Small Wars Journal

WikiLeaks and the disappearance of memory

Thu, 12/09/2010 - 1:42pm
Writing in the December 4th Wall Street Journal, former U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz laments how WikiLeaks will cause top decision-makers to refrain from taking contemporaneous notes, with disastrous consequences for historical analysis. Shultz explains:

In the wake of this affair, the amount of candid written material related to the daily conduct of American foreign policy will surely diminish. We will lose our capacity to learn from our experiences, whether positive or negative. Historical memory will slowly be eradicated.

[...]

There is now a widespread, conscious reluctance in our society, whether in business or politics, to create records—and a disposition to destroy them when they exist. What I worry about is our ability to portray history accurately if such records are not at hand and leaders try to rely on their own memory, which is often flawed. A living history requires tools of remembrance. So much of what we do today depends upon our understanding of the past. If we lose that past, we are also going to lose one of the important handles on the future.

Shultz explains how his notes from his time in office, along with near-verbatim transcripts of his conversations with foreign leaders, were invaluable for the writing of his memoirs and for understanding years later the details and context of events in the past.

It is surely true that top leaders in business and government are more reluctant to keep notes and records. But the causes of this reluctance are the process of legal discovery and potential legal liability, reasons that pre-date Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Secretaries of State and their staffs can easily keep their personal diaries and meeting transcripts from internet hackers -- they simply need to keep these records in hand-written or typed form while scrupulously avoiding any digital forms of storage. Naturally such records will be bulky, unwieldy, and impossible to electronically search. But they won't ever be on the Internet.

However, no record is immune to legal discovery, as Shultz's colleague former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger (himself a successful attorney) was reminded. In 1991 Weinberger was indicted by the Iran-Contra grand jury for perjury and obstruction of justice for allegedly concealing the existence of his diary, in the form of hand-written note cards. It did not matter that Weinberger opposed President Reagan's Iran-Contra policy; his notes, possibly embarrassing to the administration, were important evidence sought by the special prosecutor.

The lesson for today's policymakers is to never maintain a diary. Keep a document shredder next to your desk and make it your best friend. And avoid email, just like Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Future historians will deplore these practices. They can get in line to blame the lawyers.

Comments

Ken White (not verified)

Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:43am

Good article, Robert -- and good advice...

I'll cross post this comment from the Small Wars Council with some edits for a little brevity:

The hyperventilating over this issue is being done by the US Political class who believe (wrongly) that they must be seen as 'Doing something.' They are concerned only with domestic politics and their reelection...

They are aided in this charade -- and that's what it is -- by the US Media (who) must try to embellish and make it into the major story that it is not.

Those two collections of people do not reflect the broader attitude throughout the Nation.

This site is heavily populated with people who do or did work for or with the US Government. They are totally annoyed at the perpetrators because they know those folks just made their jobs much harder.

What should happen is the leaker should be found and shot -- we won't do that...What we will do is set more snoopers about, tighten all the bureaucratic rules, forbid the use of thumb drives, CDs or removable media, make it incredibly difficult to exchange information, initiate new and burdensome rules for clearances and more. Much more. Much, much more -- and it's already started. I'll add for this Roundup post, that such actions will not stop a copycat or a repetition...

On a broader philosophical note the trajectory recently has been and is toward more transparency. However, I'm not at all convinced the Wikileaks modus is a good way to speed up or improve on that trajectory.

I doubt Assange has done a service. Governments around the world will do the same thing that the US is doing right now -- tighten the rules. I suspect you'll see less rather than more transparency.