Why No Israel On Wikileaks?

When the Wikleaks cables started to trickle many in the Arab world had hopes for great insights into what U.S. diplomats really think about Israel and what is being said in private about the constant tension between the Obama administration and Netanyahu.

wikileaks1 n7VLL 19672

The U.S. amped up these expectations prior to Wikileak's releases by speaking to Israel and warning that some of the documents may be embarrassing so here's a heads-up. The Arabs eagerly awaited those dreaded embarrassments. But, alas, none have materialized thus far.

Wikileaks, despite what is being said in the press, has not indiscriminately dumped all 250,000 diplomatic cables but is slowly releasing them and has thus far publicized less than 2,000. Needless to say, there could be a lot of incriminating evidence against Israel in the remaining 248,000 documents. But it does seem interesting that for a nation that figures so prominently in American affairs in the Middle East we have yet to see many documents arrive, whether good or bad.

Why so? It is for several factors: First, U.S. diplomats are loath to criticize or mock Israel or Israelis in their cables because political appointees will look not too kindly on such antagonism and it will hurt one's career advancement to be seen as anything but a rapid Likudnik.

But, secondly, Wikileaks does not have "Top Secret" cables and nothing more than "Secret". Cables arriving from Occupied Palestine, or "Israel", are usually labeled "Top Secret" for reasons of domestic politically sensitivity toward Israel. So it's also a question of access which Wikileaks does not have.

Lastly, there's this:

Other observers offer an alternative explanation for the lack - so far - of many insightful cables out of Israel. For example, Ed Abington, a former U.S. consul general in Jerusalem (1993-1997 ) suggests, on facebook, that it might have something to do with the level of information being offered out of the country. "The U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv has been so out of the loop for the last six years that their reporting is about what you read in the Israeli press (probably where they get most of their information ). "There's a channel U.S. embassies use for very sensitive information and I don't think WikiLeaks has those cables. As for Tel Aviv, the last two ambassadors have not been risk-takers and have had a very low profile. I doubt they have been willing to rock the boat, and may not have had much, if any, inside information." What would be more interesting, Abington persists, is the reporting from the U.S. Consulate in Jerusalem. "Where is that reporting?" he asks.

The world wants to hear about U.S.-Israel relations much more than, say, Tunisia. Wikileaks better have something in the end!