The United States federal government should cease its surveillance of foreign diplomats in the United States and at United States embassies
Download 0.83 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Solvency ***“foreign intel info” mechanism
- Foreign intel solves
- Solves perception
- Undercuts legitimacy – embassy surveillance is perceived as distinct from national security
Inherencysurveillance nowNSA surveillance of 38 embassies and mission triggers international backlashMacAskill and Borger 13 (Ewen is the Guardians defense and intelligence correspondent, previously the DC bureau chief and diplomatic editor and Julian is the Guardians diplomatic editor and author of The Butchers Trail, 6/30, “New NSA leaks show how US is bugging its European allies”, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/30/nsa-leaks-us-bugging-european-allies)//cc US intelligence services are spying on the European Union mission in New York and its embassy in Washington, according to the latest top secret US National Security Agency documents leaked by the whistleblower Edward Snowden. One document lists 38 embassies and missions, describing them as "targets". It details an extraordinary range of spying methods used against each target, from bugs implanted in electronic communications gear to taps into cables to the collection of transmissions with specialised antennae. Along with traditional ideological adversaries and sensitive Middle Eastern countries, the list of targets includes the EU missions and the French, Italian and Greek embassies, as well as a number of other American allies, including Japan, Mexico, South Korea, India and Turkey. The list in the September 2010 document does not mention the UK, Germany or other western European states. One of the bugging methods mentioned is codenamed Dropmire, which, according to a 2007 document, is "implanted on the Cryptofax at the EU embassy, DC" – an apparent reference to a bug placed in a commercially available encrypted fax machine used at the mission. The NSA documents note the machine is used to send cables back to foreign affairs ministries in European capitals. The documents suggest the aim of the bugging exercise against the EU embassy in central Washington is to gather inside knowledge of policy disagreements on global issues and other rifts between member states. The new revelations come at a time when there is already considerable anger across the EU over earlier evidence provided by Snowden of NSA eavesdropping on America's European allies. Germany's justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, demanded an explanation from Washington, saying that if confirmed, US behaviour "was reminiscent of the actions of enemies during the cold war" The German magazine Der Spiegel reported at the weekend that some of the bugging operations in Brussels targeting the EU's Justus Lipsius building – a venue for summit and ministerial meetings in the Belgian capital – were directed from within Nato headquarters nearby. The US intelligence service codename for the bugging operation targeting the EU mission at the United Nations is "Perdido". Among the documents leaked by Snowden is a floor plan of the mission in midtown Manhattan. The methods used against the mission include the collection of data transmitted by implants, or bugs, placed inside electronic devices, and another covert operation that appears to provide a copy of everything on a targeted computer's hard drive. The eavesdropping on the EU delegation to the US, on K Street in Washington, involved three different operations targeted on the embassy's 90 staff. Two were electronic implants and one involved the use of antennas to collect transmissions. Although the latest documents are part of an NSA haul leaked by Snowden, it is not clear in each case whether the surveillance was being exclusively done by the NSA – which is most probable as the embassies and missions are technically overseas – or by the FBI or the CIA, or a combination of them. The 2010 document describes the operation as "close access domestic collection". Solvency***“foreign intel info” mechanismsolvency advocatesSolvency advocateNojeim 14 – Director, Project on Freedom, Security & Technology at the Center for Democracy & Technology (Greg, “COMMENTS TO THE PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OVERSIGHT BOARD REGARDING REFORMS TO SURVEILLANCE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 702 OF FISA” 4/11)//twemchen Another way to limit to national security the purposes for collection pursuant to Section 702 would be to remove “the conduct of foreign affairs” as a basis for collection. If adopted, this reform would permit collection under Section 702 for the purpose of obtaining (1) information that relates to the ability of the U.S. to protect against a hostile attack, espionage, sabotage or international terrorism or proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, or (2) information with respect to a foreign territory or foreign power (a foreign government, political party, or entity controlled by a foreign government, or a foreign terrorist organization) that relates to the security of the U.S. Such a change would be consistent with the stated counterterrorism purpose of Section 702. Refining the purpose for which surveillance under Section 702 may be conducted would not prevent the Intelligence Community from gathering information related to the conduct of foreign affairs, but rather would merely remove the highly invasive practice of compelled company disclosure of communications content absent judicial review as a means of doing so. Foreign intel solvesNojeim 14 - Director, Project on Freedom, Security & Technology at the Center for Democracy & Technology (Greg, “COMMENTS TO THE PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OVERSIGHT BOARD REGARDING REFORMS TO SURVEILLANCE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 702 OF FISA” 4/11)//twemchen The FISA provisions that govern intelligence surveillance of targets in the U.S. permit the government to engage in electronic surveillance to collect “foreign intelligence information.” For purposes of surveillance that targets a non-U.S. person, it is defined broadly as: (1) information that relates to the ability of the U.S. to protect against a hostile attack, espionage, sabotage or international terrorism or proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; or (2) information with respect to a foreign territory or foreign power (a foreign government, political party, or entity controlled by a foreign government, or a foreign terrorist organization) that relates to the security of the U.S. or to the conduct of U.S. foreign affairs.4 When the government applies to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) for permission to conduct surveillance of targets in the U.S., it must certify that a significant purpose of the surveillance it will conduct is to collect foreign intelligence information.5 Because “foreign intelligence information” is defined so broadly, and because the FISC never actually rules on whether the significant purpose test is met, the purpose limitation that governs FISA surveillance of targets in the U.S. is easily met. FISA surveillance in the U.S. is instead effectively constrained by an additional requirement: the requirement that the government prove to the FISC that there is probable cause to believe the target of surveillance is a terrorist, spy, or other agent of a foreign power. Thus, Congress effectively constrained FISA surveillance of targets in the U.S. by permitting that surveillance to target only a narrow class of persons and entities. For surveillance of people reasonably believed to be outside the U.S., Section 702 adopts the broad purpose requirement, but couples it with a broad class of surveillance targets. Section 702 is not constrained by the requirement that the target be an agent of a foreign power. Instead, the target need only be a non-U.S. person reasonably believed to be abroad. Effectively, Congress borrowed the broad purpose for FISA intelligence surveillance (collect “foreign intelligence information”) and applied it to surveillance abroad without limiting the class of potential targets to “agents of a foreign power.” This has prompted concern globally that surveillance under Section 702 is broadly directed at individuals not suspected of wrongdoing, and could include targeting based at least in part on political activities. A peaceful protest at a U.S. base in Germany or a demonstration against rising food prices in India “relate to” U.S. foreign policy; non-U.S. persons involved in those protests could be monitored under Section 702. A 2012 cloud computing report to the European Parliament included a finding that under Section 702, it is lawful in the U.S. to conduct purely political surveillance on non-U.S. persons’ data stored by U.S. cloud companies.6 Such actions raise serious human rights concerns. Further, fear of the mere possibly that this overbroad surveillance is occurring has significantly damaged the U.S. tech industry abroad. Solves perceptionKehl 14 – Policy Analyst at New America’s Open Technology Institute (Danielle, “Surveillance Costs: The NSA’s Impact on the Economy, Internet Freedom & Cybersecurity” July, https://www.newamerica.org/oti/surveillance-costs-the-nsas-impact-on-the-economy-internet-freedom-cybersecurity/)//twemchen In addition to recommending a variety new protections for U.S. persons, the Review Group urged in its Recommendation 13 that surveillance of non-U.S. persons under Section 702 or “any other authority”—a reference intended to include Executive Order 12333325 — should be strictly limited to the purpose of protecting national security, should not be used for economic espionage, should not be targeted based solely on a person’s political or religious views, and should be subject to careful oversight and the highest degree of transparency possible.326 Fully implementing this recommendation—and particularly restricting Section 702 and Executive Order 12333 surveillance to specific national security purposes rather than foreign intelligence collection generally—would indicate significant progress toward addressing the concerns raised in the recent Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on “The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age.” hurts relations – laundry listEmbassy surveillance is perceived as giving the U.S. an unfair advantageRT 14 (Autonomous Nonprofit Organization “TV-Novosti”. “NSA spying on foreign embassies helped US 'develop' strategy”. 13 May 2014. http://rt.com/usa/158608-nsa-greenwald-un-snowden)//JuneC// The National Security Agency in 2010 provided the US ambassador to the United Nations with background information on several governments and their embassies that were undecided on the question of Iranian sanctions. In May 2010, as the UN Security Council was attempting to win support for sanctions against Iran over its nuclear-energy program, which some say is a front for a nuclear weapons program, several members were undecided as to how they would vote. At this point, the US ambassador to the world body, Susan Rice, asked the NSA for assistance in her efforts to “develop a strategy,” leaked NSA documents reveal. The NSA swung into action, aiming their powerful surveillance apparatus at the personal communications of diplomats from four non-permanent Security Council members — Bosnia, Gabon, Nigeria and Uganda. This gave Rice an apparent upper-hand in the course of the negotiations. In June, 12 of the 15-member Security Council voted in favor of new sanctions. Later, Rice extended her gratitude to the US spy agency, saying its surveillance had helped her to know when diplomats from the other permanent representatives — China, England, France and Russia — “were telling the truth ... revealed their real position on sanctions ... gave us an upper hand in negotiations ... and provided information on various countries’ ‘red lines’.” The information comes from a new book by journalist Glenn Greenwald, ‘No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the US Surveillance State’, the New York Times reported. Rice’s request for assistance was discovered in an internal report by the security agency’s Special Source Operations division, which cooperates with US telecommunications companies in the event a request for information is deemed necessary. Greenwald’s book goes on sale Tuesday. The book also provides a list of embassies around the world that had been infiltrated by the US spy agency, including those of Brazil, Bulgaria, Colombia, the European Union, France, Georgia, Greece, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Slovakia, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan, Venezuela and Vietnam. United States Vice President Joe Biden (R) sits with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon (L) as U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice stands (C) before the start of the United Nations Security Council High-Level Meeting on Iraq at U.N. headquarters in New York, December 15, 2010 (Reuters)United States Vice President Joe Biden (R) sits with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon (L) as U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice stands (C) before the start of the United Nations Security Council High-Level Meeting on Iraq at U.N. headquarters in New York, December 15, 2010 (Reuters) News of the NSA’s vast surveillance network, which targets friends and enemies of the United States with equanimity, were revealed in June when former NSA contractor Edward Snowden provided Greenwald with thousands of files on the program. Despite promises by President Obama for greater safeguards on the invasive system, which has infuriated people around the world, the NSA seems determined not to let international public opinion block its spying efforts. “While our intelligence agencies will continue to gather information about the intentions of governments — as opposed to ordinary citizens — around the world, in the same way that the intelligence services of every other nation do, we will not apologize because our services may be more effective,” according to a White House statement. The latest revelations detailing how the NSA gives American diplomats an unfair advantage raises the question as to how such orders passed legal muster in the first place. According to the documents, a legal team went to work on May 22 building the case to electronically eavesdrop on diplomats and envoys from Bosnia, Gabon, Nigeria and Uganda whose embassies were apparently not yet covered by the NSA. A judge from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court approved the request on May 26. The Obama administration has faced fierce criticism following revelations of the global surveillance program, which was used not simply to identify potential terrorists, but to eavesdrop on the communications of world leaders. Following revelations that German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s private cell phone communications were being hacked by the NSA, Germany pushed for a ‘no-spy’ agreement with the United States to restore the trust. The Obama administration, however, rejected the offer. Now Europe has announced plans to construct a new Internet network that bypasses the United States and the NSA, a move the US Trade Representative labeled “draconian.” Undercuts legitimacy – embassy surveillance is perceived as distinct from national securityCouncil of Europe 15 (Council of Europe Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. “Mass Surveillance”. 26 January 2015. https://ccdcoe.org/sites/default/files/documents/CoE-150126-MassSurveillance.pdf)//JuneC// The New York Times revealed that the NSA monitored an American law firm representing a foreign government in trade disputes against the United States53 as well as other countries’ preparations for the Copenhagen Climate Summit, including those by the host country, Denmark.54 The NSA also engaged in targeted surveillance of the United Nations, the European Union, and other international organizations in a variety of ways, including bugging embassy phones and faxes, copying hard disks, and tapping into the internal computer cable network used by collaborators. 55 To cite a few examples out of the many that were revealed, the NSA used operation Blackfoot to gather data from French diplomats’ offices at the New York UN headquarters.56 Operation Perdido targeted the EU’s offices in New York and Washington, while Powell was a codename for the NSA’s scheme to eavesdrop on the Greek UN offices in New York. The NSA’s internal document indicated that its spying had a key influence on “American negotiating tactics at the UN” in connection with the Iraq War. Thanks to the intercepted conversations, the NSA was allegedly able to inform the US State Department and the American Ambassador to the UN with a high degree of certainty that the required majority had been secured before the vote was held on the corresponding UN resolution.57 While the inclusion of traditional ideological adversaries and sensitive Middle Eastern countries were “expected” and more easily explained in light of US anti-terrorism efforts, the inclusion of traditional allies discredits the contention that the purpose of surveillance is the protection of national security. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 0.83 Mb. Share with your friends:
|