For US spies, Europe is both partner and fair game
Inside US spy agencies, officers have been restricted from discussing Edward Snowden, so they conjured up a code to get around the measure. In place of “Snowden”, said one official, they exchange messages about “Igloo”.
“Once it is out in the open, no one is going to react by saying – welcome to my home,” said John McLaughlin, a former CIA deputy head, who stressed he was not commenting on the leaks. “But no one in the US regards [Europeans] as adversaries.”
For more than half a century, the US has maintained tight intelligence ties with four English-speaking nations, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, with the odd interruption when bilateral ties have soured.
European nations fall under another category, of “third party” partners, who co-operate with the US on a range of intelligence issues, depending on the circumstances
“The amount of material that comes from the US to them is extraordinary – they get virtually everything we have on terrorism. They don’t get that from anyone else, even from each other,” said Mr McLaughlin.
But US co-operation with European nations over decades has never come with a guarantee that Washington will not spy on them as well.
“With the exception of the ‘five eyes’ countries, everyone else is a potential target and fair game to some extent,” said Jeffrey Richelson, a US intelligence historian.
Washington’s “third party” partners have expanded since 9/11, with countries like Jordan, Pakistan and Yemen all working closely with US intelligence, even as they are targets themselves.
“Post 9/11, we’ve been obliged to have all sorts of partnerships based on practical needs. If you are working against al-Qaeda, you will have some strange bedfellows at different times who are not traditional allies,” said Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6.
The EU itself, though, unlike its member countries, as a transnational organisation, does not qualify to be an intelligence partner with Washington, a US government official said.
James Lewis, of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, and a former US diplomat, said the focus of US intelligence operations against Europe was often related to arms proliferation and sales.
“For a while, every arms deal in the Gulf would involve some European country trying to affect the decision through bribery,” he said.
In such cases, the US would take any evidence it had to the contracting nation. “We would say: ‘We know exactly what’s going on and we cannot accept this form of competition’,” he said.
Mr Richelson cited the case of “Curveball”, an Iraqi defector under the control of German secret service whose evidence about Saddam Hussein’s capabilities supported the case for invasion of the country.
“The Germans were sharing his briefings, but at the same time, they were lying about the claim (that he disliked the US) and his ability to speak English,” he said.
In such a case, the US accepted the information from Germany but also tried to check it.
Sir Richard, who worked intimately with the US for years, said surprise at Mr Snowden’s revelations were “naive in the extreme”.
“The US acts autonomously in its national interest,” he said. “It does not matter whether you are friend or foe.”
FUENTE: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/20d985f2-e3f7-11e2-91a3-00144feabdc0.html
The debate over the US intelligence contractor, now stranded in transit at Moscow Airport in search of asylum, has not been similarly filtered in Europe after his leak about US agencies spying on the EU and collecting phone records on the continent.
European leaders have expressed outrage at the activities of the US electronic eavesdropping body, the National Security Agency, with François Hollande, the French president, saying the spying threatened US-EU trade talks.
Serving and retired western intelligence officers say, however, that the Europeans are overreacting, and, deliberately or otherwise, ignoring their own longstanding intelligence ties with Washington.“Once it is out in the open, no one is going to react by saying – welcome to my home,” said John McLaughlin, a former CIA deputy head, who stressed he was not commenting on the leaks. “But no one in the US regards [Europeans] as adversaries.”
For more than half a century, the US has maintained tight intelligence ties with four English-speaking nations, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, with the odd interruption when bilateral ties have soured.
The key feature of the “five eyes” agreement, which mainly shares signals intelligence from facilities around the world, is that the countries agree not to spy on each other.
Asked about this when visiting Australia last week, Admiral Dennis Blair, a former director of national intelligence under Barack Obama, confirmed the arrangement. “We do not spy on each other,” he said. “We just ask.”European nations fall under another category, of “third party” partners, who co-operate with the US on a range of intelligence issues, depending on the circumstances
“The amount of material that comes from the US to them is extraordinary – they get virtually everything we have on terrorism. They don’t get that from anyone else, even from each other,” said Mr McLaughlin.
But US co-operation with European nations over decades has never come with a guarantee that Washington will not spy on them as well.
“With the exception of the ‘five eyes’ countries, everyone else is a potential target and fair game to some extent,” said Jeffrey Richelson, a US intelligence historian.
This is hardly a secret – the NSA’s own website displays a redacted document headlined: “Third Party Nations: Partners and Targets”.
Mr Richelson and other scholars say US operations directed against European nations are not aggressive – they do not recruit agents and rarely break into diplomatic premises.“I would rate the EU in terms of priorities somewhere on the third or fourth level of hell, in Dante’s terms: it is not a high priority target,” said Matthew Aid, the author of a book on the NSA.Washington’s “third party” partners have expanded since 9/11, with countries like Jordan, Pakistan and Yemen all working closely with US intelligence, even as they are targets themselves.
“Post 9/11, we’ve been obliged to have all sorts of partnerships based on practical needs. If you are working against al-Qaeda, you will have some strange bedfellows at different times who are not traditional allies,” said Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6.
The EU itself, though, unlike its member countries, as a transnational organisation, does not qualify to be an intelligence partner with Washington, a US government official said.
James Lewis, of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, and a former US diplomat, said the focus of US intelligence operations against Europe was often related to arms proliferation and sales.
“For a while, every arms deal in the Gulf would involve some European country trying to affect the decision through bribery,” he said.
In such cases, the US would take any evidence it had to the contracting nation. “We would say: ‘We know exactly what’s going on and we cannot accept this form of competition’,” he said.
Mr Richelson cited the case of “Curveball”, an Iraqi defector under the control of German secret service whose evidence about Saddam Hussein’s capabilities supported the case for invasion of the country.
“The Germans were sharing his briefings, but at the same time, they were lying about the claim (that he disliked the US) and his ability to speak English,” he said.
In such a case, the US accepted the information from Germany but also tried to check it.
Sir Richard, who worked intimately with the US for years, said surprise at Mr Snowden’s revelations were “naive in the extreme”.
“The US acts autonomously in its national interest,” he said. “It does not matter whether you are friend or foe.”
FUENTE: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/20d985f2-e3f7-11e2-91a3-00144feabdc0.html
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario