Snowden's Five 'Burns' for the Obama Administration

A close look at the “sensational news” leaked by Snowden shows that his technique is very strategic and precise. It seems that he is selectively “setting fires”: causing a stir among Western citizens, fleeing to countries that include America’s allies and sticking the American government under the scrutiny of global public opinion to bear the political and moral pressure.

It’s been nearly a month since the PRISM incident occurred. Snowden himself as well as his continued disclosures continue to affect the views of the whole world. He slipped away to Hong Kong via Hawaii, then flew to Moscow and was detained at the airport. Russia rejected his conditions for political asylum, but he has put forward applications for asylum with 21 countries. Where he may ultimately take refuge has drawn much attention. Furthermore, he revealed details on the targets of the secret PRISM surveillance program: ranging from his American homeland to Hong Kong and mainland China, he also indicated the U.K., Russia and the G-20 Summit.

Recently, the German weekly Der Spiegel revealed that, according to the top-secret materials Snowden provided, Germany and the European Union are also important targets for America’s National Security Agency (NSA) network and communications monitoring. The report said that every month the NSA monitors 500 million German emails, voice and text messages, and a daily average of 15 million phone calls and 10 million sets of network data. This puts Germany with China as “third-class partners”; the U.S. is able at any moment to initiate an attack on the German network. The EU headquarters and its Washington and New York offices’ internal computer and telephone communications systems have also been invaded, tapped and monitored by the NSA. This matter has made the German government and European Union “shocked” and “gravely concerned.” They are threatening to suspend free trade between the United States and Europe in order to force America to account for its actions.

A close look at the “sensational news” leaked by Snowden shows that his technique is very strategic and precise. It seems he is selectively “setting fires”: causing a stir among Western citizens, fleeing to countries that include America’s allies and sticking the American government under the scrutiny of global public opinion to bear the political and moral pressure. It’s said that he will still carry his secret materials — backed up and encrypted — and send them to a number of people, but if he himself experiences any mishap, then the entirety of his material will be exposed. The PRISM incident has already “burned” the Obama government in a bad way, sticking them in the awkward position of passively fighting the flames in every direction. From an analytical point of view, this one incident has confronted America with “five adversities”:

First, it attacked and bruised the Obama administration’s domestic and international image and reputation — in particular, initiating high levels of concern and disputes among the American populace over counterterrorism, national security, protection of citizen privacy and the guarantee of network freedom for both sides.

Second, disclosure of certain scarcely known surveillance methods and extremely mysterious “family property” to unknowing outsiders has brought embarrassment and great shame upon the U.S. government and involved institutions. It’s no wonder that high-ranking American officials and important political figures would unanimously denounce Snowden’s behavior as “illegal” and “treasonous,” revoke his passport and pressure any concerned nations with requests for his extradition, promising to seize him and bring him to justice.

Third, it has damaged the cooperative network of security relationships and trust between the U.S. and its allies. But, as an ally, the U.S. government will do everything it can to explain the exposed content to the EU and other nations in private — to clarify and pacify — which ought to limit the damage. This cannot be overstated.

Fourth, in the international arena, the U.S. has always bombastically proclaimed and safeguarded the morality of so-called “network freedom” — now its credibility is being seriously questioned. America on one hand demands an open Internet in other nations, to protect network freedom and human rights, but on the other hand, it recklessly invades and monitors many nations’ network and communications activities. This cannot help but make every nation increasingly vigilant and doubtful of America’s views and methods. If America is to redeem and improve its international image, it will take quite a long time.

Fifth, America’s intentions to promote its policy, views and regulations across global cyberspace will be obstructed. In 2011, the Obama administration announced America’s first “International Strategy for Cyberspace: Prosperity, Security, and Openness in a Networked World” report. It expounded the United States’ seven policies for international cyberspace, sketching out a “U.S.-style blueprint” for the development and security of the global Internet. The occurrence of the PRISM scandal made every nation and international organization wary of U.S. attempts and intentions to lead global cyberspace policy, intensifying the urgency for autonomous defenses within each nation’s cyberspace security and calling for the promotion of democratization within global Internet governance.

America, always calling out other countries as cyberthreats, is essentially a thief crying, “Stop, thief!” PRISM has robbed the global Internet hegemon of any further credibility of its justness. Its reckless invasion and monitoring of other countries’ networks is the true cyberattack.

The Snowden matter primarily involves problems of national sovereignty and security, as well as international relations, while concerns of network freedom and of the whistle-blower’s human rights have become secondary. This point in the matter constitutes sufficient proof. There should no longer be any doubt: The Internet has borders.