Opinion: How About a Nobel Prize for Assange?

(Dec. 10) -- "[T]he Nobel Committee has chosen someone who has been an eloquent and courageous spokesman for the advance of universal values through peaceful and nonviolent means, including his support for democracy, human rights and the rule of law." -- statement by President Barack Obama on the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to imprisoned Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo.

There is now another imprisoned "courageous spokesman for the advance of universal values through peaceful and nonviolent means" whom the Nobel Committee should be considering for next year's award: Julian Assange.

Through a series of leaks -- first of military documents concerning the United States' ongoing and doomed efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq; now of cables unveiling a hodgepodge of diplomatic duplicities -- Assange's organization, WikiLeaks, has offered up an unflattering portrayal of U.S. foreign policy.

It's the first real stab at a correction of the crusading, lawless Bush years that President Obama, the impulsive Nobel Committee's designee two years ago, has perpetuated.

The recent diplomatic leaks -- a mere 960 or so so far, all first published by the world's most prestigious newspapers -- have revealed, among many other outrages:

• Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's illegal (under the U.S.-signed 1961 Vienna Treaty) ordering of her diplomatic employees to spy on United Nations personnel.
• A U.S. policy that precludes U.S. personnel in Iraq from investigating atrocities committed against civilians.
• Saudi Arabia is still the major funder of al-Qaida and an advocate for an "Arab army" to confront Hezbollah in Lebanon.

But rather than calling for congressional investigations, American politicians and a largely sycophantic press have targeted the messenger.

Sarah Palin's recent tweets implicitly call for Assange's assassination. Without any evidence, Jeffrey Kuhner of the right-wing Washington Times writes that the leaks could lead to many Americans and their allies "being killed, tortured or targeted by insurgents." And that's also the White House line. (Also note that the administration is showing much more resolve going after Assange than Osama bin Laden, who killed 3,000 Americans and is probably, at this moment, happily sipping a cup of tea.)

Kuhner's charge is the same line the Nixon administration trotted out against Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers and who today calls Assange a hero. But in fact no lives were endangered by Ellsberg's revelations, and many undoubtedly were saved by the turn in public opinion that helped end the Vietnam War.

The Atlantic's David Samuels laments: "It is dispiriting and upsetting for anyone who cares about the American tradition of a free press to see Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Robert Gibbs turn into H.R. Haldeman, John Erlichman and John Dean. We can only pray that we won't soon be hit with secret White House tapes of Obama drinking scotch and slurring his words while calling Assange bad names."

There's also been talk of trying Assange under the 1917 Espionage Act, a shameful piece of legislation supported by Woodrow Wilson to stifle dissent. Legal scholars agree that the act is unlikely to ensnare Assange.

Instead he has been jailed in England because of unrelated sexual assault charges brought before a Swedish court, which Assange's defenders believe may be a set up. Still, the charges are the charges, and the women are entitled to their day in court. What's more, I trust Sweden's justice system, which doesn't torture its detainees or deny them legal rights, more than our own.