Julian Assange - a prophet for freedom or the devil himself?

What is your opinion on the whole Wikileaks? one of my friends asks me. She, a Political Scientist like I am, has at least the opinion that we should indeed have one. An opinion.

I was, to be honest, a bit disappointed. Yes, sure, we all shared a few good laughs on the expense of our politicians and the Western world is most likely not going to be changed or influenced by what the US now call a case of betrayal of state secrets. It is after all not much of a surprise that diplomats, politicians and officials have their own opinions on their respective counterparts. The only news is that US-officials occasionally think the same than us lesser human beings: that the German Minister of Foreign Affairs is not so qualified for his job and that Putin is an alpha-male, for example.

The stir in the mostly authoritarian Arab nations in the Middle and Greater East might be a bit more substantial since criticism towards the rulers is never a good thing in theocracies, dictatorships and their kind. But it would greatly underestimates the smartness of people living in these countries. Like us they have their own view on their leaders. And the Iranian opposition is for sure far from being stunned about the fact, that not all their Muslim neighbors are big fans of Iran - especially not the Sunni ones. The struggle for power between Shiites and Sunni, between secular and religious, between the military and the opposition, the multitude of lines of conflict in the whole area was certainly not generated by Wikileaks and will most likely not be fueled further.

And this is, after all, the only really interesting "betrayal of national and international secrets": some governments in the Middle East and the Gulf urged to US to go hard on Iran. Saudi-Arabia and the US have expressed and acted upon common interests in the past. No big surprise here either. That the Saudis are afraid of the Shiites and their internal opposition and mostly care to secure the political and economically status quo in their country - we all knew that.

But - a whole different storyline seems to developing right know. Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks is now official state enemy no. 1 and not only in the United States of America. And where America´s arrogance when it comes to judging other nations has become pretty obvious over the last few days, we now see a demonstration of its ongoing power as well. Only three countries in the world are considered safe for the now-refugee Assange: Cuba, Iceland and Switzerland. the rest is enemy territory. Other countries, like Ecuador, took back there offers. To long and mighty is the arm of Washington for someone to escape in a world still controlled by American money, military and secret services. This is no news either, but every time we see the prove we should be shocked and outraged. The US are a democracy after all and should therefore face threats in a way suiting a system that above all guarantees the basic human rights. And Julian Assange is no citizen of the United States either. Or is his betrayal really a matter of international concern?

If Assange really has raped two women in Sweden there is no doubt that he has to face the punishment for his actions. One just wishes that other famous rapists had been chased with the same sincerity and willingness to get them into court. Roman Polanski for example. But Assange is a threat and maybe this is a sign that he actually has more in store.

To form an opinion on this, we or I, have to neglect the accusations in Sweden and just focus on the political dimension, the different kind of accusations issued by the American government. Many people did and will interpret the actions of one Julian Assange. Some might consider him a threat to world peace, like such as thing really exists. Other might see him as a modern-world prophet of freedom. Isn´t it our right to know what goes on behind our backs? Are Yemenite citizens in no right of the truth about their government´s cooperation with the US government? Should their not be more transparency when, let´s say, Vladimir Putin and Silvio Berlusconi, both leaders of a democratic nations (at least on paper) exchange expensive gifts (expensive for the tax-payers) and one or two political game plans? Does our right as a citizen really stop with our right to vote and hence delegate our power to a politician within a system? Don´t we have to right to be informed about what said politicians do with that power? Or is it really a threat to world peace when we don´t keep our little mouths and ears shot, oblivious to our surroundings beyond the contains of our shopping carts?

I guess it is an individual decision whether you want to think of Julian Assange as a peace activist or the devil´s advocate.