Unsure and unsnowed by Snowden

 Published

2013/07/07

We're split over NSA leaker Edward Snowden. According to a new Huffington Post/Yougov Poll, 38 percent of Americans think it was wrong to expose government secrets while 33 percent say it was the right thing. Another 29 percent are unsure. I find myself in that unsure category.

It's not because recent reports cast Snowden as an anti-Obama activist. It's not that Snowden used to be pro-intelligence under President George W. Bush, and anti-spying, anti-government once Barack Obama became president. Nope.

While I'm interested in knowing about the government's domestic spying efforts, I'm wary of this manner of revelation. I question whether it's a good idea to have self-appointed leakers of government activities. Is it worth it compared to the harm done? It's not cut and dried for me.

There are some who consider Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and Wikileaks heroes for exposing the truth. I've never bought into that simply because they don't know the big picture. They don't have all the pieces of the puzzle. And as much as we may question government secrecy, why would we entrust individuals with the right to decide what should and shouldn't be made public?

What if a CIA analyst, Navy SEAL or Nightstalker helicopter pilot had misgivings about penetrating so deeply into the sovereign territory of Pakistan for the Osama Bin Laden raid and put the info online right before the raid? Would that be okay? What if Pakistan shot down the two helicopters carrying the special operations forces?

What if instead of a U.S. contractor, it was a Chinese or North Korean agent that exposed the NSA's spying program to the American public? Would you think those foreign intelligence services were heroic in revealing this information to the American people? Or would you be concerned about the nation's security? Or both?

When I think of whistleblowers, I think of someone who works at a job, discovers something is not right and then reveals it. Snowden, however, has said he took the job with the NSA contractor in order to collect and reveal secrets. That's not a whistleblower. That's a spy. And perhaps some wouldn't make a distinction and perhaps it makes no difference as long as the information is revealed. I disagree. Of course, it's up to the government to make sure its agencies and clandestine activities are secure, but if it's true that Snowden took the job to spy, he's not a whistleblower. He's no different from a member of a foreign intelligence agency.

Edward Snowden has said,  "I had access to the full rosters of everyone working at the NSA, the entire intelligence community, and undercover assets all over the world. The locations of every station, we have what their missions are, and so forth.”

On the surface, this looks like bluster. It looks like the same kind of puffery serial killers engage in when they're arrested. They've killed 10 people but claimed to have killed 100. It seems like someone trying to inflate their importance and extend their 15 minutes.

But what if he's not embellishing? What if someone has this information and then goes to China and then Russia with it? Is Edward Snowden still a hero if he sells out the identity of human intelligence assets all over the globe, crippling U.S. intelligence? What if he exposes the identity of agents who were trying to prevent terror cells from obtaining radioactive material from Pakistan? What if he compromises the activity of individuals trying to prevent the next underwear bomber from flying into the U.S. and exploding a jetliner over a major American city? What if his information results in U.S. soldiers and contractors being killed or tortured around the globe? What if an operation to prevent an atomic weapon from being smuggled into the U.S. through a shipping container is compromised?

His actions have seriously damaged the United States. Behind the scenes, assets have had to be reshuffled, operations halted and methodologies changed. That much is common sense. It's harmed our relations with our allies. There's no telling how many future helpful assets his revelations have cost us from people afraid to work with the U.S. for fear of their identities being compromised. There is also no telling what harm we're inviting, not just through terror but also  economically. Remember that espionage isn't only about warfare. It's about keeping competitive advantages secret. There's plenty of corporate espionage that goes on.

Wikileaks and its cadre of spies and whistleblowers do serve an important purpose. It delivers transparency in government. It gives citizens more information to see if they approve of how their government is functioning. It forces governments to be more careful. It forces governments to be more meticulous about their hiring and screening process. It also forces them to be even more secretive. There's a difference between government secrecy that involves national security vs. government secrecy that's only about covering someone's ass.

But the eternal struggle is – who gets to decide?

As for Snowden, the U.S. government is moving heaven and earth to get him. This past week  Spain, Portugal, and France denied the Bolivian president's plane use of their airspace, forcing him to land in Austria over fears Snowden may have been aboard the plane. In a week's time, Russian President Vladimir Putin went from welcoming Snowden to chastising him about harming relations with America. There had to be an incredible amount of unseen American pressure to get Putin to change his tune.

However, the least of Mr. Snowden's worries is being transported back to America for trial. In September 2011, the U.S. used a drone strike to kill American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. Al-Awlaki's crime was giving speeches that encouraged Al-Qaeda terrorists. Speeches.

If the U.S. government will extrajudicially kill an American citizen for giving anti-American speeches, then what do you think they'd do to the guy who exposed the biggest intelligence program in American history?

I wish I could unabashedly champion Snowden, Wikileaks and leakers in general. I want to know what our government is doing. I want there to be a check on the different branches, especially when a branch has given up their constitutionally mandated role. But at the same time, this isn't an academic exercise. There are real world consequences to these actions that, as a citizen of this country, I may have to bear the brunt of.

So while we may love being informed, let's hope the cost isn't too high.