I had no idea of the motivations of Assange stated in that article.  The idea of the leakage being to force governments to cut their communications back to extreme secrecy, thereby crippling the ability of "authorities" to sit at leisure and divy up the largesse and power of their respective positions as slavemasters.  Sort of a soft revolution, or trim of power by information.  The electronic version of freedom of the press.  

When I think of the possibilities for free, universal, and real-time information exchange to bring change I cannot help but think that the days of the free internet are numbered.  And are we not indeed seeing movement in that direction? However, the complexity of this electronic beast may be an unstoppable catylist for freedom.  It may be very close to being able to out evolve any attempts at countermeasure, staying one step ahead in defiant immunity from control.

The author then warns that secrecy of diplomacy is needed to allow diplomacy to reign instead of physical conflict.  The obvious flaw is that this assumes the legitimacy of strangers to deciding how your money and life will be used to benefit other strangers in far away lands.  Even accepting the paradigm of statism what great need is there of diplomatic secrecy if it is not to be decided behind the scenes that somebody is going to get the royal shaft?

Was it diplomacy over physical conflict when arab leaders expressed their consent for bombing Iran?