It actually enhances global (and arguably US) security.
That's why Russia and China have among the most to fear from the new dispensation.
The intel biz is changed as never before.
Some think that the problem is one leaker of historic proportion. The problem for the security states is the ability for able users of the WL media to leverage prior knowledge into confirmed hypotheses.
The revelations are not the story, though.
It is in the increased ability within the larger intel community (incl OSI) to be able to think about these things in a new way. (Very opaque intentionally - were talking man's original software). Secrets are no longer - even if locked away from all but the most qualified eyes - safe. Nobody's secrets.
Just part of the battle for the unconscious mind.
Those with a vested interest in keeping up the scam - for the money - are really going to be hurting. But this may take awhile. The obvious takes forever sometimes.
PS WARNING! Today's blandishment d'easter egg takes us to one of the documents in Aftenposten's cache of WL State cables. Our usual disclaimer applies -- as do the following excerpts and screwy commentary:
"Allies differed over whether the Special Committee should focus its efforts only on traditional subjects, such as the threat to NATO from Russian intelligence services, or should expand its reach to look at issues such as the threat to NATO forces in Afghanistan from Al Qaeda."Yikes, this in 2009? And NATO? No wonder NATO Intelligence Reform is a pressing concern.
"The French PermRep argued that the Special Committee should not engage in an assessment of the threat from Russian security services, stating that these proposed topics appeared to have been drafted with a "Cold War" viewpoint -- despite the fact that NATO recently expelled two Russian diplomats for activities inconsistent with their status."Score one for the Frogs there.
"XXXXXXXXXXXX also said that the Committee needed guidance from the NAC to help it pare down a list of 12 possible "normal" threat assessments to the five that the Committee would produce during 2010. The list of twelve included:SMC readers who need the answers to any of these Qs - classified at the NATO XXXXXXXXXXXX level - can choose one of two options. Those with appropriate NATO clearances may obtain a copy from their NATO registry or sub-registry - or else wait for us to post them when we feel like getting around to it.
-- Al Qaeda and Taliban capability in Pakistan and its impact on NATO operations in Afghanistan;
-- Afghanistan: Provision of Logistical Support and Know-How to ISAFs Adversaries;
-- Threat to NATO Operations in Afghanistan from Iranian Intelligence Services;
-- North Koreans U-turn on NBRC: What will be the Strategic Impact of the North Korean Decision to Enhance their Programme?
-- Al Qaeda Presence in Yemen: Threats and Risks to NATO Countries;
-- Somalia: Impact of the Deterioration of the Security Situation in Somalia on NATO Nations;
-- Kosovo: Links between Organized Crime and Political Figures and Subsequent Risks for KFOR;
-- Modus Operandi of Civilian Cover GRU Officers targeting the Advanced Technology Field and What Types of Advanced Technology they are attempting to Acquire;
-- FSB Overseas Operational Activity using International Counter-Terrorism and Law Enforcement Liaison. Consequent Threats to NATO Countries;
-- Initiatives by Subversive/Antagonist Circles towards NATO Targets;
-- Decision-making Process of Extremist Cells: the Role played by Veterans and Religious Leaders; and
-- The Fight against Imperialism, Militarism, and Security Policies: Shared Battlefronts of the NATO Countries Antagonist Mobilisation Front."