Deutsche Welle (WWW - Dw.de) 2013-14

TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
Does the EU need its own spies?

SPY GAME: CAN ANYONE CONTROL THE NSA?
The EU justice commissioner thinks Europe needs its own central intelligence office, as a
"counterweight" to the NSA. But the legal and political obstacles are significant, say
experts, and would it even be worth it?
Viviane Reding, the European Union's justice commissioner, was in combative mood when she spoke
to Greek newspaper Naftemporiki on Monday (04.11.2013). Asked to comment on Edward Snowden's
revelations about the US National Security Agency's activities - particularly the mass surveillance of EU
citizens' data - Reding suggested it was time Europe pushed back: "What we need is to strengthen
Europe in this field, so we can level the playing field with our US partners."
Reding went on to make a concrete proposal: "I would therefore wish to use this occasion to negotiate
an agreement on stronger secret service co-operation among the EU member states - so that we can
speak with a strong common voice to the US," she said. "The NSA needs a counterweight. My long-
term proposal would therefore be to set up a European Intelligence Service by 2020."
There was obviously a political point in the notion as much as a practical one - perhaps a rhetorical
exercise to assert European power. One EU official assured the EUobserver website that Reding had
spoken off the cuff, and had not yet discussed her idea with fellow commissioners.
Europe's disadvantage
Reding's partially-veiled anger is
understandable, given that the NSA allegedly
spied on several EU leaders, EU offices both in
Brussels and elsewhere, and on EU citizens.
"There is a perception among European
bureaucracy that Europe is at a disadvantage,"
said Nigel Inkster, director of transnational
Viviane Reding thinks its time to 'level the playing field'
threats and political risk at the International

Institute for Strategic Studies, and a former
British Secret Intelligence Service official. "So when Europe wants to exercise leverage over America on
issues of this kind it can't do so through the same mechanism. It's only option is to do so through
legislation around issues like data protection."
The proposal for a European intelligence agency is not new. The idea was first mooted after the
Madrid train bombings in 2004, when the governments of Austria and Belgium called for an EU-wide
agency to pool counter-terrorist intelligence. That idea was duly cold-shouldered by France, Germany,
and the UK - partly because of the daunting political problems involved.
For one thing, it would require a comprehensive revision of the Lisbon Treaty, which currently says
clearly that security is a national concern. "At the end of the day, intelligence collection is almost the
supreme expression of national sovereignty," said Inkster. "It is quintessentially national in its purpose
and intent."
Intelligence nightmares
There are plenty of reasons why major European countries would not want to share information with
their smaller neighbors, pointed out Paul Schulte, former defense official in the British government
and senior associate with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "Who would agree to have
their national information-flow fed into some multi-national pool?" he told DW. "Would they be able
to keep agents, would they be able to keep budgetary appropriations? You get free-rider problems
immediately."
Schulte also suggested that the perennial problems
hanging over intelligence and national security
issues - dealing with parliamentary oversight, the
threat of leaks - would only be complicated by
keeping a centralized office. "That's a nightmare of
intelligence officials - every time you share
something, you risk its usefulness being devalued,
because the message gets out that you know this,"
said Schulte. "So you have to think about the pretty
EU offices in Brussels were also targeted by the NSA
hideous problems of credibly maintaining

confidentiality amongst 28 member states - some of which may not have the highest standards of
counterintelligence and internal security."
If it's not broken

Europe already maintains some central information-sharing organizations. The EU Intelligence
Analysis Centre (EU INTCEN) provides intelligence analysis to EU High Representative Catherine
Ashton and to the European External Action Service, while counter-terrorism specialists meet
regularly within the EU Council's working group CP931. On top of that, there are bilateral intelligence-
sharing forums outside the EU structure, such as the Club de Berne, an organization within which the
EU's 28 members share their secrets voluntarily.
Other international organizations operate by the same loose principles. "We've got this in NATO -
everyone gets some information, but there are a great many things held back by individual
governments or shared only on an inner-circle basis," said Schulte. "If you try and formalize this, and
say this must be EU-wide, it's not going to happen - there will be some formal acknowledgement, and
some cosmetic high-profile sharing, but the real crown jewels are still going to be jealously guarded."
"For it to constitute an improvement, you'd have to have a lot more harmonization of a lot of
arrangements within Europe, including different legal systems," said Inkster. "A European intelligence
service, if one were to be established, would necessarily take time to bed down and develop anything
like the capabilities that already exist."
D W.D E
US Privacy Board 'is unique in the world'

How can US surveillance be both more effective and more accountable? DW spoke to David Medine, chairman o f
the P rivacy and Civil Liberties Board, which is charged with protecting US civil liberties. (05.11.2013)
TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
US Congress divided on NSA reform

proposals
A US Senate intelligence review panel has found shortcomings in the NSA spy agency. The
panel of experts has been cross-examined by a Senate committee, which made an effort to
calm concerns about implementing reforms.
The National Security Agency (NSA) must be reformed: The review panel is unanimous on this point,
even if Congress is not.
Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the judiciary committee that interviewed the intelligence experts,
gave the hand-picked panel his backing. "I believe strongly that we must impose stronger limits on
government surveillance powers," the Democrat said on Tuesday (14.01.2014) at the start of the
hearing. But those called to testify before the committee apparently did not want to put it as starkly as
that. The five authors of the 308-page report entitled, "Liberty and Security in a Changing World,"
were adamant about not jeopardizing the work of the NSA.
"Much of our focus has been on maintaining the ability of the intelligence-community to do what it
needs to do," said one of the panel, law professor Cass Sunstein. "And we emphasize - if there is one
thing to emphasize, it is this - that not one of the 46 recommendations of our report would in our view
compromise or jeopardize this ability in any way."
Improve, not impair

The report, he added, was not meant to destroy the NSA - though
it clearly does not come out of the assessment well - but to
improve it, "by increasing safeguards against insider threats and
by eliminatiing certain gaps in the law that make it hard to track
people under circumstances in which we have reasons to believe
they don't wish to do us well, " said Sunstein.
Senator Leahy, who led the Senate
hearing, supports limits on
surveillance
The panel, consisting of two constitutional lawyers, a data

protection expert, ex-CIA deputy director Michael Morell, and
anti-terrorism expert Richard Clarke, presented their report to the
White House in December. There was "a misperception on the
part of the media and much of the American public that the review group had indeed recommended
an end to the program and we did not do that," said Morell. "We recommended a change in
approach."
That means change not only within the US - but abroad too. The panel's recommendations include a
proposal that the NSA limit its foreign surveillance activities - and not only among world leaders. The
experts said future NSA directors should be civilians and at least partly chosen by the Senate. On top
of this, his areas of responsibility should be split between cyber security and the NSA's offensive
capabilities.
Metadata program
But the most important and substantial reform, the
panel suggested, was the metadata program. This
program, which allows the NSA to randomly
collect citizens' phone and internet data, was
brought to light last June through the revelations
of whistleblower Edward Snowden. Morell
admitted that critics were right to say that this
program had not prevented any terrorist attacks. "
The program only has to be successful once to be
President Obama is due to announce his reform plans
invaluable," he added.
shortly
Sunstein emphasized that the important thing was

to manage various risks. "First and foremost the risk of national security, but including also the risk to
public trust, the risk to privacy, risk to economic values and risk to democratic self-governance," he
said. For these reasons, the panel recommended that the government pull out of the business of
collecting information for its own sake. Instead, a third party, such as a telecommunications company,
should store the data for a limited period and make it available to the government on request. This
proposal has been dismissed as window dressing by digital rights activists, whereas others believe it
goes too far.
House and American people divided

Regardless of what reforms Obama announces on Friday (17.01.2014), the president is limited when it
comes to implementing the panel's proposals. On most points, he needs Congressional approval. But
just like the US public itself, the House of Representatives and the Senate are divided on the reforms,
says long-term CIA employee Fred Fleitz, a former member of the Congressional intelligence
committee.
"There is a great deal of acrimony within the US
Congress on what to do," he said. "There is an
odd alliance between the right and left of
politicians who want to roll back the metadata
program and put strict limits on certain NSA
surveillance programs because they believe they
infringe on the proxy rights of Americans."
Many would even block reforms, if they don't go
The NSA was caught spying on allies, causing a great deal
of acrimony
far enough, while others are against them

because they are worried about undermining US
security standards. "However there is also a very
strong bipartisan Senate intelligence committee bill which would improve the NSA program and
address concerns about it without shutting it down," said Fleitz.
Fleitz, who works for the think tank Center for Security Policy, thinks any reform bill would have good
chances of being approved, though it could take some time to pass through both houses of Congress
and be implemented. Many analysts even doubt whether Obama will even be able to complete the job
in his tenure.
D W.D E
'No-spy deal is no cure-all'

Germany's f uture transatlantic coordinator P hilipp Missfelder says it would be a setback if the No-Spy Agreement
didn't come about. But the agreement wouldn't answer all the questions either. (14.01.2014)
TOP STORIES / GERMANY
IN TEL L IGEN C E
'No-spy deal is no cure-all'

Germany's future transatlantic coordinator Philipp Missfelder says it would be a setback if

the No-Spy Agreement didn't come about. But the agreement wouldn't answer all the
questions either.
In the wake of the NSA affair, Germany and the US have begun talks to find an agreement on the
activities of their spy agencies. In November 2013, the minister responsible for the German intelligence
agencies, Ronald Pofalla, said that negotiations on the so-called No-Spy Agreement were going well,
but the Sddeutsche Zeitung newspaper and state TV network NDR have reported that the talks are
close to breaking down.
Deutsche Welle: Does this latest development mean there is no reason to assume that US spying
activities will cease?
Philipp Missfelder: The agreement has not yet really collapsed. It's too early to say that for certain. I'm
convinced that it would be a setback for our cooperation with the US if the agreement did not come
about. In principle, I welcome the No-Spy Agreement, but let's not deceive ourselves: even if a No-Spy
Agreement were to be signed, there would still be many unanswered questions. The principles
governing how data is exchanged are a very difficult issue. And we would have to be certain that any
such agreement would actually be kept.
Isn't it nave of the Germans to believe that the US would seriously restrict its activities in Germany,
or even give them up?
I think the US needs to see the damage all this activity has done, and how much trust has been lost in
Germany. As allies, we can't allow ourselves a situation like the current one to continue for long - and
that doesn't just apply in the case of Germany, it applies to many others among America's partners.
Does that mean that the United States has to commit to greater self-restraint in the future?
The same self-restraint is also being discussed very intensively in the US - the discussion there is even
livelier than it is here. That's why it's clear that we have to try to maintain the transatlantic partnership
and friendship. But the gap which has emerged between us has to be closed again.
How should the gap be closed? Without the agreement, little will have changed - the US continues to
treat its allies like potential enemies.
No, that's not the case. Some of the American agencies have a questionable understanding of their
role, but America treats us as a friend and we are still friends and nothing will change that. It's just
that some of the agencies have shifted the balance in a direction which does not fit with US' political
conceptions. The fact is: the US is very helpful to us in many things, such as Germany's domestic and
international security - in the fight against terror, or with regard to cooperation in such things as
international military operations. Afghanistan is one example, the resolution of the conflict in the
former Yugoslavia is another. We remain good friends and want to remain good friends. But the
friendship has been damaged by the fact that the agencies have taken what they wanted without
asking.
But now it looks as if it's the US that is not prepared to make concessions. It seems that the US fears
setting a precedent, since other countries could come and make similar demands. Should one take
account of US interests?
I don't accept those arguments. We want this agreement and we will continue to make efforts to
achieve it.
Philipp Missfelder is the new German government's designated coordinator for transatlantic
relations. He's a member of Angela Merkel's Christian Democrat Union in the German parliament
and its spokesman on foreign affairs.
D W.D E
German media blast US 'No' to no-spy agreement

After last year's media o utrage was appeased by the prospect o f a no-spy pact, recent reports that US-German
talks are unlikely to lead to binding promises o n the US side have o nce again stoked the German media f ire.
(14.01.2014)
Scowcroft: 'We're searching for a common strategy'

Brent Scowcroft is o ne o f Washingtons most renowned security experts. In an interview with DW, the f ormer
security adviser under P residents Ford and Bush senior analyzes the current challenges. (11.01.2014)
ACLU: 'NSA reforms should apply worldwide'

US P resident Barack Obama will soon announce plans f or reforming the NSA spy agency. American Civil Liberties
Union National Security Fellow, Brett Kaufmann, told DW that he f ears the reforms may not go f ar enough.
(10.01.2014)
Date 14.01.2014
Author Interview: Sven Phle / mll
Editor Ben Knight
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Feedback: Send us an e-mail. Please include your name and country in your reply.
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1AqYA
M OR E C ON TEN T
TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
ACLU: 'NSA reforms should apply

worldwide'
US President Barack Obama will soon announce plans for reforming the NSA spy agency.
American Civil Liberties Union National Security Fellow, Brett Kaufmann, told DW that
he fears the reforms may not go far enough.
The ACLU is one of many groups opposed to the NSA's spying practices
DW: Obama's reform plans are based on the advice of a review panel he appointed. What do you
think will substantially change when it comes to the work of the foreign intelligence service, NSA?
Brett Kaufman: The most important reform in substance will be the reform of the metadata program,
in which the government is collecting records about all the phone calls made and received within the
United States. That's what the ACLU is watching most closely and that has been the subject of most of
the debate here in the United States.
The President's handpicked review panel recommended that the government get out of the business of
collecting all of this information. It said that the government really should not be demanding these call
records from telecommunications companies. And that's a really important marker in this debate.
The review group suggested the possibility that a third party might hold the records, or that the
telecommunication companies themselves might be forced to retain the records for a certain period of
time. We [at the ACLU] think that that kind of system is no solution at all because it raises the same
kind of privacy concerns that the government's collection of this information does. So we're watching
very closely to see what President Obama recommends.
Will the planned reform have any consequences for the leadership of the intelligence services, such as
the director of US intelligence, James Clapper, who in March 2013 was still denying that the NSA
collected data from millions of US citizens?
There hasn't been much talk of Mr. Clapper moving on. But Keith Alexander, the head of the NSA,
and one of his important colleagues are both retiring in the

months ahead. So there will be a discussion of replacing those
individuals. And one of the topics that the president's review
group addressed was the possibility of splitting the roles that Keith
Alexander now holds - which addresses both cyber security as well
as the NSA's offensive capacities. There's also discussion of putting
a civilian in that role rather than a military officer. Those things
were probably good ideas, though it still remains to be seen where
the president will come out on those proposals.
After everything that has come to light lately, the review panel
has also suggested more restraint in intercepting
communications from foreign head of states. But would the NSA
Brett Kaufman works for the ACLU's
National Security Project
reform also offer more privacy protection to ordinary non-US

citizens, for instance Europeans?
One of the most important and probably underreported proposals of the review panel was the
recommendation that certain privacy protections currently afforded to Americans also be applied
abroad.
It's just a fact that the NSA should not be conducting these kinds of bulk surveillance programs on the
entire world. And that's exactly what's currently happening. The US government is subjecting the
population of the entire world to a mass surveillance regime. And that is in violation of the
government's responsibilities under international treaties and international law.
We [the ACLU] sincerely hope that reforms are made that restrict some of these abusive practices - not
just in the United States - but around the world.
Lawyer Brett Max Kaufman is a National Security Fellow for the American Civil Liberties Union's
(ACLU) National Security Project.
D W.D E
EU report reveals massive scope of secret NSA surveillance

The European P arliament has wrapped up its inquiry into mass surveillance. In a draft report, politicians are
being hard o n all sides - the US government, the NSA, but also o n hesitant EU governments and companies.
(09.01.2014)
NSA surveillance eroded transatlantic trust

One year ago, most people o n either side o f Atlantic had scant o r no knowledge o f the NSA and its activities.
Edward Snowdens revelations changed all that and rocked o ne o f the pillars o f transatlantic relations.
(27.12.2013)
Pressure builds to crack down on NSA spying

Not o nly is Obama's advisory panel putting pressure o n the president, but Congress is also considering two bills
aimed at the NSA's spying programs. Will they provide additional protections f or non-US citizens? (19.12.2013)
Date 10.01.2014
Author Antje Passenheim (Washington) / asb
Editor Gregg Benzow
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1AoYt
M OR E C ON TEN T
TOP STORIES / WORLD / EUROPE
C IVIL R IGH TS
EU report reveals massive scope of secret

NSA surveillance
The European Parliament has wrapped up its inquiry into mass surveillance. In a draft
report, politicians are being hard on all sides - the US government, the NSA, but also on
hesitant EU governments and companies.
It was Thursday afternoon and the first week after the winter break and it was hardly a surprise that
only few seats were filled in room JAN 2Q2 at the European Parliament (EP) in Brussels. But Claude
Moraes, British MEP from the group of Socialists and Social Democrats (S&D), woke the European
Union from its winter slumber with a bang.
The rapporteur of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) had come to
present the 52-page draft report on the committee's inquiry into the NSA spying scandal and its
implications on European citizens. The draft report is hard on all sides - including governments and
companies in the EU.
"Collect, store, analyze"

The report summarizes the findings from the past six months. On page 16, the text says that the recent
revelations in the press by whistleblowers and journalists, together with the expert evidence given
during the inquiry, have resulted in "compelling evidence of the existence of far-reaching, complex
and highly technologically advanced systems designed by US and some Member States' intelligence
services to collect, store and analyze communication and location data and metadata of all citizens
around the world on an unprecedented scale and in an indiscriminate and non-suspicion-based
manner."
The authors explicitly point at Britain's signals intelligence agency GCHQ and its upstream
surveillance activity (Tempora program) as well as decryption program (Edgehill), and add that it's
quite likely that programs of a similar nature as the NSA's and GCHQ's exist - "even if on a more
limited scale" - in countries like France, Germany and Sweden.
Claude Moraes and his fellow committee

members drew their conclusions from hearing a
variety of experts during the second half of 2013
- among them technology insiders, civil rights
activists, legal experts, US politicians, former
secret service employees and spokespeople of
companies such as Microsoft and Yahoo.
Journalist Glenn Greenwald also testified. He
Claude Moraes' draft report is a sweeping blow targeting
was the first to publish former NSA contractor
both US and EU authorities
Edward Snowden's revelations.
Fight against terrorism = a fig leaf

The fight against terrorism, according to the committee's draft report, can "never in itself be a
justification for untargeted, secret and sometimes even illegal mass surveillance programs." Moraes
and his fellow rapporteurs showed themselves unconvinced that the NSA's only goal is the fight
against terrorism, as the US government has claimed. In their draft report, European politicians
suspect that there are instead "other power motives," such as "political and economic espionage."
Moraes wrote that "privacy is not a luxury right,
but the ... foundation stone of a free and
democratic society." Above all, the draft report
condemns the "vast, systemic, blanket collection of
the personal data of innocent people."
The authors add that mass surveillance has
potentially severe effects on the freedoms of the
press, thought and speech, as well as a significant
potential for abuse of the information gathered
against political adversaries. In a nutshell, Moraes
EU buildings' IT infrastructure must be better protected

against political espionage, demand MEPs
said, surveillance programs are "yet another step

towards the establishment of a fully fledged preventive state."
During Thursday's session, MEPs repeated the call to halt negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and
Investment Partnership with the United States. But Kilian Froitzhuber from German-language blog
netzpolitik.org said he doesn't believe that talks will be suspended. He told DW he was glad, however,
to see that "in the draft report, the committee announces that the European Parliament won't sign any
agreement that doesn't explicitly protect the civil liberties of European citizens."
Will Edward Snowden testify?

The committee expressed its intention to hear from Edward Snowden himself. But it's not clear
whether that will happen. British Conservative MEP Timothy Kirkhope and others insisted Snowden
has to appear in a live and interactive session rather than sending a recorded testimony. Kirkhope was
among the LIBE committee members who have attempted to discredit Snowden, and on Thursday in a
written statement he reiterated his belief that Snowden "has endangered lives."
Internet policy activist Froitzhuber said Snowden's appearance in an EP hearing "would probably not
help bring about major new revelations, but it would be a great sign."
And MEP Jan-Philipp Albrecht from the Green group said it is
vital to acknowledge Snowden's work as a whistleblower. The
American, who has been granted asylum in Russia, should no
longer be seen as a criminal, Albrecht told DW, adding that
"Snowden has brought this all to light. I think it's very clear after
this inquiry how huge this scandal is and that we would never
have heard about it if Edward Snowden hadn't taken this step."
Jan Philipp Albrecht and the Greens
want asylum for Edward Snowden in
the EU
The European Parliament's committee inquiry into the spying

scandal was the first of this scale. No individual EU country has
looked into the scandal this thoroughly and no EU government
has been as explicit in its criticism of the US government.

That's hardly a surprise, according to Froitzhuber, who told DW that "national governments in Europe
are not interested in shedding light on the issue to this extent. The European Parliament is clearly
more independent in this respect."
Walking the walk

"This is a mature parliament when it comes to data protection and privacy," committee rapporteur
Moraes said in summary. Over recent years, the European Parliament has undertaken extensive
inquiries into data exchange agreements, such as Swift and Safe Harbor. But all too often, they have
had little implications, the committee said.
The list of policy recommendations in the draft report is long: Countries like Germany ought to revise
their laws so they're compatible with the basic right to privacy and data protection; parliamentary
control bodies that look into secret service activities ought to be equipped with better technological
know-how; and the EU's IT infrastructure ought to be better protected against attacks even if that
costs money - are just some of the recommendations.
Albrecht said he is convinced the inquiry has helped European citizens understand just how important
European standards are for their civil liberties and the protection of privacy. This, he hopes, may
ultimately lead to a higher voter turnout at the European elections coming up in May. "When they
realize that they're invited to go to elections for the next EP I think they'll consider how this EP and the
political groups have acted on the question of protecting their civil liberties in the European Union."
The LIBE committee will put its draft report up for debate at a session next Monday (13.01.2014) and
up for a final vote on 23.01.2014. Sophie in 't Veld, a member of the LIBE committee from the Dutch
Liberals, had this comment on Thursday: "We've been very naive, but if there are any hackers out there
- you have until next week."
D W.D E
ACLU: 'NSA reforms should apply worldwide'

US P resident Barack Obama will soon announce plans f or reforming the NSA spy agency. American Civil Liberties
Union National Security Fellow, Brett Kaufmann, told DW that he f ears the reforms may not go f ar enough.
Report: NSA seeking to develop 'quantum computer'

The NSA is seeking to build a quantum computer capable o f breaking most encryption codes, the Washington
Post has reported. Encryption is used to protect sensitive information including banking and emails. (03.01.2014)
Germany eyes parliamentary inquiry into NSA activities

German politicians across party borders have spoken o ut in f avour o f setting up a parliamentary inquiry into the
NSA's spying activities in Germany. But what could such a panel achieve? (03.01.2014)
WWW L IN KS
Go to the EU surveillance report
Date 09.01.2014
Author Nina Haase, Brussels
Editor Sean Sinico
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1Ao6t
M OR E C ON TEN T
U N ITED STATES
Germany eyes parliamentary inquiry into

NSA activities
German politicians across party borders have spoken out in favour of setting up a
parliamentary inquiry into the NSA's spying activities in Germany. But what could such a
panel achieve?
German coalition and opposition politicians can hardly conceal their restment as more details about
the extent of the US National Security Agency's surveillance activities on private citizens are made
public, including spy software for computers and mobile phones, mobile communication listening
posts and manipulated USB ports. They don't necessarily agree, however, on how to tackle the scandal
in Germany.
Early on, the opposition Left Party and the Greens demanded setting up a Bundestag investigative
committee, regarded as the chamber's strongest weapon since, at least in theory, such a committee has
the right to question an unlimited number of witnesses.
Presidential testimony?
The opposition parties, however, lack the 25 percent of the vote needed to appoint a Bundestag
parliamentary inquiry on their own. Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats (CDU) has more
or less dismissed the idea, while the Social Democrats (SPD) have been hesitant.
Surprisingly, Horst Seehofer, the head of the
CDU's Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social
Union (CSU), this week joined in the
opposition's calls for an inquiry, even promising
to help set up an investigative committee.
But Hans-Peter Uhl, a parliamentary
spokesman on interior policy for the
conservatives, says the CSU remains
Obama apologized to Merkel for the extent of the phone-
monitoring
unconvinced whether such a committee makes
sense, and he questions what exactly it would

investigate. "A German parliament can't monitor the actions of foreign governments," Uhl told DW,
noting that it is unclear who would be called to testify. It's not likely, he said, that "you'll get Obama as
a witness before a German parliamentary inquiry."
Qualified witnesses
Hans-Christian Strbele, a veteran Green Party lawmaker and member of the parliamentary
committee that oversees German intelligence, disagrees. If German data transmitted via US-owned
glass fibre cables or servers is no longer safe, he said, then "we can't just watch and say that's a foreign
intelligence service at work - we can't interfere." The problem of questioning qualified witnesses isn't
new and is certainly no reason not to try, Strbele told DW.
SPD deputy Michael Hartmann remains
unconvinced a committee would contribute much
in clarifying NSA activities in Germany. NSA
director Keith Alexander isn't likely to stop by in
person, he told DW. The question is, he asked, can
an inquiry throw light on the issue, and if so, to
what extent?"
Hartmann said the Social Democrats arent
opposed to an inquiry, in principal, but it "should
Berliners protested against NSA surveillance
not be a shot in the dark or raise expectations it

can't possibly fulfil." An inquiry, he added, should "confine itself to investigating to what extent
Germany's intelligence agencies may be involved in the issue."
The SPD is in somewhat of a fix. When the NSA scandal surfaced in 2013, the party was still in the
opposition and harshly critical of how Chancellor Merkel and her government handled the
surveillance affair. Today, the SPD rules in a national coalition government with the CDU - and has
had to adjust its tone of voice.
Snowden's role
The previous government, Hartmann concedes, kept a fairly low profile during the early days of the
surveillance affair. But he says the situation changed when it became known that US intelligence
wiretapped the Chancellor's cellphone.
Hartmann and Strbele agree that former NSA
contractor Edward Snowden, whose
information triggered the scandal, would be a
good witness for a potential parliamentary
inquiry. Snowden, they say, may easily be the
only one knowledgeable enough about the NSA
- and willing - to testimony before a German
committee.
Strbele visited Snowden in Moscow in November 2013
Uhl has a different view of the NSA

whistleblower, he believes Snowden was never
an NSA expert. "He was an administrator who passed on data on a large scale but is in no position to
assess the information he passed on," Uhl said.
But the dispute over Snowden, observers point out, is academic, even if a parliamentary inquiry were
to begin its investigations into NSA activities in Germany. As the German government refuses to grant
the NSA whistleblower political asylum, it is unclear how Snowden could testify before a committee in
Germany without risking extradition to the US.
D W.D E

(27.12.2013)
TOP STORIES
N SA SC AN D AL
Report: NSA seeking to develop 'quantum

computer'
The NSA is seeking to build a quantum computer capable of breaking most encryption
codes, the Washington Post has reported. Encryption is used to protect sensitive
information including banking and emails.
The Washington Post cited documents leaked by former US National Security Agency contractor
Edward Snowden in a report published Thursday detailing the latest revelations.
The newspaper said the quantum computer currently under development could be used to break
encryption codes designed to secure protect global medical, banking, business and government records
stored online.
It added that the research into the machine, which it said would be exponentially faster than classical
computers, was part of a $79.7 million (58.35-million-euro) research program called "Penetrating
Hard Targets."
The report said many in the scientific community had long been seeking to develop quantum
computers. The machines would be capable of performing several calculations at once, rather than in
a single stream.
While it is unclear how the NSA's progress compared to that of private efforts, one expert cited by the
newspaper said it was unlikely the US agency could be close to creating the machine without the
knowledge of the scientific community.
"It seems improbable that the NSA could be that far ahead of the open world without anybody
knowing it," Scott Aaronson of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology said.
The Post said the NSA declined to comment on the report.
US debates legality of data collection

Snowden triggered widespread outrage earlier this year when he leaked information on huge US
surveillance programs targeting phone records and internet communications of private citizens. The
United States has since charged him with espionage, with the possibility that further charges could
follow. He is now living in Russia, where he has been granted a year's asylum.
His revelations prompted widespread debate about the balance between individual privacy and the
battle against terrorism in US society.
Last week a US district court ruled that the NSA's collection of so-called metadata on phone usage by
US citizens was legal. That came days after another US judge said collecting and storing metadata -
information on numbers dialed and the dates and durations of calls, but not audio from the phone
calls - likely constituted a breach of the US Constitution. The issue is now likely to move to the US
Supreme Court.
Meanwhile US President Barack Obama is currently reviewing recommendations on proposed changes
to US surveillance programs leveled by Snowden, and is expected to announce reforms next month.
ccp/jlw (AFP, Reuters)
D W.D E
US judge rules NSA phone surveillance lawful, contrasting with prior verdict
A US district court in New York has ruled in f avor o f the NSA collecting bulk "metadata" o n people's phone
records, days after a contradictory verdict f rom a different court. The Justice Department said it was "pleased."
(27.12.2013)

(27.12.2013)
Snowden warns about surveillance in 'Christmas Message'

Former US intelligence contractor Edward Snowden has warned o f the loss o f the private sphere in the so-called
'Alternative Christmas Message.' It was his f irst major media appearance since claiming asylum in Russia.
(25.12.2013)
Blind quantum computing points to the future

A Vienna team has shown how to send encrypted data to a quantum computer. But a stable and powerful quantum
computer remains a long way o ff. (09.02.2012)
Date 03.01.2014
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1Ake6
M OR E C ON TEN T
Istanbul police clash with

protesters angered by plans
to restrict internet access
Germany's Bundeswehr
may be expanding its
commitments in Africa
Opposition Syrian National

Council agrees to attend
Geneva 2 peace talks
18.01.2014
18.01.2014
18.01.2014
Police have clashed with protesters

in Istanbul angered by government
plans to impose curbs o n the
German media has reported that

the country's military f orce, the
Bundeswehr, may be f acing an
Syria's main o pposition group has

agreed to attend internationally
sponsored peace talks due to begin
TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL

One year ago, most people on either side of Atlantic had scant or no knowledge of the NSA
and its activities. Edward Snowdens revelations changed all that and rocked one of the
pillars of transatlantic relations.
When the Guardian started reporting on the largest disclosure of secret NSA files in the history of the
agency in June, it was only a question of time before the information spill reached America's allies
overseas. That's because the NSA's prime duty is to monitor and collect global signals intelligence. The
agency is by law prohibited from conducting electronic surveillance on Americans except under special
circumstances.
In the Guardian's first story on how the NSA was collecting the metadata of phone calls from Verizon,
a major US carrier, it was clear that data of European citizens would be involved, since the NSA's
secret court order included all calls made from and to the US.
But it was the second scoop on the NSA's PRISM program that really blew the story wide open. It
revealed that the agency was siphoning off personal data like email, chats and photos from the world's
biggest Internet companies including Google, Microsoft, Apple and Yahoo.
Everyone affected
This revelation did not simply show that everyone using these services was affected by NSA
surveillance. It also made it impossible to ignore politically on both sides of the Atlantic. But official
reactions in the US were characterized by a strong focus on the leaker Edward Snowden and the
alleged damage by his revelations to US national security. European officials meanwhile tried to
downplay the relevance of the Snowden disclosures culminating in Chancellor Merkel's chief of staff
stating in August that the so-called NSA scandal was now over.
Two months and a slew of major disclosures later, news broke that the chancellor's personal mobile
phone had been monitored by the NSA.
"I think that alone would not have caused that much damage," says Jeremi Suri, a transatlantic
relations expert at the University of Texas. "But that revelation in the context of all the other
revelations from the documents that Edward Snowden released symbolized for many that the United
States saw almost no limits on what it could do. If we would tap into the cell phone of the German
leader, one of our closest allies, many people are asking, is there anything we wouldn't do. Are we
willing do anything to support our interest?"
Turning point
The surveillance of Merkel's phone was a game
changer in Europe as well as the US. It forced
both the White House and Congress to
acknowledge that the practices of US
intelligence needed closer inspection. It also
Surveillance of Merkel's phone caused public outrage
drove Chancellor Merkel, Europe's most

important leader, to publicly take a tougher
stance vis--vis Washington. Most importantly, it undermined one of the central pillars of the
transatlantic relations: trust.
"I think the damage is actually quite significant," notes Suri. "One of the most significant
accomplishments of the United States after World War II was to build with its European partners a set
of relationships were there was presumed trust and a believe that the US was acting in their interest."
Snowden's revelations, argues Suri, have eroded the "basis of that relationship and a younger
generation of Europeans that are coming of age not necessarily believing that the US is really their
partner, but instead perceiving the United States as a big bully with technology using its technology to
do whatever it wants. And that's a perception, once held, that's very difficult to eradicate."
Revamped relationship
Overcoming the transatlantic rift will require to rebuild trust and confidence between both partners
again.
A success in the current US-EU trade negotiations (TTIP) would be the best symbol of restored trust,
argues Klaus Larres, a transatlantic relations scholar at the University of North Carolina: "If the EU
and the US can really get their act together and perhaps include some privacy laws into these trade
negotiations than that would really demonstrate that transatlantic relations haven't been damaged for
good."
His colleague Suri is not convinced that this will
suffice. The US intelligence services need to become
more transparent, he says, so Americans and
people around the world know what they are
doing. "This is supposed to be an open society and
we have in the last 15 years moved away from
openness on many of these issues. We need to
build credibility and trust by being open not just by
apologizing and by saying we won't do this again."
NSA surveillance shook the transatlantic partnership
Whether that will happen is all but certain. Since

taking office Obama has made a U-turn from his very critical stance on US intelligence activities.
"You can say that before he became president he was not quite aware of the extent and in his view
usefulness of these activities," says Larres. "Once he became president he was enlightened' by his
intelligence services and bought into it. You could say the same about the whole drone warfare."
D W.D E
Pressure builds to crack down on NSA spying

Not o nly is Obama's advisory panel putting pressure o n the president, but Congress is also considering two bills
aimed at the NSA's spying programs. Will they provide additional protections f or non-US citizens? (19.12.2013)
Vindicating Snowden, US judge rules NSA violates privacy, ACLU says

A US f ederal judge has ruled that the National Security Agency's collection o f telephone data violated a
fundamental principle o f the US Constitution. It's a groundbreaking decision, says ACLU attorney P atrick
Toomey. (18.12.2013)
Date 27.12.2013
Author Michael Knigge
Editor Rob Mudge
TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
How the NSA penetrates the cloud

The fury of the Internet giants over the latest NSA revelations is understandable, given
that data security is fundamental to their business models. However, cloud networks are
prone to attack by their very nature.
The US giants that rule the Internet were enraged by the latest revelations about the National Security
Agency's activities. "We do not provide any government, including the US government, with access to
our systems," Google's chief legal officer, David Drummond, responded to the Washington Post story,
before assuring the world's Gmail users, "We are outraged at the lengths to which the government
seems to have gone to intercept data from our private fiber networks, and it underscores the need for
urgent reform."
Google and Yahoo have a good reason to be furious - the thought among users that private data could
be compromised represents a direct threat to their business models. "There are a lot of security
concerns about cloud computing anyway, and companies, like Google and Yahoo, have spent lots of
money trying to reassure people that it is secure," said Carl Miller, research director of the Center for
the Analysis of Social Media (CASM) in the UK. "And there's a burgeoning industry of cloud
encryption that is trying to monetize all those concerns."
Bypassing encryption
As if to address that threat, Google's Drummond also said in his
statement, "We have long been concerned about the possibility of
this kind of snooping, which is why we have continued to extend
encryption across more and more Google services and links."
But encryption may not be the weak point. By their very nature,
Drummond expressed Google's
networks like the one that Google relies on have to trade off
outrage over the revelations
security for smooth service. "They build these huge 'cloud'

networks," Falk Garbsch, spokesman for German digital rights
group Chaos Computer Club, explained. "The trick is that you have to hold the data wherever the user
is - if I have an email account in Germany I also want to access it in the US, but if every data retrieval
happens via the transatlantic underwater cables, then it slows down the network connection. So
Google and Yahoo exchange data between the data centers."
In other words, Google keeps a number of data centers - often big enough to occupy an entire building
- all around the world. When data is transported, it is encrypted before it leaves and then unencrypted
inside another data center. To hack that data, Garbsch thinks it is likely that the NSA would try to
attack the point where the encryption happens.
"One problem with cloud systems is that you need one point within the data center with unencrypted
data - the data center needs to be able to read the data in order to organize it and show it," he said.
Prisms and court orders

It is not (yet) publicly known how the NSA was
able to attack this network. "There are several
possibilities," said Garbsch. "Either I get access to
the actual building somehow - either via laws that
allow me do it as a secret service, or I break in, or I
have employees inside to install some kind of
hardware that provide a connection to the
outside."
Google keeps a network of vast data centers around the

world
The most likely scenario is that the NSA gets a

court order on the company which provides Google with its fiber-optic cables - Level 3
Communications - which would then be forced to install special devices that contain prisms to divert
the cables light signals - without Google's knowledge.
The NSA can also use the structure of the cloud network to circumvent the law. "The NSA is not
allowed to investigate domestically, just as we in Germany have intelligence agencies that aren't
allowed to investigate domestically," said Garbsch. "So in this case it appeared that the NSA worked
together with the British agency GCHQ to access British data centers and then sent back information
to the US - so technically this was data not sent within the US."
The end of state paternalism

CASM's Carl Miller thinks this latest story is
another illustration of a much wider change in
perceptions about government. "This is all
ending the idea of security paternalism," he
said. "In the last couple of decades we've
undergone a radical shift in our expectations of
government. The boundaries between
The NSA likely targets the points where data is unencrypted
government and people have got a lot more

porous - in whatever policy area. People want to
have more of a stake in how policy is made."

Edward Snowden's leaks about the NSA, Miller argues, represent an attack on the highest taboo of
government control - national security. "What Snowden has done is drag the last bastion of this
paternalistic model of policy-making into the light," he said.
But Miller also warned that it may take a while before the public debate on surveillance is truly open.
"What is happening at the moment is that the security community is digging in under the
bombardment of all these revelations," he said. "We haven't had any kind of balance. Security officials
feel too legally and morally constrained to be able to talk openly about why they're doing the things
they're doing, which means that the civil liberties groups are getting more frustrated and exasperated -
it's so radically polarized that there doesn't seem to be any way we can maturely move forward at all."
D W.D E
'Muscular' program triggers more indignation

The NSA reportedly gained secret access to the networks o f Internet companies, like Google and Yahoo. Millions
of users could have been affected. But what is new in the revelations about the program known as Muscular?
(01.11.2013)
A chronology of the NSA surveillance scandal

First it was mobile phone data to f ight terrorism, then the NSA surveillance scandal expanded to include the
German chancellor as well as millions o f individuals around the world. DW reviews how the spy scandal grew.
TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
'Snowden testimony would be a disaster'

The very idea that Germany is paying so much attention to whistleblower Edward
Snowden is an affront to many Americans. His Moscow meeting with Green politician
Hans-Christian Strbele has caused quite a stir in the US.
It would be a disaster for American-German relations if Snowden came to Germany and publicly
testified before the Bundestag." What Green MP Christian Strbele ultimately is hoping for after his
surprise visit with Edward Snowden in Moscow would be a nightmare for Stephen Szabo of the
German Marshall Fund, as well for the Obama administration.
The relationship between the two countries is headed towards "a deep, downward spiral," says Szabo.
This must be stopped. If Snowden were to come to Germany with official blessing, the situation would
escalate further, warns the long-time Germany expert and vice-president of the German Marshall
Fund in Washington.
In the US, Snowden is a traitor

Strbeles meeting with Snowden got media
attention in the US. It was reported by National
Public Radio, CNN and other media outlets.
But while in Germany Snowden is considered
enlightened, in the eyes of many in the US - and
especially President Obama - he is a traitor.
Particularly sensitive is the fact that Snowden,
according to Strbele, is apparently ready to
US-German ties are at a low point, says Stephen Szabo of
the German Marshall Fund
testify in Germany about NSA spying. This

intention is also underscored by an open letter
from Snowden. That German Interior Minister,
Hans-Peter Friedrich, has even welcomed the news, saying he "was glad to hear it" has left official
Washington speechless; even if most US experts believe Snowden is unlikely to go to Germany.
"Slap in the face of the Americans"

In an interview with DW, Caitlin Hayden, spokeswoman for the National Security Council of the
United States, did not directly mention Friederich's or Strbele's comments, but pointed out that
Washington was still seeking to prosecute Edward Snowden in a US court. Hayden did not answer the
question of whether the United States would insist on Snowden's extradition if he visited Germany.
"If it really happens, it would be a slap in the face
to the Americans, there's no question about that,"
said Jackson Janes, Director of the American
Institute for Contemporary German Studies
(AICGS) at Johns Hopkins University in
Washington. "It's the same as with Moscow, where
they have permitted Snowden to remain - and it
could mean: We do not trust you," he told DW.
Janes interprets the growing interest of the
German federal government and parliament in a
Snowdown testimony would be a slap in the face, says

AICGS director, Jackson Janes
statement from Snowden - wherever he might

make it - as a no-confidence vote against the Obama administration .
The former American ambassador to Berlin, Phil Murphy, is among those who formulate their views
more cautiously: Germany has every right to be concerned about the surveillance, he said, and, of
course, as a sovereign state can actively investigate. But the first country Snowden should go to is still
the United States, he emphasized. Murphy said he understood that Germany needed "tangible results"
to move forward towards a "solution to the crisis;" however, the former diplomat questioned whether
Snowden being interviewed by German authorities and parliamentarians was the right way forward .
Can Kerrys self-criticism calm things down?

It may be that the recent comments of US Secretary of State John Kerry will appease angry feelings.
Kerry publicly acknowledged that the United States had sometimes gone too far. "Kerry was right,"
says Janes, but "to cage the beast requires an effort by everybody, not just the Americans, he added,
referring to the global network of electronic surveillance and security apparatuses that had taken on
lives of their own.
It was first and foremost,
however, "the policies of the
Americans - incidentally in
place before the attacks of
9/11 - which now have to be
examined," Janes said.
Stephen Szabo of the
Marshall Fund advises
Snowden willing to testify
against reading too much into

Kerry's remarks: "It is to be
expected that the State
Department would make such
comments. The question is whether the security establishment, whether the intelligence services, have
the last word, together with Obama."
Differences in fundamental values
Both Janes and Szabo see German-American relations at an absolute low point. They are "worse than
during the war in Iraq," says Szabo. "We have differences on very fundamental values, such as trust
and economic competition. And esteem for America in Germany has been very low for some time."
Szabo sees the recent meeting of high-ranking German and American security experts at the White
House as a first successful step towards restoring confidence . "We should give the Germans the same
assurances we gave the British that we are not eavesdropping on them," he says. "The U.S. government
must give the Germans the feeling that they are a special partner for us."
Confidence and self- protection

To avoid the embarrassment of possible future spying revelations, Janes advises President Obama to
adopt "a proactive information policy." That could have been done much earlier, he remarked.
At the same time, he stressed, it is not enough for the Germans to be indignant about massive
surveillance by the National Security Agency and otherwise to rely on Snowden statements. "In the
longer term it is not a question of asking Mr. Snowden to help us out with our problems," Janes notes.
Instead, he said, the Germans should strengthen their own protection mechanisms to protect
themselves and their privacy more effectively - not just against the United States.
D W.D E
US rights groups push for declassification of counterterrorism documents

The o fficial legal rationales f or US drone strikes and NSA surveillance programs remain classified. A growing
number o f advocacy groups are calling o n the White House to come clean about its counterterrorism programs.
(01.11.2013)
Stonewalled by US, Germany's attitude to Snowden shifts

Hans-Christian Strbele's trip to Moscow to see Edward Snowden may have been a typically maverick move f rom
the Greens parliamentarian. But it could signal a major change in Germany's approach to the whistleblower.
(01.11.2013)
How the NSA penetrates the cloud

The f ury o f the Internet giants o ver the latest NSA revelations is understandable, given that data security is
fundamental to their business models. However, cloud networks are prone to attack by their very nature.
(01.11.2013)
AU D IOS AN D VID EOS ON TH E TOPIC
Snowden willing to testify
Date 02.11.2013
Author Gero Schlie, Washington / ad
Editor Gregg Benzow
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1AATe
M OR E C ON TEN T
Jihadists fighting in Syria

boost Assad's image
Analysts question US intel

on Syria chem attack
Obama's NSA speech: more

than a sop? 18.01.2014
18.01.2014
18.01.2014
The Islamist jihadists' presence in

the Syrian civil war is growing.
Their acts o f terrorism have come
to dominate the political handling
of the crisis. The main beneficiary
of the new situation is the Assad
regime.
Experts agree that the chemical

weapons attack in the Syrian capital
of Damascus could not have
happened the way the US
government contends. Meanwhile,
the planned destruction o f the
weapons has been delayed.
After weeks o f debate, US

President Barack Obama
announced additional o versight
measures f or NSA surveillance
programs. But key questions were
left unanswered and little is likely
to change f or non-Americans.
IN TER N ET
Germany looks to erect IT barrier

Amid revelations concerning the NSA's spying on the German government, Interior
Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich is looking to erect an IT barrier in Germany and Europe.
DW takes a look.
Germany's Interior Ministry is looking to force Internet Service Providers to keep European data out of
the hands of third parties, including intelligence agencies, in the wake of an espionage scandal that
has cooled relations between the US and Germany over widespread hacking.
Minister Friedrich told the weekly Welt am Sonntag that he wanted to "incorporate an IT-Security law
in the upcoming coalition agreement that would provide a legal framework for hindering the
interception of data exchanged [within Germany and Europe] by foreign intelligence."
But what Friedrich didn't mention was whether Germany was looking to protect data shared with
servers outside Europe - where the vast majority of Internet activity in Germany takes place.
Setting up barriers
"The infrastructure needed to create an inner European network exists," said Dirk Engling, spokesman
of the Chaos Computer Club, Europe's largest association of hackers.
"But the problem is: This is extremely counterintuitive," he told DW. "By 'ensuring' citizens that they
are only safe if they restrict their internet usage to within Europe, what is the Internet there for?"
Friedrich's proposals, which haven't been
elaborated further than the cursory statements
made in the Welt am Sonntag, made no
mention of forcing major US companies such as
Google and Facebook to set up servers in
Europe, something Brazil has pledged to do in a
bid to establish "secure" Internet
communication within its borders.
Friedrich is looking to include cyber security in the
Asked whether such legislation could prove
coalition agreement
effective, Ian Brown, Associate Director of

Oxford's Cyber Security Centre, told BBC Radio
on Monday that "countries like Brazil and Germany" would have better chances getting companies like
Google to set up servers on their turf - on account of their sheer size and number of internet users.
"But smaller countries, of course, aren't going to have as much leverage."
With regard to the pledge of secure communication, Brown also acknowledged the possibility of
containing email traffic - provided users don't "expect security" when they correspond beyond Europe.
"If you're in [Germany] and you've emailed a friend in the United States, there's no way you can keep
that in [Germany]," Brown said.
'We don't want to cut connections'

Germany's largest telecommunications company, Deutsche Telekom, has already begun planning a
routing system that would restrict all Internet traffic within the country to domestic networks.
"This is just the first step," said Philipp Blank,
corporate blogger for Telekom, adding that
eventually the company was looking to expand its
routing system to the countries in the border-free
Schengen Area.
Blank emphasized, however, that "Telekom does
not want to cut connections or restrict users from
navigating to sites based outside of Germany or the
Schengen Area."
Telekom is ready to go with its national routing system
"Why should email traffic be routed outside [the Schengen Area] if both the sender and receiver are
located within its borders? If our system were realized, intelligence services from countries outside this
area would find it much more difficult to access this data traffic."
Safe haven Europe?

Telekom's claims haven't won over critics like Dirk Engling of the Chaos Computer Club, who pointed
out to DW that spying also took place on data that was restricted to European networks.
"We know now that data was intercepted here on a large scale. So limiting traffic to Germany and
Europe doesn't look as promising as the government and [Telekom] would like you to believe."
Amelia Andersdotter, who represents the Pirate
Party in the European Parliament, told DW that
the issue goes far beyond Internet security,
dismissing Friedrich's proposals as "trumped-
up lip service."
"Our politicians are making these claims now
about IT security to enhance their popularity.
It's lip service, and it's ineffective, and it's
Andersdotter of the Pirate Party says the focus should be on
human rights
hypocritical. Over the last decade governments

have worked together with companies to build
up infrastructure that creates insecurity, in
effect preventing the Internet from serving its true purpose of communication and self-
empowerment."
And in the face of revelations of spying in Europe - not only by the NSA - Andersdotter called on the
German government to focus more on the protection of human rights in its cyber security pledge:
"The spying we've seen is an egregious violation of human rights. Why should we believe that the
limitation of internet traffic to Germany and Europe means the problem is solved? To me it seems very
vague, if not suspect."
D W.D E
Germany admits Europe's spy agencies cooperate on surveillance
TOP STORIES / WORLD
TEC H N OL OGY
Securing your smartphone

Professional eavesdroppers have it easy - and a huge range of ways to get at our data:
phone calls, SMS and web services may be all be unprotected beneath a thin layer of glass.
When it comes to protecting privacy, smartphones in particular constitute a serious security risk.
That's been known for some time, but it seems there first had to be an NSA spying scandal and the
German chancellor's cellphone had to be tapped before people started to take these concerns seriously.
Only now are people asking themselves how secure their personal data is on their smartphone?
Jrgen Schmidt, the editor-in-chief of the online portal Heise Security, takes a sobering view. "It's been
well-known for years that, from a security point of view, the entire infrastructure of our mobile phone
networks is completely useless," Schmidt told Deutsche Welle. "That is being taken full advantage of by
the police and the security services among others - no one denies it."
So if someone places great importance on the
encryption of their data, they need to master a
few logistical hurdles right at the beginning. "In
order to install encryption, the person on the
other end has to install it as well. It's not
enough just to encode things yourself. That way
you're just sending a load of junk files off into
the ether that no one is able to decode,"
Angela Merkel with the secure smartphone she uses for
government communication
Schmidt explains.
But it seems that since the spying scandal, if not
before, many people are now ready to do
something about their own data security. And the market is responding to the boom in demand for
cellphone security apps. Jrgen Fricke, an IT consultant and communications expert, advises people
floundering in the avalanche of alternatives to keep an eye out for specific program features.
Can apps provide security?

Above all, he says, the cellphone app should be programmed according to the open source principle -
in other words, the so-called source code must be visible to anyone who wants to see it. Disclosing how
security is implemented is the best way to ensure that it will be effective. "That may sound like a
paradox to the layman," says Fricke, "but if you examine what lies behind it, it's exactly what is
required."
There are plenty of freely available open-source programs which at least make it much more difficult
to eavesdrop on conversations. To secure your own cellphone, Fricke recommends programs like Text
Secure to encode text and media messages, and Chat Secure instead of a service like WhatsApp, which
takes it for granted that there will be a certain degree of listening in.
While freely available programs for real time voice encryption on the mobile phone are technically still
in their infancy, Fricke recommends the programs K9 and APG for e-mail traffic as a good way of
keeping uninvited readers at bay.
Be aware of what's around you

Along with these precautions it is also important to
keep the phone virus-free - just like a normal
computer. Regarding the question of which is the
safest of the three mobile communication routes, a
call, an SMS or a Web-based service, Fricke advises
the latter - encrypted, of course.
One also has to be aware of security risks in the
computer environment - for example, when it
Jrgen Fricke says the open source principle is an
comes to mobile calendar synchronization. Here,
important step towards improving security
too, encryption is essential, such as the email

service Posteo provides.
Criminals say 'thanks'

But one doesn't just have to worry about the world's intelligence services. Criminals are a constant
threat, says Fricke. "For example, in Internet browsers: there are often small bugs which, oddly
enough, exist for many years without being noticed."
Fricke believes that the loopholes have been left by providers in agreement with intelligence services.
"The criminal world knows this and says, 'Brilliant, as long as they do not close this gap for strategic
reasons, we can continue to profit.' That's how this ugly market works."
This theory is supported by Schmidt. In his
judgment, "The technology is available which
would enable an upgrade to higher security
standards, but the problem then is that the
police and the intelligence agencies would no
longer able to gain access when they like, and
apparently no-one wants that."
Experts agree that it is all the more important at
Jrgen Schmidt of Heise Security argues the entire
cellphone network infrastructure is not secure enough
least to complicate life for the eavesdroppers,

whichever way it's done. Criminals would then
be completely shut out, and governmental
agencies would find their work cost them more.
Data mining - legal snooping

In the end users have to ask themselves honestly how much privacy they are willing to give up. "My
Googlemail email address is more than just an E-Mail address. I'm saying yes at the same time to my
mails being monitored for marketing purposes."
Like Googlemail, WhatsApp or Facebook, many programs require that users allow those companies to
read your messages as part of their terms and conditions.
With apps for Android phones, this takes place, for example, in the form of a warning before the
installation of the program, Frick points out, "and that's when I can stop for a moment and think: this
app wants to send me recipes or an egg-timer - why does it need to have access to my address book?"
He advises users who are concerned about their privacy not to skate too quickly over such terms and
conditions and preferably to turn to open-source programs free of spyware: then at least, says Fricke,
you are not taking all your clothes off in front of your provider.
D W.D E
Cyber crooks get smart on smartphones
TOP STORIES / WORLD
TR AN SATL AN TIC R EL ATION S
Germany seeks admission to spooks' club

Despite all the public outrage over the surveillance of Angela Merkel, Berlin actually might
be less interested in curbing US intelligence activities than eventually joining the elite
Anglo-American spy club.
In August, two months after President Barack Obama's first official visit and weeks before the
country's federal election, when revelations and public anger over alleged mass spying activities on
Germany by the NSA refused to die down, Berlin hatched a plan to mitigate the fallout.
Chancellor Angela Merkel's chief of staff and point man for intelligence matters, Ronald Pofalla,
floated the idea on August 12. Germany would simply strike a no-spy deal with the US, he told
reporters, adding that American and British intelligence services had assured him in writing that they
had not violated German law. Summing it all up, Pofalla, called the proposed no-spy agreement a
unique opportunity to set common standards for Western intelligence services and declared the NSA
spying affair case over.
Three months later the NSA case is anything but closed. Instead it has finally reached Chancellor
Merkel herself. The planned no-spy agreement according to media reports is also alive as well and
expected to be finalized in early 2014.
Eying Five Eyes

While details of the proposed anti-espionage
deal are unclear - top German intelligence
officials are currently in Washington to discuss
them - after 9/11 it is unrealistic to expect that
US services will simply cease all surveillance
activities in Germany. Instead it is much more
likely that Berlin and Washington will look at a
decades-old no spy agreement as a blueprint for
German intelligence services would benefit from a deal
a German-American anti-spy deal: the so called
Five Eyes alliance.

From what is known publicly the Five Eyes members generally do not spy on each other and when they
do they act only with the consent or knowledge of the partners. From a German government
perspective this could be a workable option. Berlin could assuage domestic public sentiment by
claiming to have pressed the US to stop spying on Germans or to only do so under special
circumstances with German approval. If the agreement applied only to German or EU citizens,
nationals of other countries could still be targeted.
But regardless of the specifics of the planned no-spy deal, if it is anything like the Five Eyes agreement
then it is at least as much about collective and shared spying than about not spying at each other.
Domestic mirage
In fact, argue US-based analysts, joining Five Eyes - and not curbing America's spy activities - is
actually what Berlin is really after. "The public face is mostly a mirage to appease the German
domestic scene," John Schindler, professor of National Security Affairs at the US Naval War College
and a former NSA intelligence expert, told DW via e-mail.
Chancellor Merkel is someone who recognizes the dangers of surveillance, but also thinks that it would
be good for states to have much of this information to work together, says Henry Farrell, an associate
professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University. "So I think
Merkel's ideal coming from this would be a deal in which Germany gets admitted to this Five Eyes club
which would allow for much greater degree of access by Germany to US and UK intelligence and it
would also mean that UK and US intelligence couldn't spy on her."
Deep dependency
From the vantage point of German intelligence
services closer cooperation with the US or even full
membership in Five Eyes would be a good deal.
"BND (Gemany's foreign intelligence agency - the
ed.) and BfV (Germany's domestic intelligence
agency - the ed.) are already deeply dependent on
US intelligence," says Schindler who notes that US
services as a practical matter would have little to
gain from a no-spy pact with Berlin. But with
Pressure against surveillance is increasing in the US
public anger increasing not just abroad, but also in

the US, Washington may be ready to sign a deal to lower the political pressure.
"I could see how the German government would want access to the kind of information the so-called
Five Eyes countries had been able to develop with their massive spying on citizens of countries all over
the world," says Barry Eisler, a former CIA operative. He could imagine German admission to the
intelligence alliance as some sort of "quid pro quo, explicit or implicit for a public expression that we
are friends again."
However, Berlin's full membership into Five Eyes would not only require US approval, but also that of
Britain, Washington's key partner in the alliance. "I think it is unlikely that Washington, or London,
want to expand Five Eyes to fully include Germany (or France)," says Schindler.
Domestic battle
What's more, it would be politically very difficult for Berlin at this point to argue for accession to the
world's biggest spying club while condemning its surveillance practices at the same time. It is hardly a
coincidence that in all of their public statements German government officials have focused almost
exclusively on the US and ignored Five Eyes.
For Berlin a no-spy deal with the US is politically more palpable domestically and easier to pull off
quickly than with the full alliance, while reaping most of the benefits anyway. Once a pact with
Washington is done, full membership in Five Eyes could be a next step.
Still, any deal currently in the works with the US ultimately requires the approval not just of Merkel
and her party and a potential grand coalition, but of many other players and the German public.
"So at the end of the day I think a lot depends

on how capable people are who truly care about
these things, including data protection
commissioners and the Lnder (Germany's
states - the ed.) including various privacy
advocates including politicians in the SPD
(Social Democrats - the ed.) and Green Party,
how successful they are at boxing Merkel in a
Many Germans strongly oppose reported US surveillance
bit so that she is obliged to negotiate a stronger
measures
position even if this isn't necessarily something

that accords with her own opinion," says
Farrell.
Nicole Goebel contributed to this report.
D W.D E
Germany admits Europe's spy agencies cooperate on surveillance

Germany's f oreign intelligence agency has confirmed it swaps information with European counterparts that carry
out mass surveillance. However, it denied that it was working with the British to change and circumvent laws.
(02.11.2013)
The ever-widening NSA spying scandal

Documents disclosed by Edward Snowden continue to grab attention around the world. DW looks at the global
fallout created by the US National Security Agency's surveillance programs. (02.11.2013)
Calls for Snowden to testify in Germany met with skepticism

Members o f Chancellor Merkels center-right Christian Democrats have expressed o penness to receiving
testimony f rom Edward Snowden. But they are skeptical that the US whistle-blower can travel to Germany.
(02.11.2013)
Date 04.11.2013
Author Michael Knigge
Editor Rob Mudge
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Feedback: Should Germany strike a no-spy pact with the US?Send us an e-mail. Please include your name and country
in your reply.
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1ABR4
M OR E C ON TEN T

boost Assad's image


than a sop? 18.01.2014
18.01.2014
18.01.2014

regime.


TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
Intelligence collusion and Europe's hypocrisy

The latest Snowden revelation - that Britain's GCHQ actively helped its European
counterparts to circumvent surveillance law - seems to have embarrassed governments
who previously professed outrage at NSA activities.
It's not often that senior security officials get to quote Hollywood movies before Congress, but the
opportunity must have seemed too good to miss. "Some of this reminds me of the classic movie
Casablanca: 'My God, there's gambling going on here,' " James Clapper, US director of national
intelligence, told Congress last Tuesday (29.10.2013), quoting the movie's French Captain Renault,
who conducts a raid on a gambling den that he is himself involved in.
Clapper was referring to the outrage expressed by certain European governments over revelations
about the US National Security Agency. Those governments, he said, knew perfectly well that
eavesdropping on the conversations of foreign leaders, even allies, was a basic tenet of tradecraft -
indeed, it was one of the first things he had learned during his training in the 1960s.
Four days later, Clapper was vindicated by yet
another revelation culled from the Edward
Snowden leaks - albeit one related to a different
aspect of intelligence work: the mass
surveillance of ordinary citizens by their own
intelligence agencies.
Working together
James Clapper was reminded of the film Casablanca
On Saturday, the UK's Guardian newspaper

revealed a Government Communications
Headquarters document, which it said amounted to "a school report" on its counterparts in Germany,
France, Spain, Italy, and Sweden. The document detailed the extent of GCHQ's cooperation with those
agencies, and revealed working relationships that seemed to function much better than the one
between diplomats of those countries.
It also showed that Britain's GCHQ was the NSA's primary partner in Europe, partly because the UK's
geographic position made it the gateway to the transatlantic data flow.
Though it is unsurprising that allied intelligence agencies cooperate and share information, the
document did reveal a new facet of the relationship. "What we weren't previously aware of was the
level of collusion when it comes to getting round surveillance law," Privacy International spokesman
Mike Rispoli told DW. "We can't really be sure, but what we can infer is that when government
officials discuss information sharing, they say, 'look at our laws here, look at what we're doing, look
how lax our surveillance law is here, you should get on board with this.' "
Re-interpreting laws
There was a particular example of this in Germany. "We already had the suspicion that the BND
[Germany's foreign intelligence agency, the ed.] could interpret the G-10 law differently to how the
legislators intended it," Markus Beckedahl, spokesman for German digital rights group Digitale
Gesellschaft, told DW.
The G-10 law refers to the tenth article of the German constitution - the Grundgesetz - which is
intended to regulate the BND's surveillance powers. In 2001, this was amended for the digital age, and
decreed that only "20 percent" of the Internet could be monitored by the agency.
"But you can read this formulation differently, so that only 20 percent of data capacity can be
monitored," said Beckedahl. "Since so much data on the Internet is useless, the BND could suddenly
in effect monitor 100 percent of the Internet. The Guardian article said that the British intelligence
agency recommended that the BND re-interpret the law."
All this, Beckedahl explained, had not previously
been known, partly because all parliamentary
requests for information on the issue had been
denied on the grounds that BND activities were
classified.
Diplomatic nightmare
Of course, the new revelation also opens up
European governments to the charge of hypocrisy -
GCHQ helped their colleagues circumvent surveillance laws
especially Chancellor Angela Merkel herself, who

raised diplomatic hell two weeks ago when it emerged that her own cell phone had been monitored by
the NSA. Given the depth of collusion between the allies, was this outrage genuine or as phony as the
bluster coming from the French official in Casablanca? "Without knowing the intentions of any official
- we would assume that James Clapper knows what he's talking about," said Rispoli.
At the same time, the diplomatic nightmare that Snowden has created is self-evident enough. "I think
the reaction from Chancellor Merkel, and from the French government before that, about how the
NSA has affected them personally, has been interesting given that they haven't reacted as strongly
when it comes to the privacy of their citizens," said Rispoli. "That's the bigger problem - it's not that
they're spying on Merkel, it's that you'd expect that level of outrage when it comes to their citizens as
well," he added.
Beckedahl agreed: "We are Angela Merkel, and Angela Merkel is us."
D W.D E
Might Snowden get asylum in Germany?

Edward Snowden says he is prepared to be questioned in Germany about the NSA scandal. But would it even be
legally possible without granting him asylum - as some German politicians are demanding? (03.11.2013)

'Snowden testimony would be a disaster'

The very idea that Germany is paying so much attention to whistleblower Edward Snowden is an affront to many
TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
US Privacy Board 'is unique in the world'

How can US surveillance be both more effective and more accountable? DW spoke to
David Medine, chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board, which is charged with
protecting US civil liberties.
The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board sees itself as a guardian of civil liberties in the US.
Founded in 2004 by US Congress in order to advise the president and the administration and to
ensure the protection of civil rights and liberties, the agency has understandably gained importance
in light of the recent US spying scandal. On Monday (05.11.2013), the heads of the German security
services, the German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) and the Federal Office for the Protection of
the Constitution (BfV), met with their US counterparts at the White House to negotiate on a potential
'no-spy' agreement. Just a few streets away, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board held a
public hearing on Monday. The hearing included representatives of the National Security Agency
(NSA) and of other US security agencies, as well as legal and security service experts. The results of
the hearing are to be presented to President Obama soon in a report.
DW: Was Monday's public hearing linked to the review of US surveillance programs that President
Obama has announced?
David Medine: Our board was created by Congress as a permanent, independent, bipartisan group. I
joined the board back in late May, four days before the Snowden leak. Shortly after, the President of
the United States and members of the House of Senate asked us to conduct a study of this program.
Over the summer, we've gathered information, had classified briefings and reviewed decisions of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. And our board decided that a public hearing would be useful
at this time.
What are your findings so far after this hearing?
We learned a lot about some potential reforms that the government is amenable to. You heard that the
government said that it might retain data for a shorter period of time than the current five-year
retention period, might consider fewer "hops" (analysis of the contacts of a target's contacts is two
"hops;" analysis of their contacts is three - the ed.) in a telephone metadata program and is
considering expanding protections to non-US citizens - so those are important considerations. The
board will now deliberate after we finish today's hearing and reach its own conclusions about
recommendations it might make.
How would you explain the work you are doing at the moment to foreign audiences?
I think we are unique in the world, as being an independent, bipartisan government agency that has
full access to all the American intelligence programs. We are free to express our views as to whether
those programs balance national security with privacy and civil liberties. I'm not aware of a country in
the world that has assigned a federal government agency that authority. And it's evidenced by today's
hearing where we had a public discussion, where we were able to question the intelligence community
in an open setting about how these programs operate.
Concerning the privacy of foreign citizens, what are your main concerns?
We're assessing whether there's a legal basis for the United States to provide protection to foreign
citizens. And even beyond that whether that's an appropriate privacy and civil liberties concern. And
we have not reached any conclusions about that, but we've gotten some very valuable input on it in
today's session.
The fact that the NSA has spied on non-Americans in particular was not at the center of the hearing.
Can you understand the uproar in Europe on the surveillance issue in the US and what would be
your message for the European audience?
There's been concern domestically and internationally about these programs and that's why we're
conducting the study. We're taking a very hard look at whether privacy and civil liberties are being
protected. Again: we're an independent voice. We are not required to clear our report with the White
House. We will issue it directly to the president and to Congress.
David Medine is a lawyer and a data expert, who has served in a variety of functions within the US
government in the past. Since May, he is the chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight
Board.
D W.D E
Germany seeks admission to spooks' club

Despite all the public o utrage o ver the surveillance o f Angela Merkel, Berlin actually might be less interested in
curbing US intelligence activities than eventually joining the elite Anglo-American spy club. (04.11.2013)

The latest Snowden revelation - that Britain's GCHQ actively helped its European counterparts to circumvent
surveillance law - seems to have embarrassed governments who previously professed o utrage at NSA activities.
(04.11.2013)
Germany looks to erect IT barrier

Amid revelations concerning the NSA's spying o n the German government, Interior Minister Hans-Peter
Friedrich is looking to erect an IT barrier in Germany and Europe. DW takes a look. (04.11.2013)
Date 05.11.2013
Author Interview: Gero Schlie / ecs
Editor Michael Lawton
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1ABY3
M OR E C ON TEN T
TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
Albright: 'Good friends can work this out'

When former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright speaks, people listen. In a DW

interview Albright says she's optimistic that Europe and the US can rebuild trust "without
hypocrisy," despite the NSA spying scandal.
The US National Security Agency's spying has threatened trust between the US and Europe.
Madeleine Albright was among high-ranking politicians who discussed rebuilding trust at talks in
Washington sponsored by the Munich Security Conference (headed by the former German
ambassador to the US, Wolfgang Ischinger). DW correspondent Gero Schliess spoke with her there.
DW: Transatlantic relations have reached a low point not seen since the Iraq War. What is your
view on this?
Madeleine Albright: I think it's very unfortunate. I have always been a great believer in the Euro-
Atlantic relationship. We are natural partners, we need each other, and I hope very much that all
contacts and relationships can be restored. We, after all, have a history of trusting each other, so I am
always optimistic about that.
Were you surprised about the extent of surveillance, and did you know about it while you were in
office?
I did not. But the bottom line is that we do
know countries spy on each other; that is not
something new. It is done neutrally.
Do you understand the uproar in Europe
about the US, and about the Obama
administration?
No, I don't, really. I think a lot of it has to do
The NSA is believed to have tapped Merkel's mobile phone
with technology and frankly, I know that many

things are done for political reasons. I was in
Brussels not long ago, and I think that this is an issue generally about what the rules of privacy are in
this new technological era. I would hope very much that we could have a careful discussion on all of
this to mutually arrive at some kind of solution.
What are your recommendations for both governments - for the Obama administration and for
Angela Merkel - to restore trust?
We have many issues that we have to work on together. Obviously, some of it is personal. But we have
a very large agenda together. So I am sure this will work out. But I really do think it's important that
there is no hypocrisy. There has to be an understanding that we are in a new technological era and
that good friends can work this out.
Do you think Europe should suspend agreements with the US, like the SWIFT banking agreement, or
that they should interrupt negotiations on the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment
Partnership, TTIP?
I definitely do not. I think these are issues that
have a whole other set of circumstances that go
with them - and they are good for everybody. The
TTIP is going to be a very important agreement for
the Europeans and for the United States.
In this case, should there be a signal from
President Obama, maybe a public apology?
I'm not going to comment on this. I think that
Some personal bonds may have to be mended, as well
President Obama has made many statements on

this already.
Madeleine Albright was secretary of state in President Bill Clinton's first administration from 1997-
2001. She is currently a professor of international relations at the Walsh School of Foreign Service at
Georgetown University in Washington.
D W.D E

The latest Snowden revelation - that Britain's GCHQ actively helped its European counterparts to circumvent
surveillance law - seems to have embarrassed governments who previously professed o utrage at NSA activities.
(04.11.2013)

Snowden blows lid on German-US intel ties

Whistleblower and f ormer NSA contractor Edward Snowden has said there are close ties between German and US
intelligence authorities. Such secret cooperation has been going o n f or decades, experts say. (08.07.2013)
Date 07.11.2013
Author Interview: Gero Schliess / sad
Editor Gregg Benzow
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1ADO5
M OR E C ON TEN T
TOP STORIES / WORLD / AMERICAS / TRANSATLANTIC VOICES
N SA SC AN D AL
Ex-CIA chief: 'Snowden is a traitor'

Former head of central intelligence James Woolsey tells DW the US would never sign a
binding no-spy pact. He also doesn't recall, but can't exclude, that phones of Chancellor
Kohl were monitored during his tenure.
R. James Woolsey served as Director of Central Intelligence and head of the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA) from 1993 to 1995. As Director of Central Intelligence he oversaw the work of the entire
US intelligence community.
DW: From your experience as Director of Central Intelligence, would the president be informed and
know that the phones of close allies such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel are being monitored?
R. James Woolsey: I don't know. That issue didn't arise in the two years in the early 90s when I was
director of central intelligence. But it would depend on how much the president would want to get
into the intelligence issues. He would be free to ask a question of course and get a truthful answer from
the intelligence community. But he might or might not ask. President Clinton read the intelligence
assiduously and wrote notes to me on it and so forth, but he very, very rarely had one-on-one meetings
with me or my successor and that would be the case in which something like that might come up. So
it's possible that something like that would be happening and he wouldn't have gotten into it.
During your tenure as Director of Central Intelligence were phones of important leaders such as
German Chancellor Helmut Kohl monitored?
I don't recall that they were. I would be surprised, but I suppose it's not absolutely impossible.
To follow up again, because this is an important point here in Germany, in your tenure you don't
recall phones of Chancellor Kohl being monitored by US intelligence?
Not that I remember. It's possible it happened at some point, but I don't remember anything like that
in that period. But I was director for two years.
You have argued that Germany and France should be admitted to the so-called Five Eyes alliance,
but many experts and officials have called such a step unrealistic at least currently. How likely is this
move in your opinion?
I don't know why they would say it's unrealistic. Both France and Germany are close allies. We work
on a lot of things with respect to intelligence together now, many of them extremely sensitive. Both
Germany and France have had senior level spies inside their government as have we. We've had Ames
and Hanson, Germany had Chancellor (Willy) Brandt's chief of staff. Those things happen and one
has to cooperate with foreign intelligence services and with the senior people in the government in
order to limit their effect and find out about them.
But that doesn't mean to me that we should forego a mutual pledge with France and Germany of the
sort we have with British, Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders to not spy on one another.
Germany is a good ally, a democratic country and has an able intelligence service. And the same is true
of France. Although if one has dozens of countries in that category or in the double digits even I think
things could be spread a little bit too widely to be practical. I don't think adding Germany and France
increases the likelihood that something is going to get out that should not.
Instead of admission to Five Eyes, Berlin is officially calling for a no-spy agreement with
Washington that would ban US technical surveillance and economic espionage in Germany, but US
officials have apparently dampened expectations for a broad agreement. Do you think the US will
sign a no-spy agreement that is not just a statement of good intentions, but instead a legally binding
and enforceable document between the US and Germany that Berlin would like?
If I were still director of central intelligence I would under no circumstances sign such an agreement.
That would mean that if we had somehow come across the 9/11 planners who operated out of
Hamburg that we couldn't collect intelligence on them. That is not an agreement that I think any
American president would sign with respect to Germany or any other country.
Many in Germany expect an official apology from the US for monitoring Chancellor Merkel's phone,
but so far neither the heads of the intelligence services nor the White House have done so. Do you
think Chancellor Merkel deserves and will get an official apology?
I think we need to get away from the sort of PR aspects of this. I think as I said in my op-ed in the
Wall Street Journal a few days ago that the United States made a bad judgment when it listened in as
presumably it did on Chancellor Merkel's smartphone. But I don't think we need to elevate the
collection of intelligence to the level where it is something that is unwise where you end up having
official apologies and so on. This is not diplomacy, this is not the state department, this is stealing
secrets. That's what intelligence is about. And I don't think it operates or works well if people regard it
as a subcategory of diplomacy. That's not, I think, the way to operate intelligence services. You operate
with the heads of services explaining things privately, usually one-on-one to one another and sorting
things out.
In investigating US and British surveillance activities, Berlin has rejected granting asylum to former
NSA contractor Edward Snowden as many here have demanded and instead is considering
questioning him in Russia. What is your view on that?
I'll be blunt. I think Snowden is a traitor. I think he has gotten and will get a number of people killed
by the disclosure that he is making either through the Russians, through the Chinese, through his
journalistic companions or through any hearings by the German government in Russia. I think it's a
big intelligence loss and trying to make it worse by disclosing more and more I would say is a very
unfriendly act. And again, if I were still director of central intelligence and Germany held public
hearings in Russia on this American traitor and spread even further the damage that he had done, I
would under no circumstances recommend that we have a Seven Eyes type agreement including
Germany.
D W.D E

TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
How telcos 'collude' with the NSA and GCHQ

Google and Yahoo were quick to condemn the NSA for spying on their customers, but
telecom firms remained conspicuously silent - and for good reason. Privacy International
has filed a complaint against them with the OECD.
Google and Yahoo weren't slow to express their fury last week when it emerged that the National
Security Agency had been tapping their customers' data from inside their own cloud networks.
But the companies perhaps more directly affected have been conspicuously silent.
Telecommunications firms like US-based Level 3 or Britain's BT, which provide Internet giants with
their fiber-optic cable networks and customers with their phone and Internet access, are yet to offer
any condemnation of the surveillance that has been carried out via their hardware.
Some analysts suspect that those companies in the US may have been compelled to comply with the
NSA by secret court orders, which would also have prevented them from speaking publicly. But a
report late last month in the Guardian newspaper may offer a key to their silence. According to GCHQ
documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, telecom companies are working with
the intelligence agencies more zealously than they care to admit.
GCHQ, Britain's equivalent of the NSA, runs a
surveillance program called Tempora - also
disclosed by the Guardian via Snowden in June
- which taps into fiber-optic cables to gather
mass quantities of email and telephone
communications between the US and Europe.
To do this, the internal documents make clear,
GCHQ needs both the knowledge and
Grobritannien Government Communications
cooperation of these "Communications Service
Headquarters Hauptsitz
Providers" (CSPs) that own the cables.
Beyond requirements
The extent of this collusion emerges from a classified review prepared by GCHQ for the British
government, as quoted in the Guardian: "Under RIPA [the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act
2000], CSPs in the UK may be required to provide, at public expense, an adequate interception
capability on their networks. In practice all significant providers do provide such a capability. But in
many cases their assistance - while in conformity with the law - goes well beyond what it requires."
As a result of the story, human rights group Privacy International has filed a complaint against six
telecom firms - BT, Verizon Enterprise, Vodafone Cable, Viatel, Level 3 and Interoute - with the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), on the grounds that their
cooperation with GCHQ amounts to a violation of their lawful obligations to protect the privacy of
their customers.
"The telecommunications companies can actually do an astonishing amount to push back against this
sort of surveillance," Eric King, head of research at Privacy International, told DW. "It's plain that the
Tempora program is almost certainly unlawful Companies don't have an obligation to comply with
unlawful requests, and should they wish to challenge them, they would be well within their rights to do
so, and would likely be successful."
Ready and willing

Privacy International called on these companies to explain what, if anything, they have done to resist
government requests to help spy on their customers, but they have been unresponsive. Of the six
companies, only two responded to DW's requests for comment, though without addressing Privacy's
complaint directly: "It is our policy and our practice to comply with laws in every country where we
operate, and to provide government agencies access to customer data only when the law in the country
where the request has been made compels us to do so," an emailed statement from Level 3 said.
UK-based BT would also not be drawn on the
Privacy complaint itself, but emailed this
statement: "We shall study details of any complaint
we receive, but we are clear that matters of
national security are for governments, not
telecommunications providers. As a company, we
comply with the law."
There may be good reason for this obfuscation, for
as the leaked GCHQ documents also showed, the
CSPs were in fact worried about the publicity
Snowden's leaks have disclosed a close partnership

between telecom firms and GCHQ
should the information be revealed. They were

worried enough, in fact, to threaten to withdraw their help if it ever got out. The companies "feared
damage to their brands internationally, if the extent of their co-operation with HMG [Her Majesty's
government] became apparent," the GCHQ document said. Furthermore, if tapped private
communications were ever made admissible as evidence in UK courts, GCHQ admitted that "many
CSPs asserted that they would withdraw their voluntary support."
Technical assistance
King also pointed out that the nature of the technology involved - cables that provide 90 percent of the
world's communications - would require technical help that only the companies that own them could
provide. "It isn't simply plugging in an Ethernet cable and away you go," he said. "It's going to cause
major disruption, it's copying every single communication going through a network, and doing that
without causing delays in the network itself and doing it in a way that it doesn't tip people off to the
fact that it's going on. I'd be absolutely astonished if it could be done without the company's own
engineers."
Moreover, according to Privacy, telco firms are not under any legal obligation to help. "In the UK, we
have no judicial authority that approves or denies any surveillance orders of any form - it's our
ministers who sign off on these things," said King. "This is one intelligence agency asking their bosses -
the ministers who are responsible for them - whether they can spy on some people. There's no
independent authority anywhere touching this process."
A commercial partnership
Peter Micek, of US digital rights group Access Now, explained that
in the US there is a similarly strong partnership between the CSPs
and the NSA, though often the NSA does need to get secret court
orders. "It depends on what traffic they're looking to get," he told
DW. There are legal obstacles in place if it is a US-based telecom
firm, and if the data collection is happening on US soil. "It looks
like [the courts] do have some oversight," Micek said.
AT&T reportedly gets over $10 million
a year from the CIA for its data
Micek also suggested there was a historical reason why the

telecom firms have remained silent, while the Internet companies
have been outraged: "We are talking about two different animals," he said. "The Internet companies
are very new to this game, whereas the US has been working with the major US telecoms since the 70s
to gain access to international communications data. They have decades-long relationships with the
intelligence community."
Not only is this a historical partnership, it is also in many cases a commercial one. As a report
published in the New York Times on Thursday (07.11.2013) showed, the CIA pays AT&T over $10
million (7.4 million euros) a year to spy on its customers' data. "The recent 'black budget' has shown
that the NSA spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually in order to support upstream collection
programs," said Micek. "We have seen that they are compensated for other types of data-sharing with
the US government - in the law enforcement areas."
In other words, not only are customers paying their phone bills to a company actively helping the
government to collect their data, they are also, via their taxes, funding the company to do it.
D W.D E
Snowden aide Harrison takes refuge in Berlin

After helping US whistle-blower Edward Snowden attain asylum in Russia, British journalist Sarah Harrison has
left Moscow. Harrison has taken refuge in Berlin, o ut o f concern she could be detained in the UK. (08.11.2013)

Former head o f central intelligence James Woolsey tells DW the US would never sign a binding no-spy pact. He
also doesn't recall, but can't exclude, that phones o f Chancellor Kohl were monitored during his tenure.
(07.11.2013)

Date 08.11.2013
Author Ben Knight
Editor Rob Mudge
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1AE6k
M OR E C ON TEN T
TOP STORIES / WORLD
N SA SC AN D AL
Hero or traitor: 'Only history will decide'

Howard Schmidt, former White House cyber security adviser, tells DW the US has gone
too far in its surveillance operations. But he believes only time will tell whether
whistleblower Edward Snowden is a hero or a traitor.
Howard A. Schmidt most recently served as US President Barack Obama's Cyber-Security

Coordinator from 2009 - 2012. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Schmidt also served as a cyber-
security advisor to former President George W. Bush.
DW: In terms of the NSA debate, a lot of what we now know has come through Edward Snowden's
leaks. Before him, there was Wikileaks. Julian Assange is house-bound in a London embassy. And
now their aide Sarah Harrison fears going back to the UK over legal consequences. Are these
individuals whistle-blowers?
Schmidt: I think there are a couple of aspects to that. One, there's a legal component. I'm not a lawyer,
but when you look at someone committing a crime based on whatever basis - you have to face those
consequences. And I think these people have all decided that.
The second piece of that is the future will
determine whether or not it falls under the
category of whistle-blower and hero or criminal
and traitor. I don't think any of us can decide
this at this time. We're too close to it. So in the
future, when we look back at the Pentagon
Papers and those sorts of things, our perspective
is far different today than it was then. So,
Howard A. Schmidt
making judgements now of right, wrong or

indifferent - only history will decide that.
Journalists working on the Snowden files claim that the NSA surveillance activities are much
broader than what's described in the current reporting.
I don't know, and I can only speculate. One of the questions I get asked all the time is how much
about this did I know. The thing is when you talk about classified government programs is they're very
compartmentalized. The category we always use is, "you don't have a need to know."
My job was defense. As a matter of fact, my work was based on stopping people from doing things like
this [surveillance]. So as a consequence, they're not going to be telling me that they're doing something
that I'm trying to fight against. So to that extent, is it possible.
The revelation that Chancellor Merkel was being eavesdropped on by the NSA has been very
controversial in Germany. Has the US gone too far in its global surveillance activities?
It's my personal opinion that we have. Not only us, but others have done the same thing, not
necessarily for Angela Merkel, but they've done it for other leaders because there's the perspective that
somehow you get an edge on someone else if you do those sorts of things. Even though morally they
may be wrong, in many cases it's legal for them to do it.
The rules are different against citizens of one nation relative to another nation. So what we have to do
is we have to collectively around the world back away from that. Focus on things that are important.
Yes, guess what, you're going to go into a meeting and you're not going to know what the other side
thinks. But we've done that for light years. And that's what we have to go forward with.
We have to start understanding you may not know everything, but that's why we have negotiations.
That's why we have teams to help put things together and not somehow, "if I know everything about
you, I can conquer you." That's not the world we live in.
Berlin has called on the US to sign a bilateral no-spy agreement in response to revelations about
NSA surveillance in Germany. There are reports that while the Obama administration is willing to
increase intelligence cooperation with Berlin, it's unwilling to sign a broader no-spy agreement.
What could explain White House reluctance?
I don't know why they're saying that now, but I know one of the things that's been discussed not
necessarily with Germany, but I've heard different nations say this: "Well why would I sign
something to give up a capability I already have that puts me in a better position?" That is my only
speculation as to why someone would be hesitant to do something like that, especially with friends.
So there should be a mechanism set up where somebody can pick up the phone and contact somebody
in BKA or BSI [German federal police and Federal Office for Information Security, respectively] or
somebody and say we see this really dangerous activity coming from a server in your nation, we need
your cooperation to shut it down or to monitor or do whatever we do. We don't do that enough. And
that's the first step we have to do moving forward is to set that process in place so we have better trust.
Telecommunications infrastructure is global in many ways. Brazil and Germany have submitted a
draft resolution at the UN that seeks to strengthen international norms for the protection of privacy.
Do you believe the US supports the initiative?
I don't know if regulation is the key as opposed to agreement. And there is a distinction. For example,
in the United States we've been trying for years to get privacy protection laws changed. We did a green
paper and a white paper when I was at the White House. To this day, we still don't have that passed in
the United States.
So trying to do that globally is going to be a tremendous task. But we should start moving down that
path. We can't wait five years to start the dialogue; we need to be doing it now. It has to be done now;
it has to be concentrated; it has to be consistent.
Are privacy protections too weak then?
I think they are. Anytime you have privacy protections based on constitutions or based on democracy,
they have to be put in stone and stay there. There always should be exceptions and legitimate
exceptions. But that's under a unique set of circumstances and that set of circumstances has to be
accounted for in a lot of the cyber security things that we do. Because you can't give up the protection
of your citizens. I mean that 's one of the key roles of government. But you can't overreach in doing it.
The legal interpretations of intelligence operations and many of the court rulings are secret. How is
reform possible if the public doesn't know the full extent of what's happening?
Well I think right now the public knows enough to say, "I demand some answers now. I demand a
change of the way the business is done." But I think a lot of this once again is going to come from the
private sector. The private sector that says, "I may not know everything, I know what I know now, and
I can envision what I don't know, so therefore as my government my expectation is for you to fix
this."
Whether we in the private sector make recommendations; we become some sort of a structure that
better gives the government what our needs are and what it means to work in a global community as
we see in the Internet today. It's going to take some of that. But it has to be demanded by the
companies and the people - irrespective of what they know. That would then in turn change the
policies. Once the policy changes the courts would then look at the interpretation of these things, and I
think we'll all be better for it.
D W.D E

Former head o f central intelligence James Woolsey tells DW the US would never sign a binding no-spy pact. He
also doesn't recall, but can't exclude, that phones o f Chancellor Kohl were monitored during his tenure.
(07.11.2013)
Ehud Barak: 'It's a wake-up call'

Former Israeli P rime Minister Ehud Barak tells DW that the controls o n intelligence agencies should probably be
tightened as a consequence o f the NSA affair. But he warns that citizens shouldn't be nave about security.
(12.11.2013)
US rights groups push for declassification of counterterrorism documents

The o fficial legal rationales f or US drone strikes and NSA surveillance programs remain classified. A growing
number o f advocacy groups are calling o n the White House to come clean about its counterterrorism programs.
(01.11.2013)
Date 13.11.2013
Author Interview: Spencer Kimball
Editor Nicole Goebel
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1AGOI
M OR E C ON TEN T

boost Assad's image


than a sop? 18.01.2014
18.01.2014
18.01.2014

regime.


TOP STORIES / WORLD / AMERICAS / TRANSATLANTIC VOICES
U N ITED STATES
For US, 'the age of easy hypocrisy is over'

In the age of WikiLeaks and revelations by the likes of Edward Snowden, the US can no
longer get away with hypocrisy as a strategic tool on the world stage, political scientist
Henry Farrell tells DW.
Henry Farrell is associate professor of political science and international affairs at George
Washington University in Washington, USA. He specializes in EU-US relations and the politics of
information.
DW: You say hypocrisy is at the heart of US foreign policy, can you explain?
Henry Farrell: It's a key component of US soft power, which is the US's ability to persuade other states
to do the kinds of things it would like to see them do, without using military or economic muscle.
Here, hypocrisy can be very useful, because it allows the US to argue for one set of norms while, in fact,
breaching those ways of interacting with the world very directly. This has allowed the US to achieve
things that it otherwise might have had difficulty achieving.
Give us an example.
Nuclear non-proliferation is a good example. The US is well aware that Israel, for example, is a
nuclear power, but it never acknowledges this. You see this also with the United States' effective
acceptance of India and Pakistan having become nuclear powers. The US protested at the time, but
was prepared to accept it as a fait accompli.
But with the new age of leaks, what we're seeing is that it is getting much harder for the US to get
away with behaving hypocritically.
Is the US as the global superpower particularly vulnerable to this type of strategy and why is it
failing now?
The US has been unconscious to a great degree of the gap between the very noble-sounding ideas it
often espouses and what it actually does. Where that's brought up, the US has seen it as temporary
divergences from a still underlying set of ideals. US politicians and citizens often have genuine
difficulty understanding how people in other parts of the world might be hostile or skeptical of US
aims.
It's this bubble that has been burst. Here, the whistleblowers are acting like the small boy [from the
story The Emperor's new clothes] who points out the emperor's nakedness when no one else dared
speak up.
How does that affect US relations with its allies?
They are becoming much more difficult. If [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel, for example had
discovered privately that the US was tapping her phone, she probably would not have gone public, she
would have pressed for private concessions. But because it has gone public, Merkel and the US find
themselves constrained to behave in ways they otherwise would not.
What's your advice to the US, given their self-imposed objective of being a global liberal role model?
The age of easy hypocrisy is over. The US could go in one of two directions. It could bring its rhetoric
in line with its behavior. So, rather than pretending to adhere to various broad liberal norms, the US
could, when it's in its interest, abrogate these norms.
But that would be problematic, as the US has created a liberal order, in which it's going to have a
much tougher time of it, if other states start behaving in the same way, then many of the principles the
US has come up with, which make life easier for the US, are going to be far more difficult to deliver on.
What's the alternative?
The alternative is for the US to change its behavior to bring it more in line with the commitments and
the norms that it formally declares. It's going to be more difficult, but it's the better option long-term.
It allows the US to maintain the kind of broad consensus the US has been able to work with quite
successfully in the past.
Give us some concrete examples.
The minimal thing the Obama administration could do, and I suspect will end up doing, is to not
directly tap the communication of leaders of allies.
But there is a broader set of issues that the US needs to start paying attention to, which is the politics
of privacy and personal information. The US has managed to craft agreements with the EU on
financial or airline passenger data, agreements the US says are essential to its security.
It will have great difficulty in creating further such agreements unless it starts to build privacy
protection for ordinary citizens into these agreements.
With regards to Germany, will the German government now have the gumption to push its agenda,
given the outrage over the tapping of Merkel's mobile phone?
The Germans are pushing for a deal, under which the US would engage in enhanced intelligence
cooperation with Germany and would also agree not to spy within Germany, a version of what's called
the Five-Eyes Agreement (mulitlateral agreement on intelligence cooperation and sharing - the ed.)
that the US already has with the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
Here, it's useful for the US to realize that it needs to placate German elites. The US should start
thinking about constructing some kind of broad agreement with the EU, which would involve some
degree of enhanced intelligence and information sharing, but which would also give some protection
against arbitrary phone-tapping to EU and US citizens.
In other words, this agreement is more important to Chancellor Merkel than the mere protection of
individuals' privacy?
Merkel's ideal (scenario) coming from this would be a deal, in which Germany gets admitted to this
Five-Eyes club. But whether it will be enough to satisfy public opinion depends on how capable those
people that truly care about these issues are of boxing Merkel in a bit, so that she is obliged to
negotiate a stronger position, even if this isn't necessarily something which accords with her own
instincts, which are conservative and quite favorable to cooperating with the US.
Is there a consensus in the US for making those kinds of concessions to Europe?

There has always been some hostility in the US, especially among Republicans, to anything which
smacks of the US consulting with other powers. But there is a very interesting straw in the wind - the
intelligence committee chair in the Senate, Dianne Feinstein, who has up to date been a very strong
defender of the NSA, has said that US spying on allies is something that need to be gotten rid of.
So, there is a growing acceptance within mainstream political circles that the US needs to think about
how it can do better in dealing with its allies.
D W.D E

Germany and Brazil want UN vote on NSA spying

Germany and Brazil are in agreement: spying by the NSA has gone too f ar. With a UN resolution they want to
protect privacy in the digital age. (30.10.2013)
NSA affair could block EU-US free trade talks

Talks with the US o ver the transatlantic f ree trade agreement are set to continue. P hone-hacking "victim" Angela
Merkel is in f avor, but European P arliament P resident Martin Schulz suggests she reconsider. (29.10.2013)
AU D IOS AN D VID EOS ON TH E TOPIC
NSA scandal strains US European relations
Date 30.10.2013
Author Interview: Nicole Goebel
Editor Rob Mudge
Share
Send
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
More
Print
Print this page
Permalink http://dw.de/p/1A8k0
M OR E C ON TEN T
European defense policy

needs new impetus
McCain: 'Larger issue is

Putin's behavior' 11.12.2013
Contested history is hard
19.12.2013
John McCain is considered o ne o f

the most o utspoken US senators.
The f ormer presidential candidate
describes the conflict in Ukraine as
"very dangerous," and tells DW
about the importance o f NSA
oversight.
Renowned US economist John

Kenneth Galbraith o nce tutored
John F. Kennedy at Harvard and
later served as his Ambassador to
India. In this essay, his son, James
Galbraith, recalls his Kennedy
experience.
Germany's stance o n EU security

and defense has been pretty
unambitious. But ministers in the
new coalition government may
push Chancellor Merkel toward
supporting greater integration,
argues Thorsten Benner.
21.11.2013

Deutsche Welle (WWW - Dw.de) 2013-14

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Deutsche Welle (WWW - Dw.de) 2013-14

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

TOP STORIES / WORLD

Does the EU need its own spies?

threats and political risk at the International

EU offices in Brussels were also targeted by the NSA

hideous problems of credibly maintaining

If it's not broken

US Privacy Board 'is unique in the world'

TOP STORIES / WORLD

US Congress divided on NSA reform

Improve, not impair

The panel, consisting of two constitutional lawyers, a data

President Obama is due to announce his reform plans

Sunstein emphasized that the important thing was

House and American people divided

far enough, while others are against them

'No-spy deal is no cure-all'

TOP STORIES / GERMANY

'No-spy deal is no cure-all'

Germany's future transatlantic coordinator Philipp Missfelder says it would be a setback if

German media blast US 'No' to no-spy agreement

Scowcroft: 'We're searching for a common strategy'

ACLU: 'NSA reforms should apply worldwide'

Print this page

TOP STORIES / WORLD

ACLU: 'NSA reforms should apply

and one of his important colleagues are both retiring in the

reform also offer more privacy protection to ordinary non-US

EU report reveals massive scope of secret NSA surveillance

NSA surveillance eroded transatlantic trust

Pressure builds to crack down on NSA spying

Print this page

TOP STORIES / WORLD / EUROPE

EU report reveals massive scope of secret

"Collect, store, analyze"

Claude Moraes and his fellow committee

was the first to publish former NSA contractor

both US and EU authorities

Edward Snowden's revelations.

Fight against terrorism = a fig leaf

EU buildings' IT infrastructure must be better protected

said, surveillance programs are "yet another step

Will Edward Snowden testify?

The European Parliament's committee inquiry into the spying

has been as explicit in its criticism of the US government.

Walking the walk

ACLU: 'NSA reforms should apply worldwide'

Report: NSA seeking to develop 'quantum computer'

Germany eyes parliamentary inquiry into NSA activities

Go to the EU surveillance report

Print this page

TOP STORIES / GERMANY

Germany eyes parliamentary inquiry into

unconvinced whether such a committee makes

sense, and he questions what exactly it would

Berliners protested against NSA surveillance

not be a shot in the dark or raise expectations it

Uhl has a different view of the NSA

NSA surveillance eroded transatlantic trust

Report: NSA seeking to develop 'quantum

US debates legality of data collection

NSA surveillance eroded transatlantic trust

Snowden warns about surveillance in 'Christmas Message'

Blind quantum computing points to the future