On the 18th of October, Ed Pilkington wrote an article for the Guardian indicating Snowden had said he did not take any documents with him to Russia. According to the article (which is at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/18/edward-snowden-no-leaked-nsa-documents-russia ) all the documents were left with journalists, presumably to be let out a few at a time, over time, to increase the value of the goods to the publications they appear in. Releasing them all at once, has a narrow impact on circulation, which is the business part of the whole thing. The Guardian already admitted as much.
I want to ask my readers how plausible such a story sounds.
The Russians were taking a risk by accepting Snowden's appeal for asylum. Was he really afraid somebody was going to kill him to keep him from releasing the information, as he once insinuated would happen? If so, he has been watching too much television while sitting around the airport. Nobody is going to believe such a claim.
Was he going to be arrested and put in jail? Yes, he was. Human Rights Watch tried to make a case for this justification for asylum by saying whistleblowers don't have adequate protection in National Security cases (http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/07/03/countries-should-consider-snowden-s-asylum-claim-fairly ) which may even be partially true, but hardly a reason for Russia to think he deserved asylum. They would have a fit if we used that as justification for allowing a Russian to defect to the U.S. It just isn't very convincing that the Russians jumped to his aid because they felt like he might be put in a U.S. jail for what he did. They put reporters in jail for lesser offenses.
Why leave the documents with journalists? For one reason, because the foreign spy agencies in China and Russia have finally figured out that journalists cannot be prosecuted for having them, and spies can. Even though that makes absolutely no sense at all, the law in the U.S. and England have allowed it to be. There will shortly be another case in the U.S. where a spy will be found to have given documents to a journalist and the journalist published stories about them. When the Justice Department made him a co-conspirator in the case, the journalist community raised holy hell. The journalists have a powerful lobby, but that isn't a good reason for their behavior.
If Snowden actually did leave all his sensitive documents with journalists, what could the Russians gain by giving Snowden asylum, that they couldn't get without giving him asylum? The answer would seem to be nothing, but we can't have an answer that runs contrary to every understanding we have the Russian politic. They never do anything like this without a reason. They have to be getting something.
Either they believe Snowden knows a lot he isn't telling yet, or he brought more with him than he is willing to admit. The Russians have to believe they will get more than the altruistic good feeling that comes from keeping a person from going to jail. Nobody, not even the Russians, likes a traitor enough to take one in with the idea that they will get nothing in return. It is too much for any of us to believe.
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
Monday, October 14, 2013
China Warns U.S. Part II
CNBC reports today that Vice Finance Minister Zhu Guangyao told reporters that he understands the White House is working to resolve the double-edged crisis, but expressed impatience with the lack of progress.
"We have to see that the clock is ticking," Zhu said, according to Agence France Presse."The executive branch of the U.S. government has to take decisive and credible steps to avoid a default on its Treasury bonds," he said.
Curious how the Chinese, who have a different view of the role of government, manage to blame the Executive Branch of government for the condition we are in with the shutdown and debt debate, but our own press tends to blame the Legislative Branch.
A few of our press stalwarts might think the Chinese are ill-informed about how the U.S. government actually works. They might chuckle at their ignorance.
A few might think the Chinese are just greedy, wanting to get the whole thing settled so their sizable investments and bonds are protected from default that would cost them money.
A few might applaud the Chinese for waiting until the "last minute" to engage in the game, when a trillion or two is at stake in this bet. It shows how tolerant they are.
Perhaps, it is more simple than any of these things. The Chinese are off at the APEC Summit while our President sits on the sidelines, and our Secretary of State keeps to Afghanistan trying to get them to agree to another few years of troop support.
The Chinese are quick to step into this area of South East Asia, because they want us out. Two years ago, countries like Japan and Thailand were wanting us to get back into the area because the Chinese were being too aggressive, threatening all of them and staking claims to islands all over the region. They haven't given up on those claims; they are going their best to engage all who live in that part of the world, and they press us to stay home and tend to our budget crisis.
Notice, we listen.
Curious how the Chinese, who have a different view of the role of government, manage to blame the Executive Branch of government for the condition we are in with the shutdown and debt debate, but our own press tends to blame the Legislative Branch.
A few of our press stalwarts might think the Chinese are ill-informed about how the U.S. government actually works. They might chuckle at their ignorance.
A few might think the Chinese are just greedy, wanting to get the whole thing settled so their sizable investments and bonds are protected from default that would cost them money.
A few might applaud the Chinese for waiting until the "last minute" to engage in the game, when a trillion or two is at stake in this bet. It shows how tolerant they are.
Perhaps, it is more simple than any of these things. The Chinese are off at the APEC Summit while our President sits on the sidelines, and our Secretary of State keeps to Afghanistan trying to get them to agree to another few years of troop support.
The Chinese are quick to step into this area of South East Asia, because they want us out. Two years ago, countries like Japan and Thailand were wanting us to get back into the area because the Chinese were being too aggressive, threatening all of them and staking claims to islands all over the region. They haven't given up on those claims; they are going their best to engage all who live in that part of the world, and they press us to stay home and tend to our budget crisis.
Notice, we listen.
.
Saturday, October 12, 2013
China Involved in US Debt Debate
Last week the Chinese warned the Obama White House that they "hold significant debt of the United States" . We can only hope that nobody forgets that China owns owns $1.28 trillion, that they admit to. They have beneficial ownership of a good deal more, but if we think of money as stock, they have as much influence over the U.S. as a share holder with 10% ownership of a company's stock.
Two years ago China made almost the exact same worded warning when Congress was debating what imports to tax. Then, they raised the price of their currency, at a time when we were trying to get them to lower it. So, what is next from China on this? You can bet the backchannels are humming, and the emphasis is on getting the debt debate over with, so they can back-fill their pockets with new payments. The debt ceiling debate is not about what bills we owe; it is just as much about who we owe that money. I am uncomfortable about China, though less so about Japan, owning equal chunks of our debt. Don't we care, or like the Obama White House, do we think China is our friend?
Two years ago China made almost the exact same worded warning when Congress was debating what imports to tax. Then, they raised the price of their currency, at a time when we were trying to get them to lower it. So, what is next from China on this? You can bet the backchannels are humming, and the emphasis is on getting the debt debate over with, so they can back-fill their pockets with new payments. The debt ceiling debate is not about what bills we owe; it is just as much about who we owe that money. I am uncomfortable about China, though less so about Japan, owning equal chunks of our debt. Don't we care, or like the Obama White House, do we think China is our friend?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)