(Audible, N.D)
Who is Edward Snowden and What did he do?
Edward Snowden started working for the Central Intelligence Agency in 2006, where he worked as a security technician under diplomatic cover. This position meant he was given top secret clearance. He worked for the CIA until 2009, in which he switched to working as a private contractor that serviced the National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA is responsible for the US government’s communication and security intelligence. While servicing the NSA and having his security clearances, he obtained classified information about the NSA, specifically about U.S surveillance techniques. In May of 2013, Snowden left for Hong Kong on medical leave from his job and talked with The Guardian media reporters about NSA secrets. Snowden releases damning information about how the NSA “improperly collected phone call records of Americans”, with his leaking a series of documents including:
A court order that required Verizon to give meta data to the NSA (like phone numbers, numbers dialed, duration of calls, etc).
A document that disclosed the existence of PRISM, a data mining program that gave the US Intelligence agencies “direct access” to major internet data corporations like Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Apple. (Ray, 2022).
Claimed the NSA had been hacking Chinese computers since 2009.
He painted this as the reason he decided to work as a contractor for the NSA and wanted to learn about secret NSA activities.
An interesting fact about Snowden’s case is that he willingly came forward in The Guardian and The Washington Post about his identity after publishing the information. He has become one of, if not, the most infamous whistleblower in US history. This begs the question, how should government agencies move forward with contractors in security clearances? This article had a quote from former deputy press secretary Tony Fratto, where he found that “We can name the 20 people or so over the past 10 years who've leaked 'top secret' information," and that "Out of millions. ... The number of people who have divulged 'top secret' information is remarkably small”. (Fratto, 2013).
What privacy concerns and laws are involved in his case?
The fundamental issue that Snowden did was break United States law and endanger national security through his whistleblower status. Not only that, but the reveal to the general public that government surveillance was taking place without knowledge opened up a discussion that still occurs today, about if government and private entities have the right to collect data and use it for tracking/surveillance purposes. Snowden was charged on June 21st of 2013 with two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and theft of government property. The Espionage Act is a Federal law where it was made illegal to convey information with the intent of interfering with the US armed forces interests and projects or promoting the success of US enemies. The Espionage Act also criminalizes the publication of any information related to National Security without authorization. The theft charges pertain to the documents he released, as it counted as his stealing from the United States Government. He was in Hong Kong at the time of the charges being pressed, leading to questions of if he would need to be extradited by the Hong Kong Government to face trial in the United States.
According to a 2012 report from the office of the director of national intelligence, more than 1.4 million people have “top-secret- security clearance”. This report concluded that more than 483,000 government contractors (like Snowden at the time when he worked for the National Security Agency (NSA)) were given “top secret” security clearances, with 582,000 having “confidential” or “secret clearance”. This paints the question, how many more leaks like this are going to occur with those who have clearance access, but decide to divulge this information?
The question of whether he should be pardoned or not.
Since this incident occurred during the Obama administration, there have been three standing presidents (including Obama) that have all decided to not pardon Snowden. Former President Obama was very firm in his position against Snowden, which can be seen in the video below.
https://youtu.be/wS9TXJqxkSQ
Former President Trump was more open to pardoning Snowden, but Biden remains the same in not addressing/not issuing a pardon for Snowden.
Why he should not be pardoned
https://youtu.be/F06n348V0f8
Even if you believe that Snowden did a good thing in releasing this information, the question of a pardon should be out of the question. I believe that Snowden should not be pardoned because although his actions were noble in releasing information to the American people, his actions clearly violated US federal law and compromised National Security. His past security clearances and record of divulging secret information makes him untrustworthy to come back to the US, as his actions could have put US citizen’s lives at risk by exposing information about US intelligence activities abroad, risking further involvement in our affairs by our enemies like China and Russia. Even if he is not a current threat with him losing his security clearance and never being able to work for the government again, he betrayed an agreement of secrecy he agreed to when working for the NSA and can never be trusted again.
Fratto, the former Deputy Press Secretary I discussed earlier, had a great quote to illustrate this point.
"The 'top secret' clearance is not a hall pass to go around rummaging for information. It absolutely puts a requirement and creates obligations for anybody who is looking at information," Fratto said. "Because of the 'top secret' clearance that they have, it places an obligation on them — a legal obligation — to treat that information responsibly."
Snowden being exiled in Russia also proves as an issue for a pardon, as his involvement with our most notorious enemy and his usefulness to the Russian Government for information (even if he does not disclose anything to them) would be a risk to national security and cannot risk a “double-agent” scenario.
References
Bacon, J. (2019, June 26). NA improperly collected US phone call data after saying problem was fixed. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/03/edward-snowden-nsa-surveillance-guardian-court-rules
Carafano, J. J. (2020, December 17). Edward Snowden should not get a pardon under any circumstances. https://www.heritage.org/homeland-security/commentary/edward-snowden-should-not-get-pardon-under-any-circumstances
Logiurato, B. (n.d.). How A GED-Holder Managed To Get 'Top Secret' Government Clearance. Retrieved June 10, 2019, from https://www.businessinsider.com/edward-snowden-top-secret-clearance-nsa-whistleblower-2013-6
Reuters. (2020, September 3). NSA surveillance exposed by Snowden was illegal, court rules seven years on. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/03/edward-snowden-nsa-surveillance-guardian-court-rules
Snowden charged with 3 felonies. (2013, June 21). https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/edward-snowden-charged-nsa-093179
(Edited after 9am due to technology issues- glitches from publishing with an iPad. The videos are now available to view).
I had heard of Edward Snowden before but did not know the details of the case. This was very informational and interesting. A question I have after reading this is how exactly did the information Snowden release endanger national security. I admit this is an area I am not familiar with which is why I am a little confused. From what I read here, it sounds like the main information Snowden leaked was that the NSA was spying on its citizens and hacking Chinese computers. I fail to see how the former endangered national security, though I could see the argument for the latter. I am also interested in knowing if Snowden started working for the NSA with the intention of leaking this information, as seemed to be implied in the post.
ReplyDeleteI can totally understand how domestic affairs and leaks may not seem like a big threat to overall national security. However, I looked at historical patterns of leaks and "behind the curtain" reveals in the government (Specifically in the CIA with a very shady history of behavior relating to Covert Action) that have posed a threat to nationals security by allowing our enemies to learn about how we control and gather information. The control of information and intelligence is the key to establishing power in counter intelligence. Counter intelligence is information focused on intelligence activities, sabotage, assassinations committed by foreign countries and use that information to protect the US reactively. The US has its own subdivision of counterintelligence within the military and intelligence agencies, but so do all of its allies and enemies. Any information released without United States Government clearance lands directly into the counter intelligence agencies of other countries, with the countries knowing what we are capable in, but more importantly, what we are not capable in and find our vulnerabilities to exploit and attack. This is why I think any kind of leaks can be seen as a threat to national security, as once a country obtains information we don't want them to know, we are now vulnerable to whatever they choose to do with that information.
DeleteLike Lindsay, I had heard of Edward Snowden but wasn't sure about the specifics of the case. I agree that delicate information should place an obligation on the user to act responsibly. However, I do think there should be more checks and balances for the NSA. The public doesn't need to know everything that's happening in regards to national security but I think there should be more regulation and oversight. However, I understand the difficulty and ramifications of adding more people in overseeing the NSA. Here's an article by the American Civil Liberties Union that hashed out some of the problems with NSA governance: https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/checks-balances-and-national-security-agency
ReplyDeleteHey Hannah,
DeleteThank you so much for including that read! I completely agree that there should be more regulation and oversight within a lot of these intelligence based agencies like the NSA and CIA. However, what I find is that many do not want to take on this role as they do not want to be blamed for the fallout. I mentioned in an earlier comment to Lindsay about the sketchy history of the CIA, and the historical record shows that even though congress should have taken more responsibility in reforming the very publicly dodgy CIA, nobody wants to be put to run or manage it as they do not want to be blamed when something goes wrong. This sentiment probably follows in the NSA and other intelligence agencies, which I think allows for less oversight and more chances of "Edward Snowden" type leaks occurring again. This is a another reason I don't think Snowden should be pardoned, as I think actions like these have true consequences in these agencies (with little notice of when these leaks occur and less time to deal with the domestic fallout, drawing attention away from international intelligence) and there needs to be a standard set of being charged if you reveal sensitive information unlawfully.
This is Andrew Huang
ReplyDeleteIt’s been really interesting reading through the differing opinions on Snowden. I think I would agree that pardoning him could potentially set a bad precedent for allowing people to expose classified secrets, even if what he did was good for the American public. I wonder if there were other options Snowden could have taken to keep the NSA in check without violating the Espionage Act, though I’m somewhat doubtful that any other option would’ve been as effective.
I do think that in some respect, he should obviously be charged with violating the legal terms of his working at a government agency, but in the long run whether we pardon him or not, does it really matter? The amount of information he exposed about the NSA, as well as it’s spying on citizens I think far surpasses in importance his own character. In my opinion, only such characters come around every few years, and the bombshell he dropped for the citizens of the United States should prove that the government is working against us, trying to spy and control us.
ReplyDeleteI do think that Snowden probably shouldn't be pardoned, or at least not fully. There should be repercussions for sharing secure information that endangers national security. Even though the information Snowden leaked didn't actually cause harm, (at least as far as I understand), it doesn't mean anyone should be able to release NSA information.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you guys because I think that although his case was uniquely beneficial to the public, a pardon would create a double standard that would create a very dangerous precedent for others to build their opinions of in the future. I personally don't think that his actions were extremely harmful, it was kind of a sacrifice that he signed up for, and he broke federal laws and should be punished for it. But if he got pardoned because of it, it would show that breaking these national secrets are okay depending on the content and would establish many unrealistic opinions for the general public.
ReplyDeleteI have never heard of Edward Snowdan before, so this article was very intersting to me. Releasing private information was did violate the legal terms and he should be punished. However, it did not cause too much harm. We should punish people for releasing information they should not release, but I feel as if the weight of the punishments should be equal to the damage it caused and not so much greater.
ReplyDelete