Tweet
Rainbow protest on Gaza massacre to Australia PM Kevin Rudd (photo: Takver)Pro-Cuba, pro-Serbian, pro-Palestinian, pro and anti-Kosovo Independence, Sri Lankan, antiwar and socialist demonstrations were closely monitored by the US Embassy in Canberra, Australia in 2008 and 2009, a secret cable posted by WikiLeaks reveals. The cable also reveals the Embassy kept tabs on Greek, Malaysian, Lebanese, Serbian, Indonesian, Somalian and Sudanese communities in Sydney and Melbourne.
The secret cable is a “security environment profile questionnaire” (SEPQ) sent to the CIA, FBI, US Defense Intelligence Agency and State Department in Washington on March 2, 2009. The US diplomat, who answered the questions, describes both Sydney and Melbourne as cities with communities capable of “mounting very large scale anti-US demonstrations” if “sufficient motivations arise.” During the Israel-Lebanon conflict, 10,0000-15,000 people were brought together for a demonstration.
An itemized list of demonstrations at the US embassy or consulates is included in the cable, suggesting a US official attended each of these demonstrations and attempted to get a head count or regularly contacted police for estimates of how many protesters were present at each demonstration.
CANBERRA:
February 24, 2008 Pro-Serbian demonstration with approximately 70 protesters;
July 4, 2008 Amnesty International demonstrators with approximately 12 protesters;
January 10, 2009 pro-Palestinian demonstration with 300 protesters.
SYDNEY:
January 1, 2008 Amnesty International-300 protesters;
March 8, 2008 Kosovo Independence rally-2000 protesters,
November 11, 2008 Stop the War coalition-12 protesters,
November 16, 2008 Syria(after US Airstirke)-20 protesters,
December 19, 2008 End Iraq War-30 protesters,
December 27, 2008 End Iraq and Afghanistan-40 protesters,
December 29, 2008 Gaza Strip-1500 protesters,
January 3, 2009 Gaza Strip-50 protesters
January 4, 2009 Gaza Strip-15 protesters
January 9, 2009 Gaza Strip-30 protesters
January 15, 2009 Gaza Strip-12 protesters
January 28, 2009 Sri Lankans-50 protesters
January 29, 2009 Sri Lankans-50 protesters
January 30, 2009 Sri Lankans-50 protesters
January 31, 2009 Sri Lankans-50 protesters
February 4, 2009 Sri Lankans-5000 protesters
February 21, 2009 Kosovo-125 protesters
MELBOURNE
February 18, 2008 Anti-Kosovo Independence- 200 protesters
February 22, 2008 Anti-Kosovo Independence-38 protesters
November 5, 2008 Pro-Cuba-13 protesters
January 9, 2009 Anti-war-15 protesters
PERTH
July 25, 2008 Save our Senate/No War/ Socialist Alliance-12 protesters in conjunction with a Secretary of State visit.
September 12, 2008 No war/Socialist Alliance-13 protesters
October 29, 2008 Australia/Cuba Friendship Society-13 protesters
January 22, 2009 Friends of Palestine-50 protesters
All demonstrations are described under the section heading, “Political Violence.” Yet, in only one case did a protest turn violent. In February 2008, at the US Consulate Melbourne, anti-Kosovo independence protesters allegedly threw objects and launched flares at the front window of the building. Protesters marching to the Consulate burned a Victoria State Police vehicle.
The diplomat even concludes the demonstrations are “generally peaceful.” Australian protests are found to be “generally peaceful” as well (though the diplomat notes Australian law enforcement thinks “issue motivated groups with anti-war, anti-globalization or environmental protection agendas have become more organized and more prone to engage in demonstration tactics that have led to some violence since late 2006.”)
So, why does the State Department security questionnaire appear to function on the premise that demonstrations are most likely to lead to political violence? Why is there such contempt for protest underneath the data and assumptions presented in this secret cable?
In daily press briefings throughout the past months, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland has maintained the State Department thinks citizens of the world have the right to “peacefully protest.” For example, when talking about the Iranian people, she told the press, “As you know, we work in Washington, we work at our embassies overseas. In the United States, any group of people, whether they are citizens or whether they are visitors, have the right to peaceful protest.”
The State Department has been very supportive of Syrians’ right to revolt against the regime of Bashar al-Assad. The State Department was supportive of Libyans when they rose up against Gaddafi and the Department eventually came around to supporting Tunisians and Egyptians in their uprisings. Does the State Department consider demonstrations which helped precipitate the fall of dictators to be acts of “political violence”? If WikiLeaks released cables from during the uprisings, would there be a security questionnaire with all the Arab Spring protests that led to the uprising itemized under “political violence”?
Are demonstrations expected to be “politically violent” because they have the potential to turn violent? Or, does it all have to do with what is being protested? One thing one finds when examining the cables is many protests in the Middle East and Africa are mostly regarded as “riots.” Ordinary demonstrations are not something the State Department particularly wishes to see snowball.
Most of the demonstrations are “anti-US” to the officials in the embassy and consulates in Australia. They are anti-American because they happen at the Embassy and Consulates. One sentence in the cable even reads, “Anti-American demonstrations are usually triggered by U.S. foreign policy initiatives and military actions.” The US diplomats know actions upset thousands of Australians, but the diplomats quite frankly do not care. And, violent demonstrations only help US diplomats discredit the “anti-Americanism” that supposedly forms the fabric of the majority of Australian demonstrations.
And, why does the US need to know this kind of information for security purposes? Why is it as important as information on what countries are doing to fight terrorism?
The answer is the US has no problem with pressuring, even meddling in a country’s affairs, if only to get the outcome it desires—whatever will be best for US interests. Yet, it knows that it must consider all the variables, stick to talking points and not apply too much or too little pressure in order to achieve success in getting whatever the US wants from a country’s government.
Thus, the US must keep track of a country’s activists and the ability of communities to organize demonstrations because the US stage-manages its foreign policy, military actions and diplomatic activities. It needs to pay attention to how triggered protests might have an impact on how Australian politicians are willing to be subservient to the US. This is true for most if not all countries and especially true since the Arab Spring. US diplomacy is intensely choreographed and anything that could get in the way must be monitored.
34 Comments
Kevin and others interested in a “left-wing” Australian perspective I have posted a very long comment under Gary Lord’s 30-8-11 WikiLeaks Down Under article – see[ba75 August 31st, 2011 at 1:27 am].
What I find particularly galling in this “security environment profile questionnaire” is the expectation that demonstrations, even those involving relatively small numbers, will turn “politically violent”. I’m not 100% sure what that phrase even means – does the “violence” that happens during an illegal war (Iraq) or an (also illegal) “kinetic intervention” (Libya) count or not? I suppose the recent London riots, where the violence was largely against property/looting, might not – although there’s an ongoing debate about the underlying causes of poverty, social exclusion and police behaviour behind such a sudden and widespread (in at least a dozen cities) upsurge of anger and violence. That might count as ‘political’. Or does “politicallly violent” roughly translate as meaning that the people involved in these demonstrations might have something valid to say about the policies of their government?
I’d also note that very often what turns an otherwise peaceful protest violent is the tactics employed by those charged with policing it. In Britain the ‘kettling’ technique often results in just that outcome and you have to wonder sometimes if in part that’s not the desired effect. Watching the social media and Twitter reporting of the BART protests it’s obvious that the police use provocative tactics to generate just enough of a response to justify an arrest and thereby break up a lawful protest.
Excellent comment. What you say is what I was getting at. You fleshed out the main point I was trying to focus on better than I did, actually.
The premise that political violence will happen at a demonstration is very perverse, especially because if you view protests as being potentially politically violent the police presence will be there to control assembly and even speech and expression. If you don’t operate on this premise but have people there to regulate in the event of violence, it’s much more likely nothing provocative happens. But, maybe law enforcement, working in concert with the FBI (see the questionnaire), is perfectly okay with provoking a violent reaction to discredit protest groups.
Does anyone who comments on FDL think we aren’t on USG shitlist?
I’m going to get double teamed bc I also comment on antiwar.com.
Come sing to me when I get locked up in solitary.
Why it is starting to seem that countries that tolerate US embassy presence are willing participants in the agent provocateur game.
Has nothing to do with “tolerance of U.S. embassies” and everything to do with being on the winning side. U.S.A. is, after all, the big PTB. So most countries willing to suck up to U.S.
Funny no Right Wing or Racist groups get spied on awful funny.
eCHAN so many of us are going to be locked up we will run the joint after every big prison round up of gangs the gangs grow as their numbers let them offer protection and services in Prison which aids recruitment as prisoners who needed us get out and join our gang.
Given everything we know we can make a fortune as Prison lawyers.
Read Zinn.
Being locked up is not so easy.
Uh they were not watching genetically modified crop protests in Europe or was that not in the wiki leaks cable? I would expect them to spy to protest American Corporate interests.
Patrick Henry?
“Give me Liberty, or Give me Death”
Been to jail read Zinn I never said it was easy. I just think it will back fire on the government J Edgar Hoover used to deport Lefties groups that were not deported all seem to grow in membership and power. Which is not what the powers that be want they don’t want us radicalizing the common people.
Why take the cowards way out make them work for it.
If only Republicans would complain about these uses of their tax dollars.
I don’t see anything unusual or particularly alarming in this. The State Department officials are following their mandate, which is to keep a brief on overseas developments. On the other hand, when this is done domestically, it is an entirely different matter. People exercising their Constittional rights toi assemble and petition are at best enemies of an administration, not the state or the country it represents.
When I was in Paris a couple of months ago I was having dinner with a well-placed couple and said I thought the US was 2/3 of the way towards fascism. I would now put it at 3/4. They couldn’t believe it. I think they probably do now. The news is out.
Don’t be so sure of that. Do you know any Russians of a certain age?
A true Chicago street organizer would know that Prison gets you street Cred locking up Lefties is just helping us not the Tea Baggers be seen as the Real opposition to Obama.
No Street Organizer in African American neighborhoods can avoid working with gangs I am now wondering about Obama’s supposed Street Cred.
Lithuanian count?
And France under Sark is 1/2 way to fascism.
Czech Republics first Prime Minster was a Lefty Poet as I recall. Poland’s a Union Organizer who ok later sold out from what I hear.
A study of former soviet republics that went Left and those that went Right would be interesting. We could compare that with their immigration rate to America successful governments have people with no reason to immigrate.
Righty Governments I’m sure got more international and American aid, we can compare living standards and death rates before and after the commies left.
Russia last I heard has seen a huge drop in life span and they have definitely gone Right.
wondering about obamas “supposed street cred” is like wondering about Liberace’s powerful skull shattering right hook. One wonders why anyone would waste time wondering about something campletely halucinatory
for those of you too young: http://blogue.us/2009/09/29/fashion-flashback-liberace/
I am more likely to believe a gay guy growing up in Wisconsin back then had a skull shattering right hook to survive than I am willing to believe in O’s Street Cred.:)
The questionnaire looks more like a generic one that’s geared to the lowest common denominator. That is, a country were there is a security issue and potential dangers. Australia isn’t of course but the person filling out of the forms has to fit the answers to the questions.
Take a look at this cable about Algeria: http://www.aftenposten.no/spesial/wikileaksdokumenter/article4016866.ece Same questions but the answers are a lot different.
I doubt there is anything special about these other then how the country is seen through the eyes of some State Dept drone. You have specific numbers because the drone probably didn’t have much else to add and he needed to fill out the text boxes. I bet France, UK, Russia, etc do the same about the US.
I was talking in boxing terms. I remember Liberace, a reall stylish fellow, but not anyone who, come-the-fuck-on seriously would go a few round with Ali, or Norton. But maybe by virtue of Being Gay AND from Wisconsin, he could have whipped Muhhamd Ali’s ass.Or, maybe not.
This is funnier beyond words.
Yep. Estonian, too.
Boxing terms fine I was going for snark for an average guy who knows chances are he was either very tough or a great actor the slightest suggestion he was Gay back then would have resulted in fights…I don’t think he was a great actor.
No. Mr. Bruni is probably on his way out, unless he can rope in enough Le Pen supporters and moderate Gaullists (what’s left of them). The Left is larger and better organized than here. Martine Aubry is the daughter of the man who ran the EEC for France (forget his name under influence of too much wine). She’s got creds. Not exciting, but she can probably make it if Fabius and Segalen Royal come into the fold. Fabius is past his expiry date; otherwise he would be the obvious candidate.
On all this, I also asked my friends about DSK, whom they know personally. I assumed he was another Rubin, but he is actually a real leftist from the old days. Didn’t do Ecole Normale Superieure, which makes him a clod in certain circles, but solid. He would have been a good President in the present economic circumstances. Probably why the banksters took him down.
It was a different time in some ways. I dont care for the “austin powers” movie franchise but the original flick a few funny moments,one was when myers was going through a list of things that happened since 65 or 66 or whenever it was, and he said without any irony, “Liberace was Gay? didnt see that coming”..thats how it was. Gay was thought of as some kind of hideous perversion, to horrible and criminal to even contemplate. For some benighted clods Gay people are still so, but no one is so naive any more. Liberace was a terrible actor, but a great musician, and, so i hear, threw the wildest and best attended parties in Hollywood.
I’ll keep an open mind.
My general model is there is no Left left. Anywhere.
I’m not a leftie, but unless there is some counterfoil to the radical right, all is lost.
Libya is Sark war, and he WON.
What a chump!
The NFL season starts that night. Will viewers be switched to Obama as breaking news?
I hope so, lol.
@tps: That was pretty much my impression too.
Tone-of-the-questions complaint aside … generally speaking, aren’t the things motivating people to demonstrate in various nations where assigned to conduct diplomacy the exact sort of things our State Department *should* be monitoring (especially stuff we do that pisses folks off … or makes them happy)?