"I guarantee that European politicians are outraged by the scale
of NSA eavesdropping operations for one reason and one reason only: their own national
intelligence agencies lack the opportunities and momentum possessed by the
NSA. ... If European politicians, outraged by today's NSA activities, really wanted
to show how much they loathe Washington's immoral and unethical practices, they
should start by closing their own national intelligence services."
In 1929, as he disbanded the 'Black Chamber' code cracking unit of America's fledgling intelligence agency, Secretary of State Henry L. Stimson famously said, 'Gentlemen do not read each other's mail.' Times have certainly changed.
From the mouths of angry politicians, outrage over the activities of the American National Security Agency is the pinnacle of hypocrisy.
In every nation, the task of the intelligence
services is to obtain information about other countries in a way that violates the
laws of those countries. This is an obvious verity that has been forgotten by
European politicians shaking with indignation after the most recent revelations
based on the leaks of NSA fugitive Edward Snowden.
Legally acquiring information is the task of
journalists and diplomats. They read newspapers, meet with people, listen, and
then analyze the information. Intelligence service officers are the people who
break the law - they are to use all means possible to obtain - to buy or steal
- information held in secret by another country's government.
In 1929, the U.S. secretary of state of the
time, Henry L. Stimson,
closed America's then tiny intelligence agency, saying that “Gentlemen do not read each other's mail.”
Since that time , however, the world has changed, and today it is difficult to
function diplomatically without such “mail reading.”
They read about everyone and everything. I
guarantee that European politicians are outraged by the scale of NSA
eavesdropping operations for one reason and one reason only: their own national
intelligence agencies lack the opportunities and momentum possessed by the
NSA.
Would the world be better off without spies? Probably
yes, but that's just not possible. This is not even about terrorism and the
fight against, for example, international gangs smuggling radioactive material,
or the kidnapping of European women to work in brothels in Asia. These are
examples of the obvious benefits of spying and eavesdropping.
But imagine this situation: suppose that a neighbor
of country X in Europe put an embargo on the import of products from Y, say on
meat. And let us suppose that negotiators from Y go to that neighbor to
negotiate the lifting of this embargo. Is it in the interest of state Y and its
meat producers to know the ins and outs of their neighbor’s negotiating tactics,
objectives, and the true intentions of its embargo? Of course it is. Can country
Y discover X's true intentions in any way other than by means of intelligence
agency activity? No, it cannot.
Posted By Worldmeets.US
Or imagine a different situation: a large
energy company wants to invest in country X. It is the day before the company's
executives meet with the president of the country. Will country X reach for the
skills of its intelligence officers to discover the true intentions of the company,
and find out the extent to which its planned investment in X is an extension of
the foreign policy of country Y? But of course.
These are theoretical examples, but in real
life one finds hundreds of them. In the world of intelligence, about which John Le Carre wrote is parallel to our own, we all still
spy on everyone else, because information, especially secret information, today
gives you an advantage amounting to billions of dollars, euros, rubles and
zlotys, but also in terms of human life and political and territorial influence
- or any other kind.
For decades, diplomats and policymakers have
stuck to a simple rule - don't speak publicly about the work of the
intelligence services. That's why the biggest spy scandals took place away from
the TV cameras. Even during the Cold War, the intelligence services of East and
West maintained regular contact for the purpose of resolving disputes away from
the ears of the public. Some scandals were revealed, but only if it was
politically advantageous.
If European politicians, outraged by today's NSA
activities, really wanted to show how much they loathe Washington's immoral and
unethical practices, they should start by closing their own national
intelligence services - which they obviously will not do, because such agencies
are needed to spy on neighbors and those near and far, hostile and friendly.
And so the circle closes.
