Echelon:Espionage Without Ethics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Author. ECHELON:ESPIONAGE WITHOUT ETHICS John Bole MASSEY UNIVERSITY Table of Contents Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................... 1 Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 2 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 7 Origins of Espionage ............................................................................................................................. 10 How modern mass surveillance is conducted....................................................................................... 16 Reactions around the world differ ........................................................................................................ 19 Is mass surveillance a moral issue?....................................................................................................... 22 State Objectives .................................................................................................................................... 29 Delivery of State objectives .................................................................................................................. 38 Crime ..................................................................................................................................................... 39 Economic ............................................................................................................................................... 40 Terrorism ............................................................................................................................................... 42 Military intelligence .............................................................................................................................. 43 Principle of Double Effect ..................................................................................................................... 46 Trust ...................................................................................................................................................... 48 The Third Place ...................................................................................................................................... 50 Information ........................................................................................................................................... 52 Data security ......................................................................................................................................... 53 Profiling ................................................................................................................................................. 54 Privacy ................................................................................................................................................... 56 Implications of the Doctrine of Double Effect ...................................................................................... 67 State Security or Security State ............................................................................................................ 68 Priorities ................................................................................................................................................ 76 Society’s ability to self-correct .............................................................................................................. 85 Avoiding and preventing harm ............................................................................................................. 86 Will the question remain ours to answer? ........................................................................................... 93 Are we rational? .................................................................................................................................... 96 You simply comply because you never know when” they” might be watching ................................. 101 Is surveillance successful .................................................................................................................... 105 1 And now .............................................................................................................................................. 107 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 110 Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................ 114 Abstract In June 2013, Edward Snowden disclosed the extent of mass surveillance conducted across entire societies by five Western Governments. Snowden apparently hoped to generate a global debate on the appropriateness of these activities and the risk /reward trade-offs that society was being asked to make. Snowden seems to have either overestimated the concern of the average person or misunderstood their current level of understanding and acceptance of surveillance. Either way, the debate was short. In general, society seemed to register a level of disquiet but no specific concern. This paper seeks to determine if the disquiet is a consequence of human morality and to identify any specific moral concern. Introduction Throughout history, the value of having the right information at the appropriate time has always been given the holder an advantage. It is therefore not a surprise that information gathering has always played a significant role in society. The art of attaining information via espionage is an age old human endeavour. Since early civilisation, people have accepted that espionage should be conducted on their neighbouring states and that anyone attempting to steal the secrets from their society should be deemed a traitor and either imprisoned or executed. 2 This paper examines the primary objective of espionage and its objective of always achieving state security, both physical and economic. Much has been written over the years on the need for informational advantage and its function of maintaining power. Sun Tzu in his work The Art of War is a well-known advocate for military espionage (Creveld.M, 2002). Bentham took the concept much further in the 1790’s by designing the Panopticon and the desire to expand surveillance across an entire population (Bentham J. , 1995). Fiction writers have often explored the topic depicting various reasons and consequences for the behaviour. Perhaps the most famous of these is George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty- Four and the creation of Big Brother and the active control of society written in 1949 (Orwell, 2008). However, the depicted mass surveillance has not been a practical option for any state that might have had the aspiration, until now. In the digital age, mass surveillance has become not only a possibility but a practical reality. In June 2013, an intelligent agent in the U.S. broke ranks with his employer and his country by divulging the extent of surveillance that the U.S. and some of its allies were conducting on a global scale. The disclosures put an end to the speculation that the departments within governments had created a vast surveillance mechanism. The rumours that phone calls and all computer access and activities are being monitored were verified. However, the extent of the surveillance surpassed most people’s expectations when they learnt that everything conducted via a digital medium was being accessed, processed and stored. The general public’s view of privacy, confidentiality and personal security was suddenly called into question. The outcry from civil rights groups and politicians across the world was instant but, perhaps not surprisingly, short lived. It was generally considered appropriate to focus surveillance on terrorists and criminals, but not on any law abiding citizens. There was possibly even a mild acceptance of international political espionage. However for the majority of people, it was seen as an unnecessary intrusion into what they considered being their right to privacy. The highest level of anxiety was among people who now populate the social communication networks often referred to as the infosphere, public sphere or third place. However, in general, the voiced anxiety disappeared and did not last. 3 While some people argued surveillance is somehow wrong, they failed to express exactly why. They used terms such as illegal, immoral, unethical and a breach of rights or privacy. In general citizens felt a sense of disquiet. This paper explores the possibility that the reason for the disquiet is based on a justifiable moral concern. It may be that the general population simply trust that their state is undertaking the surveillance on their behalf. After all, in the conception of the state by contract theorists such as Hobbes and Locke, the State is an organisation constituted