Edward Snowden Essay

This essay reviews the relevant literature to provide a background on Edward Snowden and how his high-profile actions adversely affected the work of the National Security Agency (NSA). An analysis of what the NSA was doing prior to the leaks and how it collects intelligence information now is followed by an examination concerning what Snowden leaked and why. Finally, a discussion concerning whether the U.S. government violated Snowden’s constitutional rights is followed by a summary of the research and important findings concerning this issue in the conclusion.

Beginning in June 2013, Edward Snowden, a computer analyst working for the National Security Agency began leaking thousands of classified documents. These classified documents were disclosed to the Guardian and alleged that the NSA routinely gathered telephonic metadata from telecommunications companies, allowing them to scrutinize American citizens’ Internet activities (Morrison, 2014). According to Francheschi-Bicchierai (2014), among the thousands of documents that were leaked by Snowden, the secrets that were the most harmful to the NSA included the following:

Secret court orders authorized the NSA to review American citizens’ telephone records (Francheschi-Bicchierai, 2014), operating essentially as a domestic intelligence agency (Stein, 2013). In addition, Snowden revealed how the NSA’s telephone surveillance program can gather data on American citizens’ telephone calls including the numbers dialed, the length of the conversations and the dates on which they occurred (McCarthy, 2013).

The disclosure of PRISM, an initiative by the NSA’s to gain direct access to servers in major online providers such as Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple, and others (Francheschi-Bicchierai, 2014). This disclosure caused a flood of criticism from the international community in general and the citizens of the U.S. and the U.K. concerning security, privacy, and government spying (Be very afraid, 2013). The PRISM initiative enables NSA officials to collect data from these major Internet companies has been in effect since 2007 as part of the global war on terrorism (Taking liberties in the name of freedom, 2013).

The NSA routinely conducts espionage on foreign countries and world leaders, even those friendly to the U.S. (Francheschi-Bicchierai, 2014).

The disclosure of XKeyscore, which allows the NSA to determine everything that a computer user does online (Francheschi-Bicchierai, 2014).

The NSA attempt to decode encrypted data and sabotage Internet security (Francheschi-Bicchierai, 2014).

The disclosure that an NSA team of hackers exists and what techniques they use (Francheschi-Bicchierai, 2014).

The NSA had access to the Google and Yahoo data centers (Francheschi-Bicchierai, 2014).

The NSA routinely gathers private citizens’ text messages (Francheschi-Bicchierai, 2014) and likely has access to audio versions of telephone calls (Be very afraid, 2013).

The NSA intercepts all telephone calls in Afghanistan and the Bahamas (Francheschi-Bicchierai, 2014).

An NSA program routinely intercepts e-mails of non-U.S. persons outside the United States (Yoo, 2014).

The disclosure of MonsterMind, an NSA cyberattack tool that automatically unleashes a hostile response when network intrusions are detected, a tool that Snowden alleges brought down Syria’s Internet service in 2003 (Ackerman, 2014).

Taken together, it is not surprising that the U.S. government wants to get their hands on Snowden who, following an international odyssey in search of asylum (Stein, 2013), is currently living in an unknown part of Russia temporarily while he seeks long-term sanctuary elsewhere (Be very afraid, 2013). To date, U.S. federal prosecutors have charged Snowden with theft of government property and espionage (Be very afraid, 2013) and has been characterized alternatively as a traitor and even an anarchist (McCarthy, 2013).

Given the clandestine nature of their mission, it would be disingenuous to claim to know how the NSA how collects its intelligence information post-Snowden, but the NSA’s mission today is clearly stated:  “The NSA leads the U.S. Government in cryptology that encompasses both Signals Intelligence and Information Assurance (IA) products and services, and enables Computer Network Operations in order to gain a decision advantage for the Nation and our allies under all circumstances” (NSA mission, 2014, para. 2).

Some indication of how the NSA goes about collecting intelligence data can be discerned from the Executive Order 12333 of December 4, 1981 that created the agency and its roles and responsibilities. Today, the NSA Director is tasked with the following

Collect (including through clandestine means), process, analyze, produce, and disseminate signals intelligence information and data for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes to support national and departmental missions;

Act as the National Manager for National Security Systems as established in law and policy, and in this capacity be responsible to the Secretary of Defense and to the Director, National Intelligence; and,

Prescribe security regulations covering operating practices, including the transmission, handling, and distribution of signals intelligence and communications security material within and among the elements under control of the Director of the National Security Agency, and exercise the necessary supervisory control to ensure compliance with the regulations (NSA mission, 2014).

Likewise, the mission of the NSA’s Information Assurance is to “confront the formidable challenge of preventing foreign adversaries from gaining access to sensitive or classified national security information” (NSA mission, 2014, para. 2). In addition, the mission of the NSA’s The Signals Intelligence division is to “collect, process, and disseminate intelligence information from foreign signals for intelligence and counterintelligence purposes and to support military operations” (NSA mission, 2014, para. 3). The NSA emphasizes that the nature of its mission prevents further disclosure concerning its intelligence-gathering activities. In this regard, the NSA emphasizes that, “The National Security Agency/Central Security Service (NSA/CSS) is a key member of the Intelligence Community and, by its very nature, requires a high degree of confidentiality” (NSA frequently asked questions, 2014). Despite these vagaries, the NSA does state how it goes about intelligence-gathering today:  

The Agency collects, processes, and disseminates intelligence information from foreign electronic signals for national foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes and to support military operations. NSA/CSS is also tasked with preventing foreign adversaries from gaining access to classified national security information. (NSA frequently asked questions, 2014, para. 3).

Finally, the same Executive Order that created the NSA also outlined the NSA Director’s roles and responsibilities as follows:

Collect (including through clandestine means), process, analyze, produce, and disseminate signals intelligence information and data for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes to support national and departmental missions;

Act as the National Manager for National Security Systems as established in law and policy, and in this capacity be responsible to the Secretary of Defense and to the Director, National Intelligence; and,

Prescribe security regulations covering operating practices, including the transmission, handling, and distribution of signals intelligence and communications security material within and among the elements under control of the Director of the National Security Agency, and exercise the necessary supervisory control to ensure compliance with the regulations (NSA mission, 2014, para. 4)..

The Executive Order establishing the NSA and outlining its roles and responsibilities was amended on July 31, 2008 to achieve the following:

Align EO12333 with the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004;

Implement additional recommendations of the 9/11 and WMD Commissions;

Further integrate the Intelligence Community and clarify and strengthen the role of the DNI as the head of the Community; and,

Maintain or strengthen privacy and civil liberties protections (NSA mission, 2014, para. 5).

The NSA maintains that these different intelligence missions are being accomplished in a manner that is congruent with U.S. laws as well as the protection of privacy and civil liberties (NSA mission, 2014). Clearly, there are two sides to this issue and these are discussed further below.

There has been growing concern that the U.S. government is abusing its power and attempting to conduct national affairs without the transparency of public scrutiny (Grabiner, 2012). Following Snowden’s revelations, U.S. Congressman Alan Grayson (D-Florida) proclaimed to the House of Representatives that:  

We are reaching the point where Uncle Sam is Big Brother. Although its proponents depict it as American as apple spy, this program is an anti-American program. We are not North Koreans. We don't live in Nazi Germany. We are Americans, and we are human beings. And we deserve to have our privacy respected. (cited in Grabiner, 2012, p. 116)

Notwithstanding these assertions, though, many U.S. government officials regard Snowden in the same treasonous ilk as Aaron Burr. For instance, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Mike Rogers, called Snowden a “traitor” and “liar who overinflated his position... overinflated his access, and he's even overinflated what the actual technology of the [NSA] programs would allow one to do. It's impossible for him to do what he was saying he could do” (cited in Stein, 2013, p. 1). Notwithstanding this assertion to the contrary, the record clearly shows that Snowden did in fact do quite a lot to damage the reputation and creditability of the NSA during his tenure there.

To his credit (and expertise!), Snowden actually left detectable digital traces of all of the documents he stole from the NSA so the agency would know what he had and what he did not have (Ackerman, 2014). Moreover, some observers suggest that Snowden was doing a patriotic deed when he leaked thousands of classified documents. For example, Eichenwald (2013) points out that, “[Snowden] reached out to reporters after the public revelations about China's surveillance of the Times's computers and the years of hacking by Unit 61398 into networks used by American businesses and government agencies” (p. 1).

Moreover, Snowden was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2013 for his actions (Schow, 2013). The nomination for Snowden maintains that he acted in the nation’s best interests at great personal risk:  “Edward Snowden has -- in a heroic effort at great personal cost - - revealed the existence and extent of the surveillance, the U.S. government devotes electronic communications worldwide” (p. 3). Indeed, the Nobel Peace Prize nomination maintains that not only did Snowden do the U.S. and the U.K. a service by leaking these thousands of classified documents, he also helped to push the U.S. towards honoring the constitutional rights of Americans. In this regard, the nomination for Snowden added that, “By putting light on this monitoring program -- conducted in contravention of national laws and international agreements -- Edward Snowden has helped to make the world a little bit better and safer” (cited in Schow, 2013, p. 3). Other authorities also agree that Snowden’s actions were patriotic and were not in his own best interests. In this regard, McCarthy (2013) emphasizes that, “The civil disobedience of Snowden shows him to be a man of conscience and courage. He saw wrongs and tried to right them” (p. 24).

In addition, former NSA executive, Thomas Drake, a former CIA analyst, Ray McGovern, and a former FBI agent, Coleen Rowley, all traveled to Russia to visit Snowden and   present him with the Sam Adams Award for Integrity in Intelligence (Hayden, 2014). All three of these individuals were recipients of the award, together with Julian Assange, WikiLeaks founder and Katharine Gun, a translator who worked for the British intelligence agency GCHQ and revealed NSA plans to intercept communications of UN members prior to the Iraq War (Hayden, 2014). Likewise, the Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union maintains that “Edward Snowden has done this country [the US] a service” (cited in Hayden, 2014, p. 14).

Many Americans, though, do not agree that Snowden is worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize or other accolades because of the circumstances in which the disclosures were made. For instance, the director of foreign policy at the Heritage Foundation, Steven Bucci, characterized the nomination thusly:  “This is as absurd as if someone nominated spies Aldrich Ames or Robert Hanssen for a Nobel Peace Prize. It seems now that a major qualification for this award is to do something as detrimental to the interests of the United States as possible” (cited in Schow, 2013, p. 3). Pointing out that betraying trust and criminal acts rarely contribute to world peace, critics of Snowden want him brought to justice. In addition, the NSA maintains that Snowden’s breach of security has caused enormous damage to the nation’s ability to collect intelligence while it is waging a global war on terrorism (Ackerman, 2014).

Irrespective of Snowden’s self-proclaimed motives and the fallout that followed his disclosures, the fact remains that while embarrassing or shaming the U.S. government is not a crime (McCarthy, 2013), this computer professional violated the terms of his employment agreement as well as stealing classified documents from the National Security Agency. In fact, Snowden himself admitted that his actions were illegal (Morrison, 2014). In sum, even though Snowden may have been trying to actually make the world a better place, his approach was inappropriate and the government’s response did not violate this contractor’s constitutional rights. In this regard, Yoo (2014) reports that “Despite the claims of critics, these programs do not violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution” (p. 901).