I have rewritten the article here User:Callsfortruth/sandbox1 in the manner that I think it should be presented. I backed every edit that I made regarding the cables with secondary sources (from newspapers, media outlets, think tanks, etc.) and I phrased edits that are already referenced by secondary sources in the way that they are mentioned therein. 

Furthermore, I removed all edits that are referenced only by an online CV, as it is a primary source and cannot be considered as reliable. 

Lastly, I did not add a criticism section, yet I added subsections, which do not mention corruption outright, but do mention that there are allegations. All of these are properly sourced, and edits that portray the person in a negative light, according to guidelines, should only be removed if they are poorly sourced or unsourced, which is not the case. If the article was devoid of any properly-sourced mentions of criticism, then it would be a hagiography, which I believe is not the purpose of an encyclopedia.