so, at least in Switzerland.

The fact is: from the announcement of Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy in 2015 until his election, Assange has not published a single major document on his disclosure platform that would have harmed Russia or the despot Vladimir Putin. There would certainly have been opportunities for corresponding Kremlin leaks.

Instead, Wikileaks communicated with Trump advisors and Russian Military Intelligence (GRU) front organizations during the 2016 US presidential election, as investigations later revealed.

And there were targeted agreements between Wikileaks and Donald Trump Jr. – son of the then presidential candidate. It is striking that Wikileaks always published documents when Trump was in trouble, as the ‘Neue Zürcher Zeitung’ stated in 2017.

The goal was to stir up as much dirt as possible to harm Trump’s opponent. The leaked emails were investigated; no gross violations or legally relevant misconduct by Clinton came to light. On the contrary: Trump was sentenced to a fine.

It is worth noting that in 2017, Wikileaks published confidential documents about Putin’s Russia and its use of surveillance technology.

What do we learn from this?

Julian Assange and his family members have my condolences in an intolerable situation. But we should stop calling him a journalist. He’s not.

And he’s not a whistleblower either. Instead, he worked with people in Putin’s circle of influence to help Trump get elected. Not to mention that he allowed himself to be exploited for Russian propaganda.

It is fitting that Edward Snowden once again spoke out from exile in Russia and criticized the US government. However, he still does not say a word about the questionable role of his host Putin. A real hit for the Russian propaganda channel RT.

But law professor Kai Ambos agrees: Julian Assange should NOT be extradited to the United States for humanitarian reasons. In fact, the founder of Wikileaks has already been punished enough by what has happened to him over the past fourteen years.

Julian Assange, like the whistleblower Edward Snowden who fled to Russia, are tragic figures in contemporary history. Three American presidents have failed to find the right way to deal with critics of the system. That is why anti-Americanism was and continues to be fueled. And the war criminal Putin and other dangerous enemies of democracy benefit the most from this.

Sources