The World According to the US Empire
Find out what the Wikileaks files reveal about the United States and its foreign policy.
Since its inception in 2006, Wikileaks has published hundreds of thousands of classified information about international military, diplomacy, and policy, primarily about the United States.
Of course, this has enraged the US administration, which accuses WikiLeaks of spreading misinformation and misinterpreting released files. So, what exactly do the WikiLeaks papers reveal, and what do they say about the United States?
As it turns out, the WikiLeaks files have nothing positive to say, and these summaries will include critical conclusions such as the United States' war crimes and torture of captives.
This overview will teach you.
What is the secret phrase that triggers the Pentagon server to reject emails? How does the CIA justify torture? How does the United States avoid legal probes into its crimes?
1. The US administration has tried to contain and discredit Wikileaks.
If you've heard of WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, you're probably also aware it's a highly contentious organization. But what is WikiLeaks, and why is it so divisive? Let's dive in.
The story starts in 2006, when a group of hackers, programmers, activists, and journalists, led by Australian hacker Julian Assange, founded the WikiLeaks website. Whistleblowers might upload material anonymously to this portal. WikiLeaks targeted dubious, corrupt, or unlawful practices by governments, institutions, and corporations.
Since then, its global profile has risen dramatically. The website's most renowned findings include details about vast electronic surveillance by the US National Security Agency (NSA).
As of 2016, Wikileaks had published 2,325,961 US State Department records, totaling around 2 billion words that, if printed, would fill around 30,000 books. The documents also revealed that the State Department, the heart of American diplomacy, was casting a favorable and optimistic light on policies wreaking havoc in other regions.
Furthermore, they had budgeted more than $1 billion per year for "public diplomacy," which amounted to propaganda.
For its part, the United States government has vigorously opposed WikiLeaks. Both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations condemned WikiLeaks, with former Vice President Joe Biden calling Assange a "cyber-terrorist." Since its inception, US administrations have attempted to suppress WikiLeaks and prevent the public and researchers from accessing it.
For example, the Library of Congress restricts access to the website, while the National Archives prohibits searches for the phrase "Wikileaks" in its databases. In 2012, the Pentagon used an automated filter to prohibit emails containing the word "WikiLeaks" from reaching its systems.
The International Studies Association (ISA) has forbidden its members from using WikiLeaks content. With 6,500 members worldwide, including many professors in political science departments at major colleges in the United States and overseas, this is a severe crackdown, and it's all due to WikiLeaks' harmful and illuminating revelations about US policy.
2. The United States has little regard for the rule of law, and its actions in war are questionable at best.
According to renowned anthropologist Talal Asad, people of good character fight for benign reasons after exhausting all other options. In other terms, it is the last resort.
Successive US governments have always maintained that their wars were justified. Nonetheless, as WikiLeaks has demonstrated, the United States has repeatedly shown little respect for international law, even committing war crimes to accomplish its agenda.
And Wikileaks has proven it.
For example, the United States has repeatedly bombed and executed civilians. In 2006, at least ten civilians were executed in Ishaqi, Iraq, including a woman in her 70s and a five-month-old infant.
Following the handcuffing and shooting of people, the US employed airstrikes to obliterate evidence.
The US has also killed civilians and journalists. A classified US military film from 2007 depicts US helicopters murdering a dozen people in Baghdad, including two Iraqi Reuters journalists.
Of course, the US has tortured inmates at its military jail in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, even though just a few of them have ever been charged.
The evidence is clear: the United States has demonstrated no restraint, respect for the rule of law, or morality in military affairs.
For example, the US stated that its activities in Guantanamo were justified, but the Wikileaks files demonstrated this to be utterly incorrect.
Government authorities told the public that the Guantanamo inmates were fundamentally terrorists who posed a clear and present threat to Americans. However, the Wikileaks data revealed that numerous detainees were kept in detention despite posing no threat at all!
Finally, it all comes down to the rhetoric embraced by the George W. Bush administration, which aimed to reset the moral compass of the United States based on a "us versus them" mentality.
Whatever "we" Americans did was regarded as "good," whereas whatever "they" did was deemed "bad." Dick Cheney captured this mindset when he referred to the potentially innocent Guantanamo inmates as "bad guys."
3. The United States has utilized torture, although it has always denied doing so.
You might believe that the definition of torture is self-explanatory. However, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has devised ways to circumvent such definitions.
To be clear, under George W. Bush, the United States tortured people.
And there is data to support that. In 2002, the CIA apprehended Abu Zubaydah, a Saudi national who was allegedly linked to al-Qaeda, in Pakistan. The CIA openly praised his capture, claiming it was one of their most high-profile arrests. They immediately transferred Zubaydah to Guantanamo.
According to Wikileaks papers, he was forced to spend two weeks in a coffin-shaped box. They exposed him to sleep deprivation, stress positions, slappings, and even insects dispersed throughout the box.
During the interrogation, the bullet wound he had sustained during his detention was allowed to fester and deteriorate. Officers and medical personnel at the prison facility did not treat the wound.
He ultimately admitted to associating with armed jihadi groups but denied any ties to al-Qaeda and appeared to be speaking the truth.
However, the United States decided to make Zubaydah "disappear," preventing him from contacting the International Red Cross. Zubaydah remains in Guantanamo even though he has never been charged with a crime.
Given the facts of the case, you may believe the CIA was torturing Zubaydah. But the agency has dismissed any such idea.
In fact, when the torture program was started in 2002, then-CIA director George Tenet said it "saves lives" by assisting in the collection of intelligence that prevents terrorist strikes.
The CIA has since attempted to demonstrate the validity of its torture tactics. At one point, CIA personnel compiled a record detailing every instance in which they briefed members of Congress on the organization's interrogation procedures.
This is simply a technique of burying culpability for the CIA's and, by extension, the United States' conduct, allowing the country to continue to position itself as a sentinel of the liberal world order rather than confronting the grim truth of its acts.
4. By weakening the International Criminal Court, the United States may dodge responsibility.
In 2002, 122 signatory countries adopted the Rome Statute, establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The International Criminal Court (ICC) can investigate persons for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. The notion originated at a diplomatic conference in Rome in 1998.
From the outset, American officials sought to curtail the ICC's independence. Most countries supported "universal jurisdiction," which implies that the ICC can prosecute war crimes committed anywhere.
However, the United States objected to the plan. It forced a compromise: the ICC could only pursue crimes committed by individuals from ratifying states and only on the territory of a state signatory to the Rome Statute.
Despite being dissatisfied with this compromise, President Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute, which acted as a symbolic but not legally enforceable endorsement of the pact. Clinton wanted the US to be able to veto prosecutions against its people; instead, the ICC prosecutor (chosen by member states) would have the last say on which cases would be pursued.
In 2002, George W. Bush removed the United States' signature from the already weak pact, freeing the American people from punishment for war crimes.
Bush's Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, John Bolton, stated that the US would "follow its values when measuring the legitimacy of its actions."
Furthermore, only crimes committed by US citizens in states that have accepted the ICC may result in an indictment. However, the court's reliance on Western financial and political support makes this unlikely. As a result, in its 13-year history, the court has only charged nationals of African countries.
Furthermore, the ICC lacks its own enforcement officials and must rely on government cooperation to jail and extradite indicted individuals.
5. The United States has made its economic interests global.
Transnational forces control the global economy. Big banks, the financial industry, and the market play a role, but what drives their behavior? The explanation is straightforward: American imperialism.
The United States has long established its colonial mission. First reflected in the country's nineteenth-century philosophy of "manifest destiny," the United States has sought to extend and institutionalize capitalism worldwide since its inception.
This conduct is exemplified by forming international trade agreements, which aim to ensure that American capitalism remains the world's dominant economic model.
In 2014, Wikileaks published drafts of two minor free trade treaties: the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
These drafts uncovered the peculiarities of the US model. They promised substantial benefits for American service industries, such as reducing trade obstacles and raising US service exports by up to $860 billion to $1.4 trillion.
The drafts also ignored the World Trade Organization's environmental and labor protection requirements.
Meanwhile, the financial industry has a significant influence on US politics.
Between 1973 and 2007, the banking sector's profits increased from 16 to 41 percent of US economic profits. Today, Wall Street accounts for slightly more than one-third of all financial transactions worldwide.
This scale empowers financial communities, from which the US government acquires technological skills, training, legal knowledge, and attitudes. The government then mindlessly follows this suggestion, with other nations following suit.
Because of this link, American financial institutions are immune to democratic monitoring and may keep a tight hold on politics and decision-making. As a result, the financial industry retains its global significance, with US administrations advocating and protecting these financial interests worldwide.
This shows how the financial interests of the United States have melded with those of the rest of the world, becoming nearly identical.
Final Summary
The magnitude of the United States' hegemonic power and manipulations are well known. However, the WikiLeaks files provide a more detailed picture and shed light on the true character of the country's political activities. Examining the top-secret State Department cables reveals that the United States has expanded its worldwide hegemony and continues to do so by manipulating language and rules to achieve economic aims.