Slashdot Mirror
France Could Offer Asylum To Assange, Snowden
HughPickens.com writes: The Intercept reports that in the aftermath of the NSA's sweeping surveillance of three French presidents, French Justice Minister Christiane Taubira thinks National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange might be allowed to settle in France. Taubira was asked about the NSA's surveillance of three French presidents, disclosed by WikiLeaks this week, and called it an "unspeakable practice." Taubira's comments echoed those in an editorial in France's leftist newspaper Libération that France should respond to the U.S.'s "contempt" for its allies by giving Edward Snowden asylum. France would send "a clear and useful message to Washington, by granting this bold whistleblower the asylum to which he is entitled," wrote editor Laurent Joffrin in an angry editorial titled "Un seul geste" — or "A single gesture." (google translate) If Paris offers Snowden asylum, it will be joining several other nations who have done so in the past, including Bolivia, Nicaragua and Venezuela. However, Snowden is still waiting in Moscow to hear from almost two dozen other countries where he has requested asylum.
So, basically, "not going to happen".
Dear Lord: One of your creatures may be hurt tonight. Please let it be the other creature.
Well, one could argue that these agencies should concentrate spying on hostile governments and terrorists, instead of heads of state of allied countries.
But no, it is important for Americas national security to spy on, say, Airbus.
Well there's also the great hypocrisy that lies there like an elephant in the room. France have probably tried to do the same on all its allies... (No presumption on whether they succeeded or not, just that the fact that they tried is highly likely).
To me, the reaction of the French government shrieking like pigs is just a show for the public opinion, and maybe they'll send back the US Ambassador for good measure. But it will soon die down and no change is to be expected.
Why should the NSA spy on French presidents?
Why wouldn't they? First off, nation states spy on each other. Friend or foe doesn't play into it. Any nation that has the capability to spy on another nation will use that capability. Second, friends don't always stay friends and France hasn't exactly been the closest of allies to the US. Third, France has nuclear weapons and anyone who has nuclear weapons is going to be targeted for spying to make sure they aren't up to something dangerous. Nobody thinks it is likely that France is going to do anything weird but that doesn't mean it's impossible. Finally, France has communications with the leadership of other countries, some of which are far less friendly to the US than France is. Some of these communications are likely very interesting to US intelligence services. While the NSA might not be super interested in what the French president is up to, they probably are interested in some of the parties he is talking to.
Exactly where in the NSA mission statement is this covered?
Twenty seconds on wikipedia would have answered that question for you. This is exactly the job of the NSA, particularly for SIGNINT. You might find their mission to be troubling and I might even agree but it IS their job.
They should be spying on (real) terrorists and neutral/enemy countries, not on friendly/allied countries.
Grow up. There is no such thing as a true friend among nation states. If you think France isn't spying on the US as well then you are naive and haven't read any of your history books. Countries don't have friends, they have interests. Spying between even the most ostensibly friendly of nations is a routine and commonly accepted occurrence. Countries that are friends today can easily be adversaries tomorrow and the US and France haven't had the closest of relationships.
Is it sad that this is the state of affairs in this world? Of course. But don't be blind about how the real world works.
No, Elba. or possibly St. Helena.
See if I can post today without all the damned errors :|
This may sound odd, but I am of the opinion Mr. Snowden would be safer staying in Russia than he would in France. The United States and their allies ( assuming they don't piss ALL of them off by getting caught spying on them ) don't have the ability to freely operate in Russia. This makes it a bit more difficult to snatch such a high priority "prize" right off the street, never to be heard from again.
There also exists the risk of future administrations in France cozying back up to the United States, putting their freedom in jeopardy once again. ( Granted, the same can happen in Russia, but is far less likely )
So, unless Russia is as bad as the Western Media likes to portray, ( unlikely, but I've never been so can't say for myself ) I would think long and hard about leaving the safety of her borders.
*Having grown up during the Cold War era, it's interesting to note how much things have changed. When US Citizens feel the need to flee to Russia ( or any non-US ally ) to escape what would most certainly be an unfair trial ( assuming you even receive one ), it has truly become a bizarre world.
Spies neither start nor end wars. The capture of a spy won't be what starts a war. You don't have two countries start off perfectly happy with each other until one finds a spy from the other and suddenly they're sending tanks across the border. Finding a spy might be claimed as the reason for a war, but there are always other, far more significant reasons, almost always having to do with the exploitation of resources (whether mining, farming, space, or people). Even allegedly religious wars usually have to do with claiming land (and therefore resources) for one's deity.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Thank you for pointing this out. Most people don't realize it.
France dropped out as a full member of NATO in 1966, ordering most non-French forces out, and didn't rejoin it until 2009. The original purpose was so that France could potentially come to a separate peace with the Warsaw Pact nations if it didn't agree with the reasons for a war with them. This didn't last long, as a secret agreement for France to rapidly re-integrate into NATO forces was signed soon after.
However, it caused a great deal of mistrust in other countries, and France has maintained interests in other countries around the world, not always for the betterment of those outside of France. It's strongly suspected of being behind the Israeli nuclear arms program, something that was originally opposed by the United States because it risked rising tensions in the Middle East where the Soviets had a strong presence in countries such as Egypt, Iraq, and Syria. France has also been caught conducting industrial espionage in numerous countries including the United States, and there's little reason to think that they've stopped there. The country has an international independence streak much longer than that of the US, and it's not likely to change anytime soon.
Nations spy on other nations, because almost every one has been assured of something and then been stabbed in the back. Reagan told Thatcher that the US had no intention of invading Grenada even as forces were moving in, and the attack began just a few hours later. I'm sure that as much as Thatcher may have forgiven Reagan later, plans were put in place to try to catch this kind of thing at an earlier stage, whether through satellites, photography from chartered aircraft, and 'tourists' who happen to be near key locations, or through traditional espionage techniques of stealing or turning people.
It's an understood game. Everyone does it, everyone tries to stop it. They get better at both sides, and the dance continues.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
"Here's a question for you. How often does your wife bug-sweep your bedroom? People don't have marriages, they have interests within sexual alliances."
This is a poor analogy at best. Are you married? Spouses are constantly secretly keeping tabs on one another without being overt. They are eyeing what one another is doing and spending on a regular basis. And though they aren't necessarily doing it all super covertly, they aren't always open about it.