Julian Assange and his impact on the communication processes and politics - Essay Example

Julian Assange and his impacts on the communication processes and politics in the globalised world Julian Asange: Personal and professional history Julian Assange was known only as an “Australian moderator of the Legal Aspects of Computer Crime mailing list and a researcher who has written extensively about hackers” in the beginning of this century, that is, before he became a controversial celebrity who all know of (Kick, 2001). This is why calling Julian Assange, a “cypherpunk revolutionary”, Robert Manne (2011a) has said, “Less than twenty years ago Julian Assange was sleeping rough. Even a year ago hardly anyone knew his name. Today he is one of the best-known and most-respected human beings on earth” (p.194). The seemingly sudden rise into fame of this Australian individual has a socio-political context and a corresponding history. The way his actions have impacted the communication processes and the politics in the globalised world is a topic that has international implications. The geo-politics of his physical location to the ideological underpinnings of his intellectual landscape that he has extended to others through the internet represent a whole new world of possibilities- in communication, freedom and democracy. Julian Assange has been a hacker since when the first generation of computer hackers started rewriting the laws of internet communication (Manne, 2011a, p.194; Manne, 05 March, 2011b). In the book, Underground, written by Suelette Dreyfus, and for which Assange worked as a researcher, a hacker named Mendax was featured and this hacker really was none other than Assange himself (Manne, 2011a, p.197). It was in 1988, that Assange became a hacker (Manne, 2011a, p.197). He formed a group called International Subversives along with two other hackers (Manne, 2011a, p.197). Dreyfus (2006-07) had described the politics of this group as “fiercely anti-establishment; their motive adventure and intellectual curiosity; their strict ethic not to profit by their hacking or to harm the computers they entered” (as cited in Manne, 2011a, p.197). Assange was a member of the free software movement, he participated in the creation of NetBSD, an open source computer operating system, and got involved with a movement called cypherpunks in 1993 (Manne, 2011a, p.203-204). The idea of WikiLeaks had been borne out of this movement (Manne, 2011a, p.203). Among the cypherpunk group of hackers to which he belonged, Assange was somewhat an exception to others (who were anarcho-capitalists) by keeping a left leaning though he is an “anti-communist” (Manne, 2011a, p.211). The basic philosophy of cypherpunks was again the issue whether: The state would strangle individual freedom and privacy through its capacity of electronic surveillance or whether autonomous individuals would eventually undermine and even destroy the state through their deployment of electronic weapons newly at hand (Manne, 2011a, p.204). It was rumored that a 1989 attack that was carried out “from Australia on the NASA computer system via the introduction of what was called the WANK worm in an attempt to sabotage the Jupiter launch of the Galileo rocket as part of an action of anti-nuclear activists” was the work of Assange (Manne, 2011a, p.197). A programme written by Assange was named sycophant and it allowed his hacking group to hack into the US military systems (Manne, 2011a, p.197). It was when his group hacked into the Canadian telecommunications corporation NORTEL, that his hacking was found out for the first time (Manne, 2011a, p.197). In the police action that followed, Assange was arrested in a totally devastated state of mind and admitted to a hospital (Manne, 2011a, p.198). Manne (2011a) has observed that this arrest and the time spent in jail was what shaped his politics (p.198). Suburbia Public Access Network was the next war front that Assange opened (Manne, 2011a, p.200). It was a converging point for many email lists and activist groups (manne, 2011a, p.200). According to Manne (2011a) what Julian Assange was concerned with was the “extraordinary democratic possibilities of the information-sharing virtual communities across the globe created by the internet, and the threat to its freedom and flourishing posed by censorious states, greedy corporations and repressive laws” (Manne, 2011a, p.201). WikiLeaks It was during the July 2006- August 2007 period that Assange formulated in his mind, the idea of WikiLeaks (Manne, 2011a, p.214). This self-assumed conspirator against all kinds of state systems and governance systems believed that “leaks induce fear and paranoia in […] [the governments’] leadership and planning coterie” (cited in Manne, 2011a, p.220). As many believed, Assange was not only aimed at the US government, but all kinds of regimes that have “its authority through mendacity alone” as Assange would put it (cited in Manne, 2011a, p.223). “The collateral murder” footage that became WikiLeaks’ coup d'état and the gate opener to fame, came out in April 2010 (Manne, 2011a, p.231). Public key cryptography was the major area in which the hackers’ group of Assange concentrated as it would enable the space for “anonymous communication” (Manne, 2011a, p.205). One such project was the introduction of “remailers” which blocked government attempts to trace the senders and recipients of “encrypted email” (Manne, 2011, p.205). Another one was “digital cash” which hid movement of money via internet from the eyes of governments (Manne, 2011a, p.205). All these instances had a common underlying theme, a philosophy- that the freedom and privacy of the individual is far above the powers of the state and corporations which exercise their control over others. The US government was in the forefront to oppose the “circulation of public-key cryptography [...] [saying that] making it available would strengthen the hands of the espionage agencies of America's enemies abroad and of terrorists, organised criminals, drug dealers and pornographers at home” (Manne, 05 March 2011b). Assange had retorted to such arguments by saying that his "primary targets are those highly oppressive regimes in China, Russia and central Eurasia [...] [and] a politically motivated legal attack on us would be seen as a grave error in Western administrations" (qtd. in Manne, 05 March 2011b). And it was becoming clear that Assange did not want WikiLeaks to be understood either as “as a CIA front or as a same-old left-wing outfit” (Manne, 05 March 2011b). This is the point at which Assange consciously stands out in the political crowd divided into left and right and tries to balnce his feet in the gray areas which of course is a difficult task. And by opening up a space and mode of communication for those who do want to remain in the gray areas, Assange has made changes to the very communication processes and politics in this complex era of globalisation. In the long run, this could be considered as the major contribution of this individual to the global society. And this is why Assange-scholar, Robert Manne (05 March 2011b) has concluded that “his politics were anti-establishment but genuinely beyond Left and Right” and named it “political Darwinism.” Assange and WikiLeaks have been regularly sent “damaging documentary information” about governments all over the world and also about companies and corporations by undisclosed “insiders” (Manne, 2011a, p.194). The kind of news and exclusive and classified information being published by WikiLeaks is typically represented by revelation of classified information like: An Islamist assassination order from Somalia; massive corruption in Daniel arap Moi’s Kenya; tax avoidance by the largest Swiss bank, Julius Baer; an oil spill in Peru, a nuclear accident in Iran and toxic chemical dumping by the Trafigura corporation off the Ivory Coast […] [and sensational information like] Guantanamo Bay operational manuals; […] [and] the emails of Sarah Palin (Manne, 2011a, p.229). Assange and Global Media Access to Information The significance of the presence of Assange in the global communication scene is that no more, even a very powerful government like the United States with such powerful network of media under its control, can hide information from the public. This became clear when WikiLeaks published information that US soldiers and fighting units “were embedded in Pakistani fighting units” in contrary to the claim of Pentagon that the US had no “troops in Pakistan engaging in combat operations” (Wright, 2011). Also it was WikiLeaks that revealed that it was the American fighting units that were killing “Yemen-based terrorists” and not the military of Yemen (Wright, 2011). All such explosive information being revealed has resulted in great criticism in the US itself of the US foreign policies and clandestine operations (Wright, 2011). And this is the real political dimension of what Assange is doing. It is also an interesting fact that Assange is giving the people the information that even the most powerful media in the world, with all their networks and paraphernalia could not access. This is the point at which a question rises whether these big media actually were not having the ability to access such information or whether they were politically not interested in accessing such information. During the Iraq war, when AlJazeera began publishing visuals and information that neither CNN or BBC could get hold of, the same question had arisen. This was an issue that involving the politics of embedded journalism and also the politics of mainstream discourses. The global political changes that have been attributed to Assange and WikiLeaks include the “revolution” in Egypt and “the battle for resources in the Arctic Ocean” (Takaros, 13 July 2011). And many journalists have been admitting that they were depending WikiLeaks as an authentic source as compared to any other sources of information (Larsen, 10 June 2011). But it has to be remembered that Assange could get hold of much of his leaked information only because he had an aide inside the US military communication system. Manning, the military man who gave him the leaks, had admitted that he used “his security clearance” along with his “computer skills to access confidential governmental networks and download classified material” (Nicks, 23 September 2010). So partially it was being inside the system that helped Manning to assist Assange in turn, which raises the question whether it is possible simply to use the internet media to ensure democracy and right to information of the people. But all the same the US investigators have been so far unable to establish that Manning and Assange was communicating with each other (Khatchadourian, 20 May 2011). This is the smart edge of the technology that Assange has shown the world in its revolutionary glory. And it can be concluded that it is the human beings and the technology that could work a success of democracy like WikiLeaks. Because, first of all, there has to be a person like Julian Assange or Bradley Manning who finds the courage to challenge the fatal adversities of being the enemy of the system. Participation in Communication Processes One positive aspect of the Assange episode is that it has drawn attention to the possibilities of participation by the powerless ordinary individuals in the processes of communication. As Elazar and Marbach (2004) have observed “the opening of cyberspace with its electronic highway networks made possible whole different forms of communication” (p.85). A global outreach platform for an individual was one such form of communication that was made possible by internet. And once Assange happened, a whole array of cyber activists emerged. The public is still debating whether what Assange did was cyber-activism or cyber-anarchism (Crossrhythms, 20 December 2010). Phenomena like WikiLeaks have been termed as unstoppable in the cyber space by the experts concerned (Cybersafety, 09 March 2011). Increased participation along with the enhanced transparency in the global communication sphere will be hopefully the outcome of this situation. The approval that Assange has been winning not only from the general public but also from computer experts is overwhelming and indicative of what the value people give to transparency in governance (Cybersafety, 09 March 2011). For example, the third Security Blogger Summit held in Madrid had opined that “Cyber-activism was born from the global situation we live in” and that it was “unstoppable” and valid (Cybersafety, 09 March, 2011). But it was also admitted that through cyber interventions, “it is possible to damage a country without having to invade it with soldier” (Cybersafety, 09 March 2011). These responses equally mixed with apprehension and hope, show the complexity of the issue once again. Information Economy According to Manne (05 March 2011b), what Assange himself believes is that: In the era of globalisation, laws determining communication were going to be harmonised. The world would either opt for a closed system akin to Chinese political secrecy and US intellectual property laws, or an open system found to some extent in Belgium and Sweden. So one has to assume that it is with this future in mind that Julian Assange has been doing what he is doing. In interview given to C-Span in the Frontline Club discussion on WikiLeaks, Assange had said that he was publishing the kind of information that has been published on WikiLeaks on the belief that “what advances us as a civilization is the entirety of our intellectual record and the entirety of our understanding” (Frontline Club Discussion on WikiLeaks with Julian Assange, 2 July 2011). And he has admitted that WikiLeaks was still “lacking information from the interiors of secretive organizations” (Frontline Club Discussion on WikiLeaks with Julian Assange, 2 July 2011). So in the information economy that exists in the world also, Assange can be seen trying to create leaks by accessing and publishing information that will be economically harmful to the mainstream media (in terms that they lose their viewers and readers to WikiLeaks) and also to the governments and corporations (in terms that their undemocratic actions are revealed and thereby economic damages caused). And when a renowned figure like Noam Chomsky commented that WikiLeaks showed how bitterly the US government hated democracy, he was referring to the dual face of so-called democratic institutions which keep other vested interests (Democracy Now Interview with Noam Chomsky, 30 November 2010). Global Politics and Assange The global politics is also facing an erosion of credibility on the face of WikiLeaks revelations. The contradictions between what the governments say publicly and what they do actually has been come to light thanks to WikiLeaks. Major political decisions like the war on Iraq, having international implications for peace, have been revealed to be taken by the US government based on its narrow strategic agenda (Democracy Now Interview with Noam Chomsky, 30 November 2010). How the US kept secret the real number of civilian casualties in the Iraq war was disclosed by WikiLeaks (Fowler, 2011) and this was in confirmation of the allegations raised by American critics about the inhumanity of the Iraq war (p.10 of introduction). The moral highhandedness with which America was presiding over other world nations was imparted an irreparable blow. Individual and the globalised Media Economy The source of many leaks of information on the US military was traced to Bradley Manning, “a young military-intelligence analyst and Private First Class in the United States Army” and when this revelation came out in May 2010, the world was reminded that it was not a single individual who created the spectacular phenomenon called WikiLeaks (Khatchadourian, 20 May 2011). This fact is crucial when the relationships between the society and an individual have to be examined in depth. What Kampmark (22 December 2010) has written in the website, Scoop, which is an independent news media of New Zealand, show that Assange is not as politically correct regarding gender democracy as he might be regarding individual freedom. This again raises the issue whether one individual can be given/command the ultimate power to decide the fate of a society, or at least what other individual should know and not know, even when he/she is having the skill and intelligence to do the same, at least for a period of time. Now it is getting revealed that Assange is turning more and more autocratic resulting in many of his aids-in-arm leaving his side (Takaros, 13 July 2011). It is in this context that Assange can be accused of individualist politics of a dangerous kind. Individualistic politics is usually a “means by which individuals may attain their goals or secure their interests or improve themselves socially and economically” (Elazer and Marbach, 2004, p.53). But the politics of Assange is of a different creed. Though individualistic, Assange’s politics is not to attain personal goals but for a more complex end. It is also a search for a society that he thinks will be better than that is there, today. And he has also been understood by many as a crusader against the kind of individualism that is promoted a so-called free market of the capitalist block (St Amant and Smashwords Inc., 2010, p.163). And it can be seen that the age-old argument that “stability is better than chaos” has been once again put to abuse by those who call Assange a cyber-terrorist (St Amant and Smashwords Inc., 2010, p.163). Australia and Assange The cultural upbringing of Julian Assange can be said to have an impact on his personality and actions. As his step-father was a theatre director and as he as a child and his mother were travelling all around Australia along with his performances, Assange, as a child, might have felt a detachment from his regional roots that usually people have and he might have instead developed a global perspective (Manne, 2011a, p.194). For example, before he was of the age of 14, he had moved from one place to another 30 times and also studied in “37 different schools” (Khatchadourian, 07 June 2010; Mainne, 2011a, p.196). Manne (2011a) has called him “the most consequential Australian of the present time” (p.194). Though it was accidental that Assange was a native of Australia, his country’s remoteness from the prominent mainstream markets of the world might have made it difficult for his enemies including the US authorities to trace his internet foot prints. Being far away from the “Northern hemisphere” where all actions on the world stage are concentrated is a state of being that previous Australian Prime Minister allegedly described as being in the “arse end of the world” (Milliken, 27 June 1994). A “lucky country” in the sense being far away from the problems faced by the rest of the world, Australia is theoretically also an ideal place to begin talks about a new anarchic social order. And another important aspect is that Australia has so far resisted attempts by countries like the US to make it prosecute Assange for treason and similar offenses and also Australia has officially stood by Assange and proclaimed his right as a citizen, though under political and public pressure inside the country (CNN, 06 December 2010). Conclusion Bradley Manning, the man who gave all the leaks to Julian Assange risking his own job and personal safety is a citizen of the US. So it becomes evident that a Julian Assange is possible anywhere in the world given the new communication frontiers and possibilities that are being opened up. Manning is charged with copying classified information into his private computer, giving away information on national defense to an outside source, and helping the enemy which calls for capital punishment, and he is awaiting a court martial (Nicks, 23 September 2010). Julian Assange is facing an extradition trial in London as per the request of Swedish authorities, on the sexual abuse cases against him filed in Sweden (Booth, 13 July 2011). And the cases are believed by many to be politically motivated (Booth, 13 July 2011). Such dangerously consequential efforts by such ordinary persons is indicative of the general and worldwide frustration that people feel against the ways in which powerful nations and mighty corporations control the lives and fate of ordinary citizens by way of dirty politics, wars, business. And the rules of the world dictated by countries like the US seem to be tilting as is evident from the statement of the United Nations' Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Frank Larue that Assange and his WikiLeaks employees had immunity against prosecution for the information that they published (Hall, 09 December 2010). This stand was taken on the argument that: If there is a responsibility by leaking information it is of, exclusively of the person that made the leak and not of the media that publish it. And this is the way that transparency works and that corruption has been confronted in many cases (Hall, 09 December 2010). This signals a positive desire towards better transparency in the global mindset. The support groups for WikiLeaks and Assange are growing worldwide. And the global politics is finding a new paradigm in the free communication spaces opened up by the same. References Booth, R. 13 July 2011. Julian Assange extradition appeal: QCs clash over ‘conceptions of consent’, The Guardian, (20 September 2011) < http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/13/julian-assange-appeal-sexual-complaints> CNN, 06 December 2010. Australia: Assange allowed to return home, CNNWorld, (20 September 2011), < http://articles.cnn.com/2010-12-06/world/australia.wikileaks_1_wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-law-enforcement-mirror?_s=PM:WORLD> Crossrhythms. 20 December 2010. WikiLeaks and Julian Assange: cyber-activism or cyber-anarchism?, Crossrhythms, (17 September 2011) < http://www.crossrhythms.co.uk/articles/life/Wikileaks__Julian_Assange_CyberActivism_or_CyberAnarchism/42469/p1/> Cybersafety, 09 March 2011. Cyber-activism and cyber-warfare major IT security topics in 2011, Cybersafety, (18 September 2011) < http://www.cybersafety.co.za/?p=377> Elazar, D.J. and Marbach, J.R. 2004. Opening cybernetic frontiers: cities of the priarie, Transaction Publishers, New Jersey. Frontline Club Discussion on WikiLeaks with Julian Assange, 2 July 2011, television program, C-Span, London. Horne, D. 2008. The lucky country, Penguin Group, London. Interview with Noam Chomsky, 30 November 2010, television programme, Democracy Now, Boston, MA. Khatchadourian, R. 20 May 2011. Manning, Assange and the espionage act, The NewYorker, (18 September 2011) < http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/05/manning-assange-and-the-espionage-act.html> Khatchadourian, R. 07 June 2010. No secrets: Julian Assange’s mission for total transparency, The New Yorker, (20 September 2011), < http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?currentPage=all> Kempkark, B. 22 December 2010. Sex, politics and Assange, Scoop, (18 September 2011) Kick, R. 2001. You are being lied to: the disinformation guide to media distortion, historical whitewashes and cultural myths, The Disinformation Company, New York. Larsen, K. 10 June 2011. How WikiLeaks have changed today’s media, CNNWorld, (20 September 2011), < http://articles.cnn.com/2011-06-10/world/wikileaks.journalism_1_julian-assange-wikileaks-reuters-journalists?_s=PM:WORLD> Manne, Robert. 2011a. Making trouble: essays against the new Australian complacency, Black Inc., Collingwood. Manne, Robert. 05 March 2011b. Inside the brain of WikiLeak’s Julian Assange, The Australian, (18 September 2011), Milliken, R. 27 June 1994. Keating's rear view of the lucky country causes storm: careless remarks have damaged the PM's nationalist stance, writes Robert Milliken in Sydney, The Independent, (20 September 2011), < http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/keatings-rear-view-of-the-lucky-country-causes-storm-careless-remarks-have-damaged-the-pms-nationalist-stance-writes-robert-milliken-in-sydney-1425378.html> Nicks, Denver. 23 September 2010. Private Manning and the making of WikiLeaks, This Land Press, (19 September, 2011), < http://thislandpress.com/09/23/2010/private-manning-and-the-making-of-wikileaks-2/>. St Amant, E.A. and Smashwords Inc. 2010. Articles in dissident philosophy, Edward A St Amant, Canada. Takaros, 13 July 2011. How WikiLeaks has changed today’s media, Support Julian Assange, (19 September 2011) < http://www.support-julian-assange.com/how-wikileaks-has-changed-todays-media/> Wright, R. ‘Is Julian Assange helping the neocons?’, in Alexander Star, Open secrets: Wikileaks, War and American Diplomacy, The New York Times Company, New York. Read More