Game Theory and Why Diplomatic Transparency is a Good Thing

The author misses the key point of WikiLeaks: Assange doesn't which to make diplomacy public: he empowers any member of an organization to denounce its contradiction. According to a alarming report by the Washington Post, the current US Intelligence community employs more then two millions people — some who disagree with it and are ready to take risks like Manning. Countries with limited, empowered civil servants don't have anything to fear.

For instance, no nuclear engineer will even leak secret launch codes: why sabotage a project that your support? They might leak information about secret deals with nations that he believes his government shouldn't secretly associate with.

The goal of WikiLeaks (and this is why I commented here and not on the post itself) is communities like Zappos, where every worker is independent, criticizes freely, but agrees enough with the direction to remain loyal. What this prevents is having frustrated people like Manning approached by actual enemies, and have a similar access used for harm.