The “war on terror” has been a boon to the British intelligence services. After decades in which they became notorious for “counter-subversion” operations against political activists and trade unionists, colluding with death squads in Northern Ireland and helping the US to overthrow elected governments around the world, the spooks have at last had a chance to play the good guys.
Instead of the seedy antidemocratic gang that plotted against a Labour prime minister, they can claim to be the first line of defense against indiscriminate attacks on the streets of Britain.
MI5 has well over doubled in size in the past 10 years. Glamorized beyond parody in TV dramas such as Spooks, the spying agencies’ uncheckable pronouncements about their exploits and supposed triumphs are routinely relayed by the media as fact. The same has been true in the US, but on a far larger canvas.
Illustration: June Hsu
So faced with the avalanche of leaks from the US National Security Agency (NSA) and British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) about the epic scale of their blanket electronic surveillance, both at home and abroad, the masters of Anglo-US espionage have played the “national security” card for all it is worth.
The revelations of former NSA contractor Edward Snowden in the Guardian have been a “gift” to terrorists, MI5 Director-General Andrew Parker claimed, eagerly supported by the British prime minister.
The leaks were the “most catastrophic loss to British intelligence ever,” former GCHQ director David Omand said.
They were cheered on by the trusties of the British press — a fertile recruiting ground for British intelligence and the CIA over many years. National security has been imperiled, they all warned, as Tory demands for the Guardian to be prosecuted have grown.
In reality, national security is a catchphrase so elastic as to be meaningless. As MI5 helpfully explains, government policy is “not to define the term, in order to retain the flexibility ... to adapt to changing circumstances” — in other words, political expediency.
If it simply meant protecting citizens from bombs on buses and trains, of course, most people would sign up for that.
However, as the Snowden leaks have moved from capability to content, it has been driven home that much of what NSA and GCHQ are up to has nothing to do with terrorism or security at all, but, as might be expected, the exercise of naked state power to gain political and economic advantage.
In the past few days the French have discovered — courtesy of Le Monde — that the NSA harvested 70 million digital communications in France in one month, while the Mexicans have learned — via Der Spiegel — that their president’s e-mails were hacked into by US intelligence to “plan international investments” and strengthen US diplomatic leverage.
Something similar happened to Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, just as world leaders were targeted at the G20, while India and Germany were among other countries treated to the full electronic harvest treatment. Terrorism was clearly well down the priority list.
The protests of the French and other Western governments, which of course have their own, less effective espionage capability and collude with the US across the board, are largely for public consumption.
France was among several European states that cravenly bowed to US pressure to force Bolivian President Evo Morales’ aircraft to land this summer, in a hamfisted attempt to kidnap the whistleblower Snowden.
However, it is the scale and reach of the NSA-GCHQ operation — and the effective global empire it is used to police — that sets it apart.
And when it comes to terrorism, the evidence is that the US and British intelligence agencies are fueling it as much as fighting it.
Take drone attacks, which are US President Barack Obama’s weapon of choice in the new phase of the war on terror. They are reckoned to have killed up to 3,613 people — 926 of them civilians, including 200 children — in Pakistan alone.
Amnesty International this week argued that US officials should stand trial over evidence of war crimes in the Pakistan drone campaign. Human Rights Watch has made a similar case over the slaughter in Yemen.
The drone war is run by the CIA and US military. However, the Snowden leaks confirm — this time in the Washington Post — that the NSA is intimately involved in what are often anything but “targeted killings” — as is GCHQ, now facing legal action in London over war crimes brought by the son of a Pakistani victim of a drone attack.
Drones have, as the New York Times put it, “replaced Guantanamo as the recruiting tool of choice for militants,” cited as justification by jihadists for attacks on Western cities.
The same goes for the role of US and British intelligence, serviced by the NSA and GCHQ, in a decade of torture and state kidnapping.
As the evidence of MI5 and MI6 complicity with CIA black sites, “extraordinary rendition,” waterboarding and genital mutilation has built up — from Bagram to Guantanamo, Pakistan to Morocco — court case has followed police investigation. You might call it a recruitment “gift” to al-Qaeda. However, neither the agencies nor the politicians supposed to supervise them have yet been held to account.
Meanwhile, despite its multiple failures, the war on terror keeps expanding, spreading terror as it goes.
The new front is Africa, where the US military is now involved in 49 out of 54 states. Two years after what was supposed to have been a successful intervention in Libya, the country is again on the brink of civil war, its prime minister begging to be rescued from the backlash over another US kidnapping.
It is a democratic necessity that the Snowden leaks are used to bring some genuine accountability to the NSA-GCHQ machine and its lawless industrial-scale espionage. However, to frame the controversy as a trade-off between security and privacy misses the wider picture.
The main Western intelligence agencies are instruments of global dominance, whose role in the rest of the world has a direct impact on their own citizens. It is not the revelations that threaten our security, but the agencies and their political masters themselves.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.