Spiller of beans, and State vs open society

Release of Wikileaks cofounder Julian Assange, following a plea deal with the US Department of Justice, ends nearly 15 years of legal battles that were essentially a tussle between freedom of expression and a government’s determined effort to keep its secrets. Assange, who shot into global prominence with the 2010 and 2011 publication of military and government documents of US activities in Iraq and Afghanistan, and diplomatic cables, was wanted by the US on espionage charges. The Australian, who faced 18 charges relating to stealing of military files carrying 175 years’ imprisonment, will plead guilty to one count of espionage, with a sentence of 5 years, that will be offset against the time he has served in British prison. Like the house, the state always wins.

Wikileaks demonstrated the immense power governments, even in liberal democracies, have over their citizens and the extent to which a state will go to protect that power. Assange made us confront the ease with which governments use ‘national security’ as a default rabbit to be pulled out of the hat. AI will only augment this power exponentially. So, it’s all the more urgent to establish safeguards that protect privacy while considering the needs of genuine national security and interest.

Another aspect of free expression that Assange put the spotlight on is the question of desirability. Assange was a hero of the civil liberties community when he published the US military files stolen by Chelsea Manning, but his image was dented when in 2016 he published the Democratic National Committee emails, stolen by Russian hackers, a move that worked favourably for Donald Trump‘s election as US president. Free speech isn’t unalloyed good, but one mediated by who gains from it.