Edward Snowden recently said in an interview that “the mission is already accomplished”, referring to the changes and re-assessments in US surveillance policy against targets both foreign and domestic. His revelations have drawn the ire of many world leaders, which highlighted US espionage against allies such as Germany, and relatively friendly countries such as Brazil. This is of course completely understandable- no country wants to be spied on any more than an individual wants people to know their credit card or social security numbers. Just this weekend, President Obama gave a personal pledge to Angela Merkel that there would be no ore US spying on Germany, describing previous actions as “a mistake.”
In terms of international relations theory, I personally
adhere to what is known as the English School, which is essentially a middle
ground between the poles of Liberalism (the idea that countries can and will
cooperate for the common good) and Realism (the notion that countries will act
only in their own self-interests and that one state’s gain is another state’s
loss). Insofar as I adhere to this balanced view, I do tend to lean more toward
the Realist side (in spite of some of my previous writings, such as calls for
greater Russia-US cooperation). My belief in this theory is based upon the
conclusion that I’ve reached that there are some areas in which countries will
often cooperate, such as development and human security. Espionage, however, is
one of those areas in which is really and truly is every country for
themselves. In this there is no honor, and everything is fair.
In the same vein that President Obama apologized to Germany
for American espionage against its major ally, Obama nevertheless stated that
the US will continue to gather information of interest to know what other
governments’ intentions are. "There is no point in having an intelligence
service if you are restricted to the things that you can read in the New York
Times or Der Spiegel" the President said. (Note: there is a branch of
intelligence-gathering known as “open source” intelligence, or OSINT for short,
that entails things like reading other countries’ newspapers, etc., and the CIA
does hire analysts for this specific purpose. Needless to say, this type of
intelligence is rather limited, but it is still a part of the intelligence
process).
Some of the US’s strongest allies have engaged in espionage
and intelligence gathering against the US. My guess as to why Hebrew is listed
as a critical language by the FBI (which is the organization tasked with the
bulk of US civilian counter-intelligence operations) is because of the vast
Israeli espionage operations against the US, famously personified by former
Navy intelligence analyst Jonathan Pollard, and more recently exemplified by
Israeli eavesdropping on US telecommunications. Technically speaking, the US
does not spy on Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom. Yet the truth of the
matter is, I have often wondered if, in the shadowy, darkest and most profound
depths of the CIA or MI6, there is a tiny cadre of people tasked with spying on
even these most important allies.
France’s main civilian intelligence agency, the DGSE, was also
found to be conducting corporate and economic espionage against the US in the
1990’s, particularly against firms such as Texas Instruments and ABM. (There is
a famous case when a young US Marine tackled a French minister at an arms show
when the minister tried to wipe his hand against a US stealth aircraft. Had the
minister been allowed to touch it, he could have collected a sample of the
coating which gave the fighter jet its stealth quality). Of course the biggest
targets of intelligence-gathering and espionage for the US are China and
Russia--and this intel-gathering goes both ways. The latter want our trade and
technology secrets, while we in the US want to know what they’re up to, what
their capabilities are and how much of the dirt they already have on us, etc.
The aforementioned points highlight the other side of
espionage known as economic or industrial espionage. Many may be more inclined
to associate this term with Michael Douglas as Gordon Gekko using an ambitious
Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen) to gather insider information on stocks. But this is
not simply an issue of Wall Street hotshots and the SEC. Corporate espionage is
a very real part of current international espionage, and its execution is not
limited to other companies (for more details, check out Luke Bencie’s 2013 book
Among Enemies). Governments are just as prone and privy to corporate, economic
and industrial espionage as are private companies. In fact, one of the major
concerns Brazilian President Dilma Rouseff had was that the US government was
conducting such espionage against Brazilian energy company Petrobras; while
it’s not, strictly speaking, the same thing as Mobil Oil or Total trying to get
inside information on a prospective deal on upstream development operations, it
is an example of government espionage and business espionage blurring the
lines. Foreign governments are just as interested in the activities of foreign
corporations and their subsidiaries as they are the activities of other foreign
governments.
As long as there are corporations, countries and
governments, there will be spying among them as well. This is not to say that
“everybody’s doing it, so it’s okay.” Nevertheless, revelations that the US has
conducted espionage against treaty allies is not the absolute worst thing that
could happen. It may be a breach of trust, but it is not a direct, vicious
assault on another country, either. Revelations that the French government
conducted espionage against the US have not unduly damaged the France-US
relationship. Those who may point to the less-than-smooth Franco-American saga
should note that, from the French side, one does not need to be in lock-step
with their friends or partners 100% of the time in order to still be friends.
My guess is that sooner or later this embarrassing revelation about US
espionage against allies will blow over, and that it will not likely cause
irreparable damage to our relationships with our cherished allies.
No comments:
Post a Comment