When the US president invites allies to the white-house, I would assume there to be quite of an outcry if guests were found to plant bugs on phones and network switches. I would expect headlines to include "human lives are put at risk" and "we expect invited allies to behave according to national treaties" in all of the large news papers.
I would not expect to see a shrug and a "owell, thats what spying is for, right?".
I would not expect to see a shrug and a "owell, thats what spying is for, right?".
The French secret service is infamous for its espionage. They have even been accused of bugging hotel rooms and airline flights to gain classified US information.
And until Snowden, the collective reaction was indeed "meh." Well, Germany did call France the 'evil empire' of industrial espionage, but nobody cared. Apparently the US only ever confidentially complained when it became too overt.
So France screaming about US spying is rather like the pot calling the kettle black. It's done for political reasons, not because the French government really believes it's wrong.
I would. Last week there were lots of stories that indicated that elements within the Chinese government were responsible for the OPM break in. That is, a foreign government allegedly hacked the US governments computers.
The outrage was that the US let it happen, not that China tried it, because of course they are going to try that, because "thats what spying is for, right?"
Firstly, I wouldn't be surprised if things like this are quietly ignored for the sake of diplomacy.
Secondly, this fairness isn't the objective here, it's being ahead. The perfect situation, as far as any reasonable spy agency is concerned, is we can spy on others but others can't spy on us.
What you write may be true: spy agencies feel like they can spy on everyone else, but everyone else can't spy on their country. Or something.
But that position is illogical: according to USA laws NSA can spy on everyone else, according to UK laws, GCHQ can spy on everyone else, etc. And everyone points fingers at everyone else for "breaking the law". That position leads to immediate contradictions. Also, it's a "Well, they're right because they're OUR guys" sort of thing.
Once you take the "OUR guys are RIGHT and YOUR guys are WRONG" position, there's no limits, just insufficient imagination to justify anything weird, dangerous, unethical and in a larger sense, immoral.
Comments
When the US president invites allies to the white-house, I would assume there to be quite of an outcry if guests were found to plant bugs on phones and network switches. I would expect headlines to include "human lives are put at risk" and "we expect invited allies to behave according to national treaties" in all of the large news papers.
I would not expect to see a shrug and a "owell, thats what spying is for, right?".
The French secret service is infamous for its espionage. They have even been accused of bugging hotel rooms and airline flights to gain classified US information.
http://articles.philly.com/1992-10-24/news/25999062_1_aerosp... http://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/14/news/14iht-spy_.html
And until Snowden, the collective reaction was indeed "meh." Well, Germany did call France the 'evil empire' of industrial espionage, but nobody cared. Apparently the US only ever confidentially complained when it became too overt.
So France screaming about US spying is rather like the pot calling the kettle black. It's done for political reasons, not because the French government really believes it's wrong.
The French government may well believe it's wrong when it's done to them...
Your articles are 25 years old though.
Yes. Do you have any reason to think things have changed?
This is a game that's been played by every nation against every nation for six thousand years.
I would. Last week there were lots of stories that indicated that elements within the Chinese government were responsible for the OPM break in. That is, a foreign government allegedly hacked the US governments computers.
The outrage was that the US let it happen, not that China tried it, because of course they are going to try that, because "thats what spying is for, right?"
When reports of China hacking first came up in 2010 the White House objected to China strongly. I think they still do.
I find comments like this really strange.
Firstly, I wouldn't be surprised if things like this are quietly ignored for the sake of diplomacy.
Secondly, this fairness isn't the objective here, it's being ahead. The perfect situation, as far as any reasonable spy agency is concerned, is we can spy on others but others can't spy on us.
What you write may be true: spy agencies feel like they can spy on everyone else, but everyone else can't spy on their country. Or something.
But that position is illogical: according to USA laws NSA can spy on everyone else, according to UK laws, GCHQ can spy on everyone else, etc. And everyone points fingers at everyone else for "breaking the law". That position leads to immediate contradictions. Also, it's a "Well, they're right because they're OUR guys" sort of thing.
Once you take the "OUR guys are RIGHT and YOUR guys are WRONG" position, there's no limits, just insufficient imagination to justify anything weird, dangerous, unethical and in a larger sense, immoral.