Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Assange: has Gillard got the guts?

By Kellie Tranter and Bruce Haigh - posted Monday, 20 December 2010


What would the US position have been if the leaks were from another powerful nation with which America vies? You can bet that "the land of the free" would be offering safe haven to Assange and secure hosting for Wikileaks, and that we'd follow right behind and do the same.

Internationally the goodies and baddies are created for us by propaganda fed to a complicit and compliant media. But what if the United States is no better than anyone else, and maybe even worse? The only response we ever seem to see from the US is patronising condescension, with wanton aggression and the diplomacy of bullies in the face of threat, defiance and solid criticism. We saw that after September 11. As the only (then) remaining superpower, by their own description, they didn't have to build networks or create consensus in order to secure international support before acting: they did what they wanted, relying on their own power, saying arrogantly, "You're either with us or against us". And so far that’s worked.

But has Wikileaks challenged this power, and America's influence? Certainly it seems that only a few self-interested powerbrokers are jumping to defend US integrity, or even expressing sympathy for its situation.

Advertisement

The more common world view is demonstrated by the popular protests in cities around the world, including the odd Guy Fawkes mask; by the global petitions and open letters; by supporters of free information uniting to attack Mastercard, Visa and Paypal, the financial vassals of the political elite; by the exponential growth of WikiLeaks mirror sites around the world; by high profile world leaders and celebrities adding their support, including, quaintly, Vladimir Putin who slammed Assanges' detention as "undemocratic" and Brazil's president who voiced "solidarity" with the jailed WikiLeaks founder.

The problem with the "official" line is people just don't buy that this persecution of Assange is not politically motivated. Perversely, it's a bit like Dubya's simplistic logic: to the person on the street: if you are anti-Assange then you are anti-freedom of speech, anti-democratic and anti- transparency. The citizens of the world see WikiLeaks as a beacon of hope for truth and freedom to flourish and for people empowerment; Assange's guilt or innocence is entirely irrelevant to that perception. Whatever happens to him won't affect public support for the organisation or divert attention from the content of the leaks or the questions they raise.

People sniff the prospect of positive change, and they like it. They understand it’s not Assange purporting to act with impunity, it’s their governments.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

8 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Authors

Kellie Tranter is a lawyer and human rights activist. You can follow her on Twitter @KellieTranter

Bruce Haigh is a political commentator and retired diplomat who served in Pakistan and Afghanistan in 1972-73 and 1986-88, and in South Africa from 1976-1979

Other articles by these Authors

All articles by Kellie Tranter
All articles by Bruce Haigh

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Kellie TranterKellie TranterPhoto of Bruce HaighBruce Haigh
Article Tools
Comment 8 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy