The US Needs to Explain the Surveillance of Foreign Embassies
It has been revealed that the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) has been bugging Japanese and European Union embassies and diplomatic missions located in the U.S. and targeting them for surveillance.
The origin of this information was the English newspaper [The Guardian] that reported the information leaked by former CIA employee Edward Snowden. Snowden is being prosecuted for exposing the personal data collection activities of the NSA.
The U.S. government responded by saying, “The United States gathers foreign intelligence of the type gathered by all nations,” but this secret collection of information from foreign diplomatic establishments is naturally being interpreted as spying.
French President François Hollande criticized the U.S., saying, “We cannot accept this kind of behavior between partners and allies,” and demanded that it be stopped immediately.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga stated, “The reports are being confirmed through diplomatic channels.” Japan and the U.S. are allies. What kind of information was the U.S. collecting and for what purpose? I would like to see the Japanese government address the situation with a resolute attitude.
According to the report, devices attached to fax machines and antennas for picking up radio waves were used in EU delegations. It seems there were also techniques for secretly viewing computer data.
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made foreign embassies “inviolable,” and determined that the receiving country “shall permit and protect free communication” for diplomatic personnel. Hindering free communication by tampering with embassy equipment and intercepting radio waves is none other than foul play.
It is now an open secret that U.S. intelligence agencies conduct surveillance of U.S. allies. The U.S. government has by no means admitted to this, but Edward Snowden’s whistle-blowing has publicly confirmed the matter for the first time.
Of course, this kind of data gathering is probably not limited to the U.S. It is a possibility that other countries have carried out similar activities to varying degrees.
However, as the leader of the capitalist faction since the Cold War, the U.S. has demonstrated a great deal of influence in the maintenance of international law and order. For this reason, the U.S. should evaluate the appropriateness of surveillance activity toward its allies. The U.S. has an obligation to explain its actions to the countries involved.
The recent whistle-blowing also made public the fact that the NSA has been obtaining civilian telephone and email records. While this may be an anti-terrorist measure, the question of whether the extensive collection of personal information should be allowed is making waves.
How do you preserve the balance between national security and individual privacy? How can national power be used to monitor the usage of information? The true merit of the "land of liberty" is being called into question.
The origin of this information was the English newspaper [The Guardian] that reported the information leaked by former CIA employee Edward Snowden. Snowden is being prosecuted for exposing the personal data collection activities of the NSA.
The U.S. government responded by saying, “The United States gathers foreign intelligence of the type gathered by all nations,” but this secret collection of information from foreign diplomatic establishments is naturally being interpreted as spying.
French President François Hollande criticized the U.S., saying, “We cannot accept this kind of behavior between partners and allies,” and demanded that it be stopped immediately.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga stated, “The reports are being confirmed through diplomatic channels.” Japan and the U.S. are allies. What kind of information was the U.S. collecting and for what purpose? I would like to see the Japanese government address the situation with a resolute attitude.
According to the report, devices attached to fax machines and antennas for picking up radio waves were used in EU delegations. It seems there were also techniques for secretly viewing computer data.
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made foreign embassies “inviolable,” and determined that the receiving country “shall permit and protect free communication” for diplomatic personnel. Hindering free communication by tampering with embassy equipment and intercepting radio waves is none other than foul play.
It is now an open secret that U.S. intelligence agencies conduct surveillance of U.S. allies. The U.S. government has by no means admitted to this, but Edward Snowden’s whistle-blowing has publicly confirmed the matter for the first time.
Of course, this kind of data gathering is probably not limited to the U.S. It is a possibility that other countries have carried out similar activities to varying degrees.
However, as the leader of the capitalist faction since the Cold War, the U.S. has demonstrated a great deal of influence in the maintenance of international law and order. For this reason, the U.S. should evaluate the appropriateness of surveillance activity toward its allies. The U.S. has an obligation to explain its actions to the countries involved.
The recent whistle-blowing also made public the fact that the NSA has been obtaining civilian telephone and email records. While this may be an anti-terrorist measure, the question of whether the extensive collection of personal information should be allowed is making waves.
How do you preserve the balance between national security and individual privacy? How can national power be used to monitor the usage of information? The true merit of the "land of liberty" is being called into question.