Snowden fallout: Revelations forced U.K. to pull out agents from “hostile countries”

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond told Sky News that Snowden had done a huge amount of damage to the West’s ability to protect its citizens.

“As to the specific allegations this morning [in the Sunday Times], we never comment on operational intelligence matters so I’m not going to talk about what we have or haven’t done in order to mitigate the effect of the Snowden revelations, but nobody should be in any doubt that Edward Snowden has caused immense damage,” he told Sky News.

The high-level source told the Sunday Times that they had no evidence that any agents or operatives had been harmed.

A “senior Home Office source” was also quoted by the newspaper, saying: “Putin didn’t give him asylum for nothing. His documents were encrypted but they weren’t completely secure and we have now seen our agents and assets being targeted.”

The Sunday Times also quoted a “British intelligence source” saying that Russian and Chinese officials would be examining Snowden’s material for “years to come.”

“Snowden has done incalculable damage,” the intelligence source reportedly said. “In some cases the agencies have been forced to intervene and lift their agents from operations to prevent them from being identified and killed.”

Too much zeal
In addition to the more run-of-the-mill, if still serious, criticism of Snowden – that he violated the contract he had signed with the NSA, that he weakened the U.S. ability to track its enemies and protect itself, and more – security experts were especially vexed by two questions.

First, by his decision to go to China and Russia: These are not only the two countries with the cyber capabilities to crack whatever encryption method he had chosen – these two countries have also been carrying out sustained cyberespionage and cyberattack campaigns against U.S. private organizations, government agencies, and U.S. critical infrastructure.

Second, Russia and China, both with great-power aspirations, are also the main targets of U.S. espionage, both by technical means and through human intelligence. The files Snowden was carrying with him, if cracked, would give both Russia and China knowledge about U.S. spy networks in these two countries, and also provide them with knowledge of the reach and scope of U.S. cyber espionage.

It was one thing, critics of Snowden argued, to rail, in the name of protecting the privacy of American citizens, against NSA domestic surveillance excesses — but it is not clear how the values Snowden confessed to cherish and the goals he said he was trying to promote are served by helping two authoritarian countries like Russia and China better defend themselves against U.S. surveillance, and how the privacy rights of Americans are enhanced by making these countries better equipped to conduct even more intrusive and more effective cyberattacks on U.S. private and government organizations.

The NSA may or may not need to collect and store the phone metadata of American citizens – lawmakers have been divided on this issue. But why would Snowden carry with him into China and Russia files containing detailed information about Western agents operating in these countries, and the methods the United States and the United Kingdom employ to keep a close eye on these two countries? Does Western spying on Russia and China also threatens the privacy of American citizens? Would the exposure of Western operatives in Russia and China, and thus ending their effectiveness in closely monitoring developments in these two countries, promote the security of Americans?

It is not difficult to agree with Snowden that the United States at times falls short of living up fully to the values of civil liberties and individual rights which it proclaims. Helping China and Russia is not helping the cause of civil liberties and individual rights, though: it is not as if Russia and China, too, fall short in their pursuit of civil liberties and individual rights — these two countries do not even proclaim these values as goals worthy of pursuit in the first place.

There is little doubt that the curbs on the NSA’s ability to collect phone metadata on American citizens – curbs which are part of the reforms of Section 215 of the patriot Act which passed Congress two weeks ago – were the result of Snowden’s revelations about the NSA domestic spying activities. Even supporters of Snowden, however, would have to ask themselves whether making it more difficult for the United States and the United Kingdom to spy on China and Russia helps the cause Snowden says he believes in.

To expose the scope of the NSA’s domestic activities – activities authorized and governed by the 2006 Section 215 – there was no need for Snowden to carry with him 1.7 million NSA files to China and Russia, since the vast majority of these files had nothing to do with Section 215-authorized domestic data collection.

Snowden has answered questions about why he leaked to the Guardian and the Washington Post files detailing the methods the NSA used in its domestic data collection. Snowden is yet to answer questions about why he took with him files that have nothing to do with domestic spying – like the files containing the names of Western agents in Russia and China and the details of U.S. and U.K. espionage operations in these two countries.

Talleyrand, the French politician and diplomat who represented France in the Congress of Vienna negotiations (1814-15) and who led the post-Napoleonic Bourbon Restoration, was known for his pithy one-liners and aphorisms. He said that his favorite was “Surtout, pas trop de zele” — “Above all, not too much zeal.”

Edward Snowden made a contribution to democratic governance by forcing Americans and their representatives in Congress to reflect on and debate the proper balance between security and privacy in the United States. As we learn more about the damage Snowden has done to the ability of the United States and the United Kingdom to protect themselves – “nobody should be in any doubt that Edward Snowden has caused immense damage,” in the words of U.K. Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond – we note that Edward Snowden would have done well to follow Talleyrand’s advice: Even the pursuit of worthy goals should not be infused with too much zeal.

Ben Frankel is the editor of the Homeland Security News Wire