Storm over leak of vital sites

December 06, 2010 07:32 pm | Updated November 17, 2021 03:27 am IST - Washington

The internet homepage of Wikileaks is shown in this photo taken in New York on Dec. 1, 2010.  Photo: AP

The internet homepage of Wikileaks is shown in this photo taken in New York on Dec. 1, 2010. Photo: AP

A comprehensive inventory of what the United States considers “critical infrastructure and key resources,” has been published online by WikiLeaks, the whistleblower website, raising the pitch of the debate surrounding its exposé of secret U.S. State Department cables.

According to the cable, dated February 18 2009 and sent from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to all U.S. diplomatic outposts abroad, the State Department requested diplomats to update the “vital” sites list, which included telecommunication infrastructure, gas pipelines, mineral mines, medical research facilities, weapons components manufacturers and transportation hubs.

The sites mentioned in India include chromite mines in Orissa and Karnataka and a company called Generamedix in Gujurat, which the cable suggests is involved in producing chemotherapy agents, including florouracil and methotrexate.

Issuing a request for action to U.S. diplomatic posts world over the Secretary’s cable said the State Department required “compilation and annual update of a of critical infrastructure and key resources that are located outside U.S. borders and whose loss could critically impact the public health, economic security, and/or national and homeland security of the U.S.” The cable added that under the U.S. Patriot Act of 2001 “critical infrastructure” was defined as systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, “so vital to the U.S. [that] the incapacitation or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact” on U.S. national security.

Condemnation of the release of the list followed swiftly, particularly in the United Kingdom, where a Downing Street spokesman was quoted as saying, “We unequivocally condemn the unauthorised release of classified information. The leaks and their publication are damaging to national security in the U.S., Britain and elsewhere.”

However Mark Stephens, the lawyer representing WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange, who is on the run from authorities, was said to have denied that Wikileaks was putting people and facilities at risk.

According to the BBC he said, “I do not think there is anything new in that... What I think is new is the fact that it has been published by Wikileaks and of course we have the Wikileaks factor because a number of governments have been embarrassed by what has happened.”

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.