To date some 2000 dispatches were published

Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, the Tunisian President overthrown, has been, to date, the most important collateral victim of WikiLeaks A few weeks before the collapse of his regime and his departure into exile in Saudi Arabia, the publication of the comments made in June 2008 by the American Ambassador, Robert Godec, on corruption at the top of the Tunisian State and in the entourage of the now deposed tyrant has contributed to further discredit his regime. But these information were not the determining factor, far from it, which is a popular and democratic revolution and political root causes are in the total absence of opening during more than a quarter of a century. At most, the effect produced by WikiLeaks has been to strengthen the feeling in the population that the United States did not support Ben Ali and his clan.

Since November, site Internet WikiLeaks, passing by the filter of several major newspapers in the world, "New York Times", "Spiegel", "The world", "El Pais", "the guardian" - distilling some of the some 250,000 cables of American diplomats obtained by a computer without precedent "leak". But what had been announced as a "11 September diplomacy" by Franco Frattini, the Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs, and other diplomats, is not produced. To date, some 2,000 dispatches were published. A small party tip of the iceberg. And continues to drop-to-drops, without that we perceive major earthquake on the front of international relations.

Their effect, well beyond the wrath of politicians against the founder of the site, Julian Assange, or debates on diplomacy at the time of transparency, is however still very far from can be gauged accurately. For many diplomats and observers, the majority of these cables are essentially confirmation of what was already known and are not strictly speaking revolutionary revelations.

In the Zimbabwe, for example, the Prime Minister, Morgan Tsvangirai, is now under judicial investigation for treason following the publication of an American telegram from 2009. According to this cable, Morgan Tsvangirai spoke in private conversations, the question of sanctions against his country with American, British, French and Dutch ambassadors and a representative of the European Union. The greatest danger for the opponent ever to President Robert Mugabe, is that the investigation was initiated by the Attorney General of Zimbabwe, Johannes Tomana, the subject of individual sanctions of the United States. "WikiLeaks seems to reveal relationships of complicity between citizens of the Zimbabwe and the aggression from the outside world, including the United States," said the latter to a Harare newspaper. But, again, is that WikiLeaks the head of the serious threats facing Tsvangirai and Mugabe will remain for years in power

Another example, assertions that the former President Gabon Omar Bongo, who died in 2009 in Spain, financed French political parties are not strictly speaking revelations, although American telegrams suggest, for the first time, a diversion of funds from the Bank of Central African States.

In another area, information on the "repeated" requests of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia to the United States to attack the Iran to prevent it from developing a nuclear bomb did not cause a conflagration between the two countries. Nothing, in any case, which Vienna fundamentally disrupt the geopolitical situation in the region, where the Saudi Sunni and the Shia Perse former are major rivals, especially after the overthrow by the us of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

The Yemen, one of telegrams confirms that the bombings against the bases and Al-Qaeda militants for the peninsula Arabian (Aqpa) are the fact of the Americans, not Yemeni forces. Putting the President of this country, Ali Abdullah Saleh, in caught lying, he claimed that his army was at the origin of these strikes. But this cable only confirms his pro-American tropism.

It must also be with a lot of precautions which is reported by American diplomats, who, like the others, draw their information from "good sources", journalists, persons present at the meetings or attending conversations and which themselves give their own interpretation. Thus, a Russian diplomat said us recently that was not Nicolas Sarkozy who had the first "assaulted" the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sergei Lavrov, in 2008, as was suggested in a note published by WikiLeaks, but "the contrary." Each its truth.

To date, the main consequence of the WikiLeaks case was concerned the chanceries and leaders around the world. Because there is no doubt reported truths which are embarrassing. And the publication of this archival well before the time fixed by the countries-vingt-cinq years in France, less in most Western countries especially in the United States - may undoubtedly to question a system of relations based on trust between the interlocutors. Surely, it will force the diplomats to work otherwise. From there to say that after this publication, nothing to never be as before in world diplomacy, there is a step that we must be careful to cross. For the time being, the revelations of WikiLeaks have particularly merit to offer to the historian a view without precedent in international relations at the beginning of the 21st century. It will thus years of analysis before applying the best fruit. The "great night of diplomacy" will not happen overnight or in a few months.