Ethics Assignment On

Wikileaks & Ethics

Submitted to: Prof. Pathik Variya Centre for Management Studies DDU, Nadiad

By: Hunny Goyal (14) Jagrut Patel (28) Parth Shah (44) Nilay Thakkar (51)

What is Wikileaks? WikiLeaks is a multi-jurisdictional public service designed to protect whistleblowers, journalists and activists who have sensitive materials to communicate to the public. Since July 2007, we have worked across the globe to obtain, publish and defend such materials, and, also, to fight in the legal and political spheres for the broader principles on which their work is based: the integrity of their common historical record and the rights of all peoples to create new history. They believe that transparency in government activities leads to reduced corruption, better government and stronger democracies. All governments can benefit from increased scrutiny by the world community, as well as their own people. They believe this scrutiny requires information. Historically that information has been costly - in terms of human life and human rights.

Information Leakage Process:

About Our Project: Our Project theme is centered about the different ethical views which are incorporated in the business ethics & how this views influencing the whole world & their subjects. Large amount of private information is disseminating around the world without barrier that for whom is that sort of information is most important. Relevance of the Information and their effects on the peoples around the world is will be the discussion issue in this assignment. For analyzing this information effect around the world & what can its transparency leads to will be most described the various cases of Wikileaks around the world which is prima facie of how the information is collected around the world & through leakage of that information in front of the public, how it affect the government, Organizations & MNCs which are involved in that particular issue. We have applied various modern ethical views like: Utilitarian Approach Ethics Virtue Approach Information Ethics Approach Kantian View

As there is not a clear demarcation line between the Right & Wrong in ethics. As several times the situation arises that an act is right for a party while being wrong to the other one. So avoiding all the clashes we are going to stick to the generalize views as been presented by the above 4 approaches.

Utilitarianism Approach
Utilitarianism is a general term for any view that holds that actions and policies should be evaluated on the basis of the benefits and costs they will impose on the society. Utility is the inclusive term used to refer to any net benefits produced by an action.

Utilitarianism: advocates maximizing utility matches well with moral evaluations of public policies appears intuitive to many people helps explain why some actions are generally wrong and others are generally right Here we will analyze the utilitarian approach in the context of WikiLeaks case. There are two basic questions asked by Luciano Floridi: (1) Is whistle blowing ethical, even when motivated by resentment and the desire to harm is a target? This question distinguishes between (a) the act of whistle blowing and (b) the underlying motives (2) Is WikiLeaks facilitation of whistle blowing ethical, even if it might put at risk innocent people. This question throws light on further two points:

(a) What are Julian Assanges motivations in leaking all these documents? (b) Does leaking these documents harm innocent people?

Further Floridi suggests that the deontologist sees the relevant rule to be about truth tellingtelling the truth and never lying is an absolute must

But there are further questions for the deontologist.

Much depends on the formulation of the rule. Distinguish between

Do not lie Tell the truth always Always tell everyones truth

Assange is not just telling the truth about things he already knows and is being asked about. He is going out and obtaining other peoples information and disseminating it. The Utilitarian Approach, focusing on the consequences that the publications of WikiLeaks have on the well-being of all parties that are affected directly or indirectly. There are two sides to consider:

On the one hand, the uncovering of misconduct and the increased transparency of the government are of such importance that the publications benefit society as a whole. So it alleviates the opinion making and leads to a greater understanding of governmental work. Here this point talks about the benefit of the society in terms of the transparency of how the government works.

On the other hand the publications may threaten the national security and so harm society. They lead to a society with decreased integrity which may eventually result in less communication, more technical restrictions and so in less freedom.

Here the information disseminated by the Wikileaks was of the great importance to some countries like U.S., Afghanistan etc. That information should not have been revealed to the public because there is a threat to national security to those countries. Also the means from which the information was collected was unethical.

Margaret Somerville says that good ends do not justify wrong means. The information was leaked by Bradley Manning to Julian Assange. The original leaker of the video material known as

Collateral Murder, and the hundreds of thousands of documents known as Afghanistan and Iraq War Logs, and US diplomatic cables, was in a position of trust. This trust was vi olated when the materials were passed on to WikiLeaks.

Bradley Manning was a US Army intelligence analyst at the Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq. In May,2010. Manning was first arrested in connection with the release of a video by WikiLeaks, titled Collateral Damage that showed the shooting deaths of Iraqi civilians and two journalists in 2007 by a US helicopter gunship.

On 1 March 2011, Manning was charged with 22 additional counts, replacing the previous charges, including violations of Articles 92 and 134 of the US Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the Espionage Act, which include:

(1) Knowingly giving intelligence to the enemy (2) Aiding the enemy through indirect means (3)Wrongfully causing intelligence to be published on the Internet (4) Transmitting national defense information (5) Theft of public property or records. As we can see, Manning has breached all the codes of conduct as a U.S. army man. He has knowingly disseminated highly sensitive information to WikiLeaks which can be used by enemies to harm U.S. He has wrongfully transmitted national defense information over the internet which can be harmful for any country as well as the people of the country. That is a cost to the people of the country. He is also charged with theft of public property or records which is also unethical.

VIRTUE ETHICS
Virtue ethics basically focuses on a persons character and the virtues that a particular persons holds for evaluating and determining the ethical behavior. It contains three approaches:1. Normative Ethics. 2. Deontology. 3. Consequentalism.

In this case Bradley Manning has been taken as a whistleblower as of working in U.S. Army but leaked some important informations:1. Bagdad Airstrike Video Collateral Murder 2. Granai Airstrike 3. Iraq War Logs 4. Afghan War Logs 5. Cablegate

NORMATIVE ETHICS:-

Study of Ethical action

It consist of the set of questions that arise how one ought to act and standards for rightness and wrongness of actions, and it is a perspective One rather than descriptive. As it is about the study of ethical actions two main questions arises from the Bradley manning case:-

I.

Does what Bradley manning done was it ethical? Actually in the case of Cablegate it was unethical as he breaches the organizations rules and passing the security information which might result out in a national security threat.

Otherwise in all the other four cases mentioned above excluding the Cablegate one Bradley Mannings virtue and his actions were ethical one. And these cases are needed to be shown to the public.

II.

Is the U.S. Government act as being ethical to Bradley Manning? No the government is treating him in an unethical manner. The reasons stated by Bradley Manning are as follows:a) I am being treated differently from any other detainee at the Quantico Brig. While the PCF Commander follows the recommendation of the Brig Psychiatrist in dealing with other detainees, this does not happen in my case. Other detainees usually remain on MAX custody or in POI Status for about two weeks before they are downgraded. I, however, have been left to languish under the unduly harsh conditions of MAX Custody and POI Status since my arrival on 29 July 2010. In fact, I am currently the only detainee being held under MAX Custody and the only detainee being held in POI status by the Brig. Any objective person looking at the above facts would have to conclude that this treatment is unjustified.

b) On 18 January 2011, CWO4 Averhart placed me on Suicide Risk, over the recommendation of Capt. Hocter and the defense forensic psychiatrist, Capt. Moore. His decision was also in violation of Secretary of Navy Instruction (SECNAVINST) 1649.9C Para-graph 4205.5d. As a result of being placed on Suicide Risk, I was confined to my cell for 24 h a day. I was also stripped of all clothing with the exception of my underwear. Additionally, my prescription eyeglasses were taken away from me. Due to not having my glasses, I was forced to sit in essential blindness during the day. I remained on Suicide Risk until 21 January 2010. The determination to place me on Suicide Risk was without justification and therefore constitutes unlawful pretrial punishment.

c) Under my current restrictions, in addition to being stripped at night, I am essentially held in solitary confinement. For 23 h/day, I sit alone in my cell. The guards checked on me every five minutes during the day by asking me if I am okay. I am required to respond in some affirmative manner. At night, if the guards cannot (sic) see me clearly, because I have a blanket over my head or I am curled up towards the wall, they will wake me in order to ensure that I am okay. I receive each of my meals in my cell. I am not allowed to have a pillow or sheets. I am not allowed to have any personal items in my cell. I am only allowed to have one book or one magazine at any given time to read. The book or magazine is taken away from me at the end of the day before I go to sleep. I am prevented from exercising in my cell. If I attempt to do push-ups, sit-ups, or any other form of exercise I am forced to stop by the guards. Finally, I receive only 1 h of exercise outside of my cell daily. My exercise is usually limited to me walking figure eights in an empty room.

DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS:- Duty or Obligation based ethics Rightness or wrongness of action based on how action adheres to rules. In this it basically describes and correlates with the Cablegates case in which Bradley manning has breached the rules and regulation of the organizations by passing the information of the most important documents. So, this defines the wrongness of action based on the organizations rule.

CONSEQUENTIALISM:-

It shows that the consequences of ones conduct are the

ultimate basis of any judgment about the rightness of that conduct.

In this approach it basically shows that the virtues of Bradley manning are ethical ones and they were for the information providing purpose which will be a right one and the peoples getting benefited by this as they will be aware by such kind of information.

Information Ethics Approach

In this Approach we are going to see the impact on information leakage can cause how much Carnegie to the Stature of a Country. This field of Ethics has been originated from the U.S. itself around 20 years back in the middle of 1980s & we will try to see the effect of this branch of ethics on the nation. It is defined as the branch of ethics that focuses on the relationship between the creation, organization, dissemination, and use of information, and the ethical standards and moral codes governing human conduct in society Normally Information Ethics is subdivided into different branches. They are as follows:

Library ethics Cyber Ethics Media Ethics Bio information Ethics Business information ethics Computer Ethics

In the following case of ethic regarding Bradley Manning we are going to keep our focus on Cyber, Media & Computer Ethics. Information Ethics approach on Bradley Manning versus U.S. Govt. is based on the 3 roles : Realpolitik Legitimacy Retaliation

As we know that Manning had revealed various types of confidential documents like Collateral Murder, Granai Air Strike, Iraq War logs, Afghan War Diary, Cable gate etc. As the private information about the state policy in various wars has been revealed in the front of the public which will jeopardize the image of the nation & infringed the social, economical & political interest deriving from the policies created for maintaining the Legitimacy on the peoples of the country. After all, any framework of power, especially a states regime, needs legitimacy to insulate itself from critical questions regarding its utility. Consider if the important papers were massed to the world then it would hamper the image of the U.S. in the international front & affect them in the political & the economic aspects. To maintain legitimacy and power, the state needed to ensure that the impact of the release of this information was minimized and attention taken from the contents to the threat that the whistle-blower posed to the state, in the name of national security. Little concern or attention was given towards the details and the content of the leaked documents (i.e., redirection). Any problems revealed remain unacknowledged. The only concern was and remains that someone threatened US control of information. On the other hand, while the diplomatic cables may not reveal crimes and misdeeds of the magnitude found in the war logs, they still deteriorate foreign policy and diplomatic misconduct. Many of the emails reveal relatively dull details about US foreign relations; however, they also unveil a darker side of US diplomacy. Another cable unveiled US meddling in Haitian politics. The exposure from the disclosure of the cables could potentially undermine foreign relations which are vital for a functioning body of international legal system. The cables shown how, in many situations, the United States are largely not concerned with maintaining foreign relations for ethical or moral reasons. Rather, the relationships were manipulated and maintained for the states own interests. Thus, revealing this information threatened not only current relationships, but the means in which future actions might be received. At last, To deal with the all the Problems which are aroused due to the leakage of the

information, it became mandatory for the govt. to take the role of retaliation to stop the Manning activities which are posing serious threats for the image & several policies of the U.S. Govt. & national security. In the case of Manning, the states reactions included his arrest, and giving specic and general deterrence as well as a means to redirect the focus from the content of the released information, to the criminal whistle-blower.

Another Important point also realizes as in context of the Information Ethics that it s right for someone to leak such crucial information for the not so known public interest & it really helped to the cause of mankind. As this issue is not been able to clearly demarcated in this topic but surely it will going to deteriorate the image of the U.S. & also affect the relations with the other govt. around the world which will create tension in the relations between the other nations & common people will be crucified & pay the price for this. Moreover, being in Army of the U.S., the prima facie act for the Manning is to serve the country & act in the way to betterment of the govt. & in the betterment of the people whom he was belonging. His all interest comes after these duties towards the nature. He can act according to his will after fulfilling his basic services to the interest of the country.

Kantian View
1. We must act only on reasons we would be willing to have anyone in a similar situation act on. This is universalizability and reversibility approach. 2. Individuals generally must be left equally free to pursue their interests. 3. An interest is important enough to raise to be a right if: We would not be willing to have everyone deprived of the freedom to pursue that interest. The freedom to pursue that interest is needed to live as free and rational beings. 4. Never use people only as a means to your ends, but always treat them as they freely and rationally consent to be treated and help them pursue their freely and rationally chosen ends. Based on the idea that humans have a dignity that makes them different from objects. Kantian View for Wiki leaks Kant argued that publicity is required in order to have peace within a society. No information should be kept secret as this involves lying and prevents individuals from understanding their situation. According to the categorical imperative lying is always wrong. Kant would have strongly supported Wiki Leaks.

Kant maintained that democracies (Republics) would not go to war against one another, because the interests of the ruling bodies within these democracies are generally identical with the interests of those who are governed by them, because the worth of the individual has become a part of the understanding of the state, and because and here is the crucial point for usthe international relationships in democracies are public: there arent any secret subsidiary agreements to international treaties; for every citizen, everything is transparent and can be checked on, and those who rule in democracies tend to avoid all

duplicity and secret policies. This condition of publicity constitutes the centrepiece of Kants democratic peace: The democratic form of government will ensure peace between republics, independent of their particular interests, only when the goals of regimes in international politics are transparent and public. Manning revile this information of US military was for people of US. This information was threat for US government and US Economy as well as US reputation in world. The information of cable gate scandal was revile by manning throw wiki leaks was favourable for people of USA. The other information like Afghan war diary, Iraq war logs are not useful for people.

If we consider Kantian view then manning reviles that information that not right for government of USA. If we suppose that manning rule the government then they should not in fever of revile that information.

Conclusion
As we have seen all the 4 Ethical Approaches on the Wikileaks Cases of Bradley Manning & their effects & consequences for the U.S. Govt. & peoples. All the 4 approaches i.e. Utilitarian, Virtue Ethics, Information Ethics & Kantian showed us the different perspectives related to the case & how it ethically affects the nation & the mankind. Starting from the Utilitarian which shows the benefits of all & to the extremities of Kantian Thinking of Putting foots in other shoes with the principles of Reversibility & Universalism. And passing through the Virtue Ethics which is imbibed in an individuals action & also discussing the effects of Informational Ethics which shows how information leakage results to the deterioration of Govt. Legitimacy & national security.