LITTLE ROCK — Aside from revealing a serious security problem, those 91,000 leaked documents pertaining to military operations in Afghanistan highlight how difficult prosecuting that war truly is. In fact, during the period covered by the leaks, January 2004 to December 2009, the U.S. and its allies were incrementally failing in their mission.
The website that posted the documents, after first sharing them with three respected publications here and in Europe, says it has another 15,000 whose release might harm individuals or operations.
WikiLeaks claims no agenda other than a dedication to openness and transparency. But the assertion of its founder, Julian Assange, that some of the material is evidence of U.S. war crimes suggests otherwise, as did a decision to label leaked footage of a U.S. helicopter attack that killed civilians as “collateral murder.”
The excerpts printed by the New York Times graphically show the difficulties faced by U.S. troops: a ruthless and resilient enemy; inhospitable terrain; the corruption, unreliability and irresponsibility of the Afghan police and army; and a Pakistani intelligence agency that, at the least, seems to be playing both sides against the middle, and, at the worst, is actively aiding assaults on U.S. forces.
There is no telling how selective the document disclosures might have been and it was left up to the news organizations to provide context, which the Times did extremely well.
The documents end just as the Obama administration began pouring 30,000 additional troops into the fight and implementing a new strategy with a heavy emphasis on minimizing civilian casualties. But unless conditions have changed greatly, the Obama administration has surely handed U.S. commander General David Petraeus a thankless and intractable task.
Editorial, Pages 18 on 07/28/2010