If All These Countries Are So Outraged By Revelations Of US Spying On Them, Why Aren't They Offering Snowden Asylum?
from the telling... dept
Glenn Greenwald makes some really good points in a Guardian column (one of his last) discussing the reactions to the latest revelations about the NSA surveillance on citizens and (mainly) top politicians in other countries. The key one being, if these countries are really so outraged by these revelations, shouldn't they be offering Ed Snowden asylum, since they appear to be admitting that these revelations are important?All of these governments keep saying how newsworthy these revelations are, how profound are the violations they expose, how happy they are to learn of all this, how devoted they are to reform. If that's true, why are they allowing the person who enabled all these disclosures – Edward Snowden – to be targeted for persecution by the US government for the "crime" of blowing the whistle on all of this?Of course, when put in the context of how it's really just about cutting off the power of American hypocrisy, this situation makes more sense, even as it highlights the hypocrisy of those other countries.
If the German and French governments – and the German and French people – are so pleased to learn of how their privacy is being systematically assaulted by a foreign power over which they exert no influence, shouldn't they be offering asylum to the person who exposed it all, rather than ignoring or rejecting his pleas to have his basic political rights protected, and thus leaving him vulnerable to being imprisoned for decades by the US government?
The reality is that none of these leaders expressing outrage are actually shocked by this. Everyone knew this was going on. They're reacting this way because it's all part of the theater, in which they have to act shocked and to condemn the US, but it's really just about the information being revealed. When looked at under that light, of course they have no interest in offering Snowden asylum. He's the one who created the "shock" by revealing this information which all those officials almost certainly knew about, while pretending not to.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: asylum, ed snowden, france, germany, ialy, nsa, nsa surveillance, spain
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Just because the NSA uses this type of argument structure, does not excuse it being used in journalism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just to satiate my curiosity, what are you considering the bait and what was switched? I'm also failing to see any blame being placed anywhere. Did we read the same article?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Blaming the victim. By casting a disingenuous analysis, over the issue of asylum, the article seaks to play down the issue of spying, because the targets are not sincere about their outrage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On a side not, having read the article for the third time, my criticism is a little harsh when viewing it in it's whole. While I think the first half is just woeful, the second half is much better constructed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Being angry at someone while being unwilling to do something that would invite retaliation isn't hypocrisy. There's probably also major legal issue regarding things like extradition that would make such a thing difficult if not impossible, although I'm no expert in that area. Other than being a public gesture, I don't see how anything positive would truly be achieved here, but I can see lots of negatives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Zem on Oct 28th, 2013 @ 2:49pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reply
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reply
Spying on 'allies' is a pretty big thing. Not like the US has any allies anyway...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reply
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The answer is likely simpler.
That means for one thing that asylum may often only be granted once somebody is in the country.
For another, the countries may have an extradition treaty with the U.S.A. Shutting that down or making exceptions to it might not be easy to do in a timely manner.
Third, many of those countries are those where the U.S. claims to have "thwarted" terrorist plots without informing state authorities. That means that they have the means and willingness to bypass local authorities and kidnap or kill on foreign soil of purportedly sovereign allies.
Guaranteeing the safety of Edward Snowden is only possible in countries where the death squadrons of the U.S.A. are not on the loose.
Offering Snowden asylum just to have him kidnapped or executed would be a public relations disaster.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The answer is likely simpler.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Military strength my ass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Honestly I don't think it will stop, but I do believe that if you get got you should be punished. It should be done in the most stealthy way possible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Compromised Leaders
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait a minute...
Seriously, WTF TSA?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hold your horses
http://www.thelocal.de/national/20131028-52609.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
is snowden asking for asylum at those places
Plus, well it embarrassing that these people COULD be spied on IF THEY ACTUALLY WERE, which is doubtful really.
Lots of people don't believe Snowden, or even if they do believe him, don't agree with what he did.
Third, they don't want to complain TOO MUCH, because they might be 'leaked' too, they all do it, well for the right reasons anyway.
are you suggesting they should continue to make snowden a pawn in some political game ???
Lastly, its got nothing to do with Snowden, he's just the thief, not the story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Most of these countries act just as badly or FAR WORSE
Snowden has to also be in that Country to get asylum, plus they would want a known thief with them. Plus they would want to piss of the US, plus its not confirmed that this is even true, its doubtful that it is.
Plus, people (you know THE PEOPLE) would have to actually CARE, and they really don't.
And, do you really think international policy and politics should be run by thief spies and UK 'journalists' ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Most of these countries act just as badly or FAR WORSE
"do you really think international policy and politics should be run by thief spies and UK 'journalists' ?"
Is your issue with the people, or with the information they are leaking?
Because to me it's simple. Snowden could be Smith, and Guardian could be Wikileaks or BBC or other free press. The people don't matter, the outlets don't matter. It's the information.
Some really bad bad choices by a General whose been running the show in secret.
What use is collecting all of this crap on normal people? For a spying perv maybe, but what actual use is it that outweighs all the damage it does?
And why does he wear a uniform like he's fighting a battle?? NSA is a civilian role, yet he dresses up in costume, with his shiny badges. Why? It's like a statement of loyalty in the US, if you're loyal to the military you wear the uniform, if you're loyal to the constitution, you wear civilian clothes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Most of these countries act just as badly or FAR WORSE
"
It certainly does matter if the probity of the information might be in questions, as in this situation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Most of these countries act just as badly or FAR WORSE
One can scarcely imagine the amount of brain damage one must have had to purchase a solar panel from an intellectually-deprived fuckwit like you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Most of these countries act just as badly or FAR WORSE
The only person who has "got the fuck away with whatever the fuck they wanted" is SNOWDEN !!!
Who else ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Most of these countries act just as badly or FAR WORSE
And having never sold a solar panel, I guess no one !!
I am rather happy that I make you rage to the degree you do, it speaks far more about your state of mind that mine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Most of these countries act just as badly or FAR WORSE
Or is that just a lie ? Is that your logic ? Coward ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Most of these countries act just as badly or FAR WORSE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And even if I did trust our government not to change it's mind, I don't trust there's not some loophole somewhere which makes it a legal obligation to extradite him.
And again, even it that was safe, there remains the fact that the US executive has absolutely no qualms to send professional hitmen ('Special Forces') to any allied or unallied territory to murder whoever they dislike if the target is just high-profile enough. And murder is the nice alternative, those less lucky end up in clandestine torture camps for life.
Snowden is seriously high profile at the moment, and neither France nor Germany is likely to start a way over a murdered sysadmin. Russia or China just might, so while I feel for Snowden that he has to stay in countries like that, I'm still secretly glad he's there, because it seems the safest alternative all round.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Perhaps you might want to try to keep up with events in Russia and see for yourself, I could think of a couple hundred countries where he would be safer (in the long run) including the US. Time will tell.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If American wanted him dead, it not matter in the least that he is in Russia, the US has the means and people to do that job if they wanted it done.
Again, if you really believe that is not the case, you need to pay a bit more attention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And yes, IF the Americans want him dead, they will be able to get him more or less everywhere. But Russia or China will have way more caustic responses to US operations in their territories than our tame central European governments ever will.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In many of the EU countries these sort of revelations mean an act of war.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not in the middle of the TAFTA treaty, they won't. Actually, the spying might give European nations some leverage, particularly in the light of the revelations about industrial espionage.
If the US refuses to trade with a European nation that takes Snowden in, the whole EU might turn around and tear up TAFTA or impose some sanctions of its own. There is also the matter of US bases scattered all over the UK and European countries...
So no, they'd squeal like little pigs, then get over it. However, Snowden would have to watch his back every day for the rest of his life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nobody wants to provoke the Bullie!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For shame on the US.....for getting caught.
No one wants to take in Snowden b/c they want to make a show of trying to "fix" their so called bruised relations with the US, and taking him in would pretty much burn that bridge. As of right now, on the public stage, they have some leverage over the US and the US politicians have to do some quick dancing and squirming. Taking in Snowden would give the leverage back to the US.
So yah, I'm not surpised.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also if I were to hack a goverment computer I'd be locked up yet it it perfectly legal to be hacked by the goverment. Logic anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]