Secret - This is the second-highest classification. Information is classified secret when its release would cause "serious damage" to national security. Most information that is classified is held at the secret sensitivity.
Confidential - This is the lowest classification level of information obtained by the government. It is defined as information that would "damage" national security if disclosed to the public.
Several tens of thousands of the documents provided to and released by Wikileaks were classified as Secret, or documents whose release would cause "serious damage" to national security. Without mitigating factors then, we can say that anyone whose duty it is to safeguard document(s) categorized as "Secret" has committed a serious crime if they willfully and intentionally cause that document/those documents to be released without authorization.
Does Manning have mitigating factors in the release of this information if it is proven that he is the person who released it? For a few of the documents, and for those unfamiliar with the military, it would appear that an argument could be made that he does. Manning was upset about the video he saw that apparently showed a helicopter firing on unarmed civilians in Iraq. This video was one of the first things that Manning turned over to wikileaks.
The problems with the idea of mitigating factors, however, are several. First, of the 250,000+ documents and materials allegedly released by Manning, less than 20 or so at most are whistleblowing in nature. The rest are rather routine diplomatic communications that while routine, are embarrassing to either the US, or one of scores of other countries whose diplomatic messages ended up on SIPRNet and Mannings CD. Another way of describing the release of those non-whistleblowing documents and materials is an action that is harmful to the United States or other countries without any positive impact whatsoever. The release of those materials was a poorly aimed malicious act. Here are some examples:
- The new nuclear plant in Bulgaria has cost overruns http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/07/09SOFIA363.html
- The US Ambassador to Peru opinion on the health of the President of Peru http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2006/12/06LIMA4570.html
- Demographics of the Muslim population in the UK http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/01/09LONDON27.html
- Request by the Vatican for help with setting up a security crisis management team http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/12/08ROME1541.html
That anyone would assert that these four documents, or the vast majority of the rest are whistleblowing or somehow make government better by sunlight is laughable.
Let's now discuss the materials that were whistleblowing in nature, to include the video of the helicopter. If one hasn't been in the military and is not familiar with resources available to military personnel, it might seem that the release of those documents is a mitigating factor in Manning's actions. However, the military provides several resources for military personnel to blow the whistle on fraud, waste and abuse and other unlawful and/or unethical acts. One of the most important of those resources is the various inspector generals.
Most military personnel have at least two or three inspector generals at various levels to which they can go to report wrongdoing. Each of the branches of the military have an inspector general at the branch level. There is an Army Inspector General, an Air Force Inspector General, etc. Then, as each of the branches is broken down into major commands, each of those major commands has an inspector general. Also, many of the subunits under the major commands have IG's (inspector generals). Finally, many forts/posts/bases have an IG for the personnel in that installation to use.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
3
2
