Trying to get the bottom of something can be a huge task, particularly when the information that you come across is in stark contrast.

Case in point, recently leaked cables from the US Embassy in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea, effectively bring into question much of what has been published about the former Spanish Colony in recent years. From human rights to the Riggs Bank scandal it seems as though most of what has been put out there has been delivered from a clear position of bias, which makes it difficult to know just exactly what to believe.

If you were to go on what is immediately available in the media today then you could probably form the opinion that Equatorial Guinea is perhaps one of the worst countries in the world in terms of corruption and human rights abuses. If you dig a little deeper, however, you find something else.

Wikileaks release of cables between US diplomats offers readers an entirely different account on the current state of affairs in Equatorial Guinea. Interestingly, where it stands out from the majority of articles that I've come across on the subject, is not just that it is an account from people who were actually living and working in the country at the time of publishing, but also that these cables were not written for the purpose of PR or designed to give the reader a pre-disposed idea of how things are in Equatorial Guinea. They were written with the sole purpose of providing a ground-level view of one of the world's most isolated and least understood countries to interested readers.

To offer just one example of the many opposing accounts of what's has transpired in Equatorial Guinea you don't need to look any further than the now infamous Riggs Bank scandal. Commonly reported in the popular press, the claim is that Equatorial Guinean President Teodoro Obiang and Riggs bank set up phony and deceptive accounts, as well as off-shore dummy corporations in order to receive and pay out large sums, which are only described as ‘services', however, according to the cable the actual study of the record shows that the bank itself was the one who was at fault with regard to its reporting responsibilities, while the accounts associated with EG could be reasonably explained.

According to the cable: ‘Equatoguineans readily accepted Riggs' advice regarding accounts and accounting -- assuming the bank was "acting properly." As the increasing flow of dollar-denominated oil revenues built up, and attractive interest income streams ensued (which was not always the case with EG funds held in the BEAC -- the Central African central bank), individuals associated with the EG government began to open private accounts.  Both the amounts in the government accounts and those in individual accounts are easily in line with amounts generated respectively by oil revenues and private activities of those concerned.  Recognizing the crippling human capacity challenges in the country and the need for western (particularly U.S.) education, the EG government even worked with the bank to set up accounts for two separate scholarship funds, which the bank (poorly) administered.  EG leaders were "surprised" to learn U.S. government investigators took a dim view of this arrangement.'

This is just one small example of some of the contrasting ideas that are being offered on Equatorial Guinea by the press by and large and it's interesting to see just how completely opposite two accounts on the same subject can be. Of course, this is not something new and especially so when you are discussing a country with an impressive amount of new found wealth deriving from one of the world's most sought after commodities such as oil.

Just which account you choose to base your opinion on is entirely up to you and without offering my own on the subject I would encourage any interested reader to go through the cables and come to a conclusion on your own. You might be surprised.

The full transcript of the cables from the US Embassy in Malabo can be found at http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/03/09MALABO27.html