Edward Snowden has done us all a favour – even Barack Obama
By Edward Luce
For a whole generation, the US is coming to stand for Big Brother
Whether he is a scoundrel or a hero, it is clearer all the time that Edward Snowden has done us a good turn. Shortly before Mr Snowden’s first big download in June, President Barack Obama gave a landmark speech in which he defended the US war on terror while pleading for vigilance against its excesses. Franklin Roosevelt once said: “I agree with you. I want to do it. Now make me do it.” Though Mr Obama was talking about America’s counter-terrorist and data intelligence complexes, his speech contained a similar appeal. Shortly afterwards, Mr Snowden took him up on the challenge.
Mr Obama has yet to provide a convincing response – ask Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff, orGermany’s Angela Merkel. Mr Snowden may yet force him to. From Mr Obama’s point of view there are silver linings to the National Security Agency bombshells. Something of this kind was going to happen sooner or later. If a high-school dropout could get hold of troves of classified information, so can many others. Bradley Manning, a US army private, had already demonstrated that. US intelligence agencies are meant to be smart. Mr Obama now knows how dumb they can be.
ON THIS STORY
- In depth US security state
- US admits spying has ‘reached too far’
- Editorial US pays a price for spying on Merkel
- France under few illusions on US spying
- Snowden has job in Moscow, says lawyer
ON THIS TOPIC
- Germany ready to speak to Snowden over spies
- Google ‘outraged’ by latest NSA claims
- Court declines Miranda documents request
- Congress stands divided on NSA reform
EDWARD LUCE
Mr Snowden has also reminded us that there is more at stake over America’s sprawling data intelligence complex than hunting terrorists. Washington has done a good job of preventing big attacks on the US homeland since the terror attacks of September 2001. Both George W Bush and Barack Obama deserve credit. Both also deserve blame for having over-learned the lessons of 9/11. US intelligence does not have a particularly stellar history. It has a tendency to bungle covert action and to miss what is coming – from the Bay of Pigs debacle in Cuba to the World Trade Center attacks. There is also its extraordinary litany of domestic abuses exposed by the Church committee in the 1970s.
In light of what Mr Snowden has taught us about the rapid growth of the NSA in the past few years, it is worth rereading the report of the 9/11 Commission – the best on intelligence failure yet written. The report blamed the failure to foresee the World Trade Center attacks on “stovepiping” between US agencies. Because of turf protection, nobody was in a position to “connect the dots” between fragmentary clues about flight schools, Saudi visas and so on.
A decade later it is plain that US intelligence overcorrected for 9/11. The days of stovepiping are long gone. Nowadays anyone can download enough classified information to construct Tolstoyan epics about US espionage. Here too, Mr Snowden’s actions have been helpful.
Most of all, Mr Snowden has reminded us that the biggest lesson from 9/11 remains unaddressed. The report said intellectual failure was the ultimate culprit in missing the Twin Towers attacks and stressed the need to “routinise, even bureaucratise, the use of the imagination”. Mr Obama needs no imagination to know how tarnished America’s brand now is. Some of it comes from the recent Washington shutdown and default crisis. But the NSA revelations have added mistrust to complaints about US incompetence. Corrosion of trust between allies and between governments and citizens can breed all sorts of unforeseen consequences. It is the right moment for Mr Obama to start a larger debate about US intelligence.
At some point in the near future he is likely to agree to a weaker version of the code of conduct among allies that exists between the “five eyes” of English-speaking nations. It will be a polite fiction but co-operation will not have been seriously impaired. Neither side of the Atlantic is likely to curtail actual intelligence gathering. And in many cases they should not. Tapping the phones of leaders such as Ms Merkelhas clearly boomeranged – as has the NSA’s siphoning of data from nodal points at the leading US data companies. But eavesdropping on Pakistan’s military should continue to be a no-brainer.
Mr Snowden has also forced us to confront the larger question of US power in a changing world. For all America’s military weight, hard power gets fewer bangs for its buck nowadays. The fate of a US-led world in the coming decades will probably not be decided by a military clash with another large power. It is more likely to be settled by the quality of America’s economy and democracy. For most people around the world who are older than 30, the US is still chiefly seen through those prisms. But, for a whole generation beneath them, it is coming to stand for Big Brother – and not necessarily a benign one. The damage to US soft power – and the weight it lends to those who want to nationalise data storage and balkanise the internet – should not be overlooked.
Why, then, does Mr Obama want to put Mr Snowden behind bars?
The question of Mr Snowden’s motives is secondary. He may be a criminal, or a saint. I suspect he had good reasons. At minimum he will pay for his sins with a lifetime of looking over his shoulder. In the meantime, the rest of us are far more educated than before about how much privacy we have lost and how rapidly. We are all Angela Merkel now.
Mr Obama is enraged and embarrassed by the hammer blows of one giant disclosure after another. But the fallout has given him the possibility of answering his own plea for greater accountability. Back in May, he issued a thinly coded cry for help to rein in the growing US shadow state. We should be grateful that Mr Snowden came forward.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2013. You may share using our article tools.
Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.
Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.
You may be interested in
- BlackBerry founders eye bid consortium
- RBS warns of loss amid restructuring
- An exclusive interview with Bill Gates 892
- Israel launches attacks on military sites in Syria
- US airline regulator relaxes rules on using gadgets in flight
- Court hears of six-year affair between Brooks and Coulson
- François Hollande forces soccer clubs to swallow 75 per cent tax
- Signs of recovery abound but with little consensus on future course
- Microsoft urged to spin consumer business
- Surge in annual house prices amid concern of UK bubble
- No need to worry about too much easy money
- The madness of the $13bn JPMorgan settlement
- Inspirational quotations at work are nothing to shout about
- US Treasury hits at Germany over surplus
- Taxpayers lose out over 'Crossrail effect' on central London property values
- Home sales stall as price rise hopes outstrip mortgage valuations
- Housing boom sets off bidding wars in 'frantic' fight for land
- Cameron plans married couples tax break
- Government to contact UK's non-doms about tax due on remittances
Post your own comment
Sorted by newest first | Sort by oldest first
Multimedia
Tools
- Portfolio
- Topics
- FT Lexicon
- FT clippings
- Currency converter
- MBA rankings
- Newslines
- Today's newspaper
- FT press cuttings
- FT ebooks
- FT ePaper
- Economic calendar
And supposedly intelligent and informed journalists like E Luce would see none of this, why of course because they have their own agenda: America as Big Brother and Russia I suppose reciprocally is the freedom champion.
The end of the article is another howler: Snowden should in fact be congratulated by Obama, because both are trying to fight the "shadow state". No of course Obama the Media Hero cannot be turned into a convinced anti-Snowden himself, he is basically good and honest, only polluted by the politicans around him.
I must say I was rarely as disappointed by a view expressed in an article in the FT as by this one.
I do not accept that those "enemy states" weren't already aware of the extent of activities of the NSA, GCHQ, etc. Given the vast number of people who seem to have had access to all this intelligence material (some 850,000 people in the US forces and outside contractors!) it is reasonably certain that well organised state-sponsored espionage organisations would have found and exploited compromised employees. It was the citizens of the countries doing the spying who were being held in ignorance, not the KGB. Intelligence history is littered with such situations where the "enemy" knew what the electorate were denied knowledge of.
Edward Luce rightly points to one of the conundrums facing the intelligence world - security demands restricting the passing round of sensitive intelligence, but without passing it round it cannot be exploited for advantage (whether that be to prevent a terrorist attack, find out nasty Mr Putin's plans, or smear a domestic political opponent). One thing we have learnt is that the US intelligence organisations have have been extraordinarily careless with the secrets they were supposed to protect.
Another conundrum is the one we are discussing today: to what extent do we need to exercise some control over the extent of eavesdropping activities? Simply shouting 'traitor' and 'treason' is not a useful contribution to that vital debate.
"...Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together..."
The most creative and innovative sector of the American economy, the sector that most represents a future prosperity for American business, is symbolized by Google, a huge organization, whose business model is based on the free flow of information and especially on obtaining the personal data of everyone on an interconnected, frontier-less planet, in order to anticipate and satisfy their every want and desire by knowing even their unconscious needs and motivations. This obviously requires enormous quantities of trust on anyone who uses Google... as users confide to Google, knowingly or unknowingly, things that they would never confide even to their dearest friend or most loved and trusted family member. Trust, friendliness, goodwill then, are the central, essential qualities of Google's business proposition.
Google's antithesis is the NSA, who also wants access to the personal data of everyone and to know (and especially anticipate) their needs and desires, conscious and unconscious in order to dominate and control them. This organization's philosophy is not to trust anyone, not even ones closest friends. And whose process of knowledge to action might be symbolized by the drone strike. Certainly trust, friendliness, goodwill then, are NOT the central, essential qualities of NSA's "business proposition".
However the two "business propositions" are deeply entwined. It is hard to imagine a "Swiss" Google or anything as all-encompassing as Google in any country that did not physically control the Internet and set and enforce the world's rules of commerce and supply the world with its reserve currency, while physically controlling the seas and air all over the world with the greatest accumulation of military power in the history of our planet. And conversely it is hard to imagine an intelligence agency as "penetrant" as the NSA without access to the resources of Google, Yahoo and Facebook.
The same as mixing Clorox with gasoline will cause an explosion and it is vital to keep the two apart, so it is vital for America's new economy to keep the idea of the NSA as far away from the idea of Google as possible... I should say "was" because Snowden has let the cat out of the bag and like putting toothpaste back in the tube, all the king's horses and all the King's men will never put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
With the wisdom of hindsight this Achilles's heel of American power was obvious, but Edward Snowden, or whoever (if anyone) runs him has fired a deadly torpedo directly under America's waterline.
http://seaton-news...e-or-overripe.html
Snowden deserves to be tried for treason, end of story.
Wonder what will happen if the "shadow state" outgrows the "state" what kind of world would that be?
Snowden has allowed oppressive regimes to justify their continued heavy handed approach to their citizens' freedoms for some time to come - that seems likely as one of the more material consequences.
Snowden is obviously smarter than the bulk of university graduates and has not been conditioned by the time serving brainwashing that a degree entails. Formal credentials are vastly over-rated I should know, my wife and I and our two kids have 9 degrees between us.
It has created an arms race that will only be defeated when some creates encryption to defeat the NSA.
With this technological ability to know everyone information - One government can rule them all.
he had access to the whole system, including security protocols, at the highest level .
"Whether he is a scoundrel or a hero,...." + "If a high-school dropout could get hold of troves of classified information, so can many others." = A-Yes-Sir-Journalist.
The guy did what he did because he is not framed like the biggest majority of the ones who do high schools + Universities simply for doing, (99.9999% all).
High schools + Universities are / became framing organizations used to teach to be silent and to conform. The astounding majority learn how to stop thinking and to comply to what the stupid and arrogant teacher repeats along years and years..
Few, very, very few do something useful with their degrees. The others learn how to conform and to comply and in so doing get a position to defend the Establishment.
Your two lines just show the amount of prejudice we see in this Establishment newspaper.
A very long time that the FT stopped doing decent journalism.
Classy journalism is done today in only very, very few places. And one of them is The Guardian.
And BTW in the coming years the masses are going to react to what has been happening since a very long time. It is impossible that it does not happen this way.... and this time around there will be no co-opting I am afraid to say.
Best regards,
A_Reader, BTW Ph.D.
As for US intelligence failures to anticipate 9/11 and other attacks, Mr Luce seems to be blaming the US intelligence services rather than the perpetrators, which is frankly absurd. I would rather have the USA, if occasionally overbearing, looking out for me and mine rather than say an EU secret service (non-existent and liable to be unfaithfull).
Next June will be 70 years since D Day in Normandy....and let no one be in any doubt.....
IT is the United States of America that has allowed the World and especially Europe to enjoy the fruits of peace from 1945 to 2013.
My only fear is that the Yanks may decide that the cost is too high and that Europe ain't worth the candle anymore in which case.....shall we rely on the Belgian army and the Swiss navy for protection??!!
Je crois que non....I don't think so.
Snowden acted as an American citizen who, outraged with the lies of a Government that claims to be democratic, has been acting more like a Government that wants to control what their nation and other nations have done.
I believe that many Americans would be startled and indignant at the same position. I also believe that many did not show these evidences for fear. Snowden had no measures. Snowden has jeopardized his career. Snowden has jeopardized their citizenship. Snowden has jeopardized his life. He knew it wouldn't be different and, therefore, has a plan that couldn't be more in the United States.
He knew the damage they will suffer, however, did not want such damages borne disproportionately on American citizens. Who are the real owners of America? Isolated decisions by Governments or their agencies, which are not supported by a nation, cannot be considered worthy of a democratic nation. After all, a democratic Government does what it wants, or what his people want?
Snowden did what he thought was right, not pactou with what was incorrect and that he didn't think worthy of the American population.
Snowden is a hero and there's no doubt about it. Snowden put its existence at risk, for believing in something that many no longer believe more: the truth. Snowden had the courage that many would like to have and no one had. Snowden put the egg whites, a u.s. Government incorrectly. Snowden has demonstrated that there are needs for reform in the form of information gathering.
The needs of reform are currently recognized by the US Government. If what Snowden displayed, really proved on need for reforms, so Snowden is innocent.
The American people will have to leave the idea that his Government's superhero. This incorrect image of a country that is in financial difficulties, political problems, proposal for senseless wars, inadequate investments in the form of unemployment and control struggles that can lead the country to a standstill. The u.s. Government, this time, it hasn't been a hero, both Democrats and Republicans alike, and this will have to be recognized. This time, the hero is beyond borders and fight against what feels wrong in your Government and exposes the real needs of change. This hero is Snowden.
http://napoleonliv...d-snowden-dossier/
I am an ardent reader of the FT, the best daily publication in English of which I'm aware. Thus, Mr. Luce's ill advised assertion that Edward Snowden "has done 'us' a good turn" is shocking. Mr. Snowden violated his employment agreement and security clearance, is a criminal and a traitor to the United States, and must be captured and prosecuted. It appears that Mr. Luce may have let events since Mr. Snowden's treason color his views. Popular opinion of Kim Philby, too, was undecided until Anatoliy Golitsyn confirmed Mr. Philby was a Soviet spy and the "third man." In contrast, there is no disputing that Mr. Snowden disclosed classified details of top-secret U.S., Israeli, and British government surveillance programs to the press and thus to the enemies of those Western democratic states. U.S. authorities have charged him with espionage and theft of government property. The FT should not side with the ultra-libertarians who wish to make Mr. Snowden a martyr in the now global, privacy versus security versus states' rights debate. Look, I happen to agree with Mr. Snowden's views on Dick Cheney. That doesn't change the fact that be betrayed his country and must be brought to justice in the U.S. for that act of treason.
But the extraordinary litany of abuses around the world get no mention in Luce's soap-suds. Abuses like setting up death squads in Central America, Indonesia, Colombia and dozens of other locations, then giving them lists of people to torture, rape, mutilate and then kill. 'Abuses' like overthrowing elected governments and installing sadistic thugs... Why do liberals shut their eyes, pinch their noses, cover their ears and ignore this 'extraordinary litany'? This ostensibly enlightened article is in fact part of the continuing cover-up - and I'm not suggesting the existence of a conspiracy, but of a pathology.
Do yourself a favor, and reach your hands around to the back of your head and see if you can find the scar where they implanted the chip in your brain. It would be interesting to know if it goes back to your birth or is more recent.
@PAUL A MYERS
No reasonable person is saying that we don't have to conduct clandestine operations and gather intelligence. I'm sure Edward Snowden would never suggest such a thing. But anybody who thinks that there are not people in the NSA or the US federal government (or other governments) who are not going to abuse this power to advance their own interests is exhibiting such a child level of naivete, I can't think of what to say to them except that they should maybe go back to grade school for a few years--except that they don't teach lessons like this in school.
All you need to do for a very recent example of abuse of power, in the good ol' US of A, is to remember the neocons in the Bush presidency. Here we had a very, very, narrow interest group who were able to hijack the US government to pursue their own ends, in opposition to most of the global population, including the US electorate (at least once the lies they had told were revealed), and commit one of the greatest heists (the invasion of Iraq) in history. And they did this in plain sight. They didn't even try to hide it.
Don't think there aren't plenty of other people just like them in the current power structure, just because, unlike the neocons, they have the good sense to stay in the shadows.
Whether you agree with him or you don't someone had to do what Snowden did. Without it being revealed just how deep and wide the intelligence gathering had gotten, their could never be any accountability, and without accountability, there will be no check on the power of these people. The debate being had over this now would not have been possible without this leak.
Edward Snowden seems to have sacrificed a lot by going public and to assume that he is not sincere and patriotic given the abuses - and let's not be ambiguous about that, they are serious abuses of trust and violations of freedom and privacy rights - we have therefore to judge on the facts and exposing wrongdoings is what is expected of all those working for government since they pursue such wrongs with determination when they are committed outside government. He therefore was doing his job and acting in the government's best interests. Anyone in government engaged in war activities has to have the highest authority to do so and anyone doing so without that authority is a danger to the public. If a peace process is deliberately sabotaged the cost to America is enormous and measured in billions of dollars at least given the monthly cost of being in Afghanistan - $10 billion? So, how many individuals have the authority to delay departure? A few trillion dollars have already being spent yet who knows how or why? Anyone seeing this happening and unable to make sense of it has a problem. If there is nowhere he can take it what is he to do?
If that's what Mr Snowden was faced with in his section must we conclude that acting on abuse information and decision making is not what it should be in the military or the administrative structures, which also seems to indicate that where the buck stops is a secret to all who have to pass it as part of their daily duties. When we see government chasing banks for millions and billions out of necessity and see those same sums multiplied three or four fold in the Middle East expenditure from decisions and military actions that make no economic or security sense we are left to conclude that special interests are at work and not for patriotic reasons. Snowden had everything to lose and lost it. America too has everything to lose and is losing it daily because information technology can do everything it wants to from creating incidents to depicting them, to choosing the actors, activists, and victims, and presenting the lot to the media electronically in the necessary form to obtain the required result from the public and from governments.
He is bankrupt of personal values and beliefs. It all begins with the individual. He may think himself to be 'big brother'.
Those editorials read like they were written by the NSA - and I recall a pretty hostile reception to them from readers.
I have yet to hear or read a single interview of responsible parties in the NSA who actually force them to answer straight questions - such as: 'How many US citizens' phone conversations has the NSA recorded over the last year?'
I think you'd find - in the highly unlikely event that that ever came to be known - that the figure would be enormous; but since no one is ever likely to be able to find out the truth, I suspect the NSA will avoid giving any real answers to questions - no matter true or false - because they probably just don't know what information Snowden downloaded from their systems, and thus would be scared that revelations yet to come would contradict any clearly-defined statements they make about their interception activities.
The sad fact of the matter is that the interception industry is now a vast one in the US - and once that happens in the military-industrial complex, it becomes self-perpetuating, with too many jobs, too much power, and too much money depending on its continued growth.
Thus, I don't think anyone should realistically expect to see any reduction in US electronic interception in the future.
After all, even in the very unlikely event that any sufficiently powerful politicians actually wanted to limit this monster's power and activities, how would anyone know whether the NSA was in fact abiding by any rules that it sought to impose on them? They answer is that they wouldn't.
And for an industry so well-equipped to learn everything there is to learn about anyone's lives in which they take an interest, and to find whatever skeletons are buried there, what politician would really want to take them on, when blackmail material on policy-makers must be one of the most valuable and powerful assets that the NSA collects?
Did he simply download it or did someone help him access it? It's already been questioned how a high-school dropout with no degree could get this job.
"But eavesdropping on Pakistan’s military should continue to be a no-brainer."
Do you think Mr Snowden would agree?
"Corrosion of trust between allies and between governments and citizens can breed all sorts of unforeseen consequences."
And this is what Snowden, Greenwald, Assange, et al want to see.
"Why, then, does Mr Obama want to put Mr Snowden behind bars?"
Does he? I thought he just wanted him to return to the US for there to be an inquiry and if it is deemed Snowden may have broken any laws then he would be tried for that and if he's found guilty then the court would decide the sentence.
"We should be grateful that Mr Snowden came forward."
Because all the libertarian right-wingers who hate "government" have found their hero?