Skip to main content

Leaked diplomatic wire, WikiLeaks, Internet, Blogging, What is this mean

When reading news I found an interesting news reported by Antara News and Tempo Interaktif. There is mentioned that the two of Australia's famous newspaper, The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald, has reported confidential information about President Yudhoyono. The news on both newspaper were based on WikiLeaks's information which was leaked from the diplomatic wire of U.S. Embassy.

Fellow blogger Martin Manurung, as I read on his profile was a President Director of PT Sekurindo Gada Patria (a company provides consultancy on managing risks and business continuity), has an interesting post about this issue titled Arti Heboh Wikileaks. Sadly he wrote in Bahasa Indonesia. He had quote and translate parts of the sentences from the Australian newspaper that he considers important (and I quote from his post), that is:

...The US diplomatic reports-obtained by WikiLeaks and provided exclusively to The Age - say that soon after becoming President in 2004, Dr Yudhoyono intervened in the case of Taufik Kiemas, husband of former president Megawati Sukarnoputri...
...In December 2004, the US embassy in Jakarta reported that one of its most valued political informants, senior presidential adviser T.B. Silalahi, had advised that then assistant attorney-general Hendarman Supandji, who was leading the new government’s anticorruption campaign, had gathered "sufficient evidence of the corruption of former first gentleman Taufik Kiemas to warrant Taufik’s arrest
...But Mr Silalahi, one of Dr Yudhoyono’s closest political confidants, told the US embassy the President "had personally instructed Hendarman not to pursue a case against Taufik...

Of course, the news got a lot of protests from senior officials of Indonesian government, like this:

Suruh buktikanlah kalau itu benar. Kalau ada buktinya serahkan ke Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK)", kata Ketua Mahkamah Agung, Harifin A Tumpa

Translated in English: "Tell to prove if it's true. If there was evidence, submit to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK)", said Chairman of the Supreme Court, Harifin A Tumpa.

Kalau memang (informasi) ini sungguh-sungguh tidak benar, kedutaan (AS) itu harus meminta maaf ke Pemerintah Indonesia," kata Jaffar Hafsah, Ketua Fraksi Partai Demokrat

Translated in English: "If this (information) is really not true, the US Embassy must apologize to the Indonesian government," said Jaffar Hafsah, leader of the Democratic Party's faction.

Like Martin, I do not want to comment on whether the news is true or not, factual or not, because I'm not involved in political mainstream, and do not have any evidence on my hand. I just want to release of what in my mind like this:

  1. Blogging is not just building our village (that is important too) as posted by Jim Belshaw. I think blogging has been ogled by many activists / journalist in this world as an alternative way out for channeling the freedom of expression without censorship, unlike printed news.
  2. WikiLeaks phenomenon is a signal that in the era of information technology, all things may be possible to open. Think about the incidence of a bank account hacked by hackers.
  3. Information through blogging and social media like Facebook / Twitter, email, SMS via Blackberry, now seem more powerful. Unlike traditional media (printed newspaper), they do not know (not tied) with the journalistic code of ethics.

In closing I still wonder whether all the information stored in the WikiLeaks's safe deposit box are valid and accountable, or only partially that can be accounted. Hopefully the news from WikiLeaks, The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald is not true, while I'm still love my president.

Comments

  1. Oh... I should add point number 4 like this:
    4. Governments today must realize that whatever they have done can be disseminated via the internet rapidly. Internet and social networks are now beginning to appear as an unofficial control-tool for government. They are far more than the number of members of parliament. Even your trusted staff can provide confidential information on the internet anonymously. They can write frankly unashamedly. So, if you are a leader then I will say "be careful" to you. Do the best for your country and your people.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Can't but agree with you; technology, internet included, may be used for good causes as well as bad ones. I consider any contribution which provides information that limits manipulations of the people by the high and mighty, as ( very) positive.

    But, I guess, professional subjectivity
    As for the Wikileaks revelations, they are what they are. That is an enormous series of confidential cables by US diplomats on situations and persons of the country where they have their jobs.It's their ( the diplomats') perception, it's subjective. Wikileaks have them published in regular media after calculated timing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Tikno,
    Very interesting post.
    Blogging and the social media like FB, Twitter can be considered as part of control process on the government, parliament, courts. It have been proven in the : Prita case, Bibid-Chandra case.
    Re: Wikileaks
    I don't how is the rule for US diplomats, but
    for Indonesian diplomats, diplomatic cable/ telex are classified materials typed using codes by special official of the embassy.
    Like diplomatic bags/pouches they belong to the Indonesian government.
    Whereas Wikileaks is created and maintained by private citizens whose credibility and accountability is unknown. There is no guarantee whatsoever that their materials are correct.
    The point is: why should we pay attention to news reports whose source is not clear at all ?
    If the government has not protested very loudly I would not pay attention to the news reports.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Colson,
    Agree with what you say: "It's their (the diplomats) perception, it's subjective."

    Multibrand,
    I think the point is we need to make people aware that the archives owned by WikiLeaks should be questioned.
    Like you said: "...maintained by private citizens whose credibility and accountability is unknown." :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. The word "subjective" has got a biased meaning in Indonesian daily use. Whereas, subjectivity is part of human conscience, it's not a sin, and everybody must have their own subjective perspectives. It's simply a lie to be always 'objective'.

    So, I'm laughing out loud when hearing Daniel Sparingga, the president's political communication special assistant, protesting how 'raw' US diplomatic cables were sent to Washington. It's every country's right to have their own procedure of information sharing, and Indonesia is not at the position to judge whether the information is proper or subjective. Of course, every country has their own subjectivity.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @ martin: Interesting observation. Talking about ' subjectivity' I think you are right if you observe a "biased meaning". And I agree with you when you wrote it is the right of diplomats do to their job: gather the best knowledge you can get and report it back home - facts and opinions.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @ Martin,
    Agree with you :)

    @ Colson,
    "... facts and opinions" ??
    According to you Colson, whether these leaked information for SBY is categorized as fact or opinion??

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

NOTE: comment moderation is activated due to a lot of spam comments. Comments containing racial hatred, personal attacks, or advertising are strictly prohibited.

POPULAR POSTS LAST 7 DAYS:

Musing Of The Pornography Law

On Thursday, October 30th 2008, People's Representative Council of The Republic of Indonesia (Indonesian: Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Republik Indonesia / DPR RI) has been legalize the draft of anti-pornography law. The definition of pornography in that law are (original text in Indonesian): BAB I, Pasal 1 (1): Pornografi adalah materi seksualitas yang dibuat oleh manusia dalam bentuk gambar, sketsa, ilustrasi, foto, tulisan, suara, bunyi, gambar bergerak, animasi, kartun, syair, percakapan, gerak tubuh, atau bentuk pesan komunikasi lain melalui berbagai bentuk media komunikasi dan/atau pertunjukan di muka umum, yang dapat membangkitkan hasrat seksual dan/atau melanggar nilai-nilai kesusilaan dalam masyarakat. BAB I, Pasal 1 (2): Jasa pornografi adalah segala jenis layanan pornografi yang disediakan oleh orang perseorangan atau korporasi melalui pertunjukan langsung, televisi kabel, televisi teresterial, radio, telepon, internet, dan komunikasi elektronik lainnya serta surat kabar, ma

LGBT and Human Rights

The existence of LGBT people in society is a fact. Legally, some countries legalize their status, while the majority of others still do not. What influences someone to become LGBT? There's a whole range of hypotheses, from the viewpoint of genetic, psychological, psychosocial, and personal experience. It is too long to write here, so please read it on the internet. The logical question is, who doesn't want to have a normal family (father, mother and biological children)? Sometimes I can understand that people who experience same-sex sexual desire are not their logical choice. LGBT people demand their rights using human rights arguments. Meanwhile, the majority use arguments that apply in society. Indeed, this is a complex phenomenon, like between liberals and conservatives. So, what is my view on this phenomenon? Well, I was born and raised in eastern culture, a religious society. But I tend to think moderately. Personal freedom of LGBT people in society to live and earn a livi

Artificial intelligence ChatBot.

The world is enthusiastic about the so-called ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) developed by an artificial intelligence research laboratory called OpenAI. Google also did not want to be left behind by developing their own version called Google Bard. Both are powered by artificial intelligence technology. There is a lot of news about this technology, which I think, at least for now, is over-reactive. Like the assumption that artificial intelligence technology will exceed human intelligence (its creator), and moreover, replace humans themselves. On the other hand, Elon Musk warned that this technology could cause a "catastrophic outcome" for humanity if not controlled. He even called a temporary halt to its further development. Considering he was one of the main donors to this project, I found it odd. I don't know if this is a marketing trick to blow up investors' interest. After all, ChatGPT, Google Bard, or artificial intelligence is just a computer pr