Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Before the invasion of Iraq, Bush used the NSA to spy on U.N. diplomats -- and it had nothing to do with fighting terrorism.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

NSA Spied on U.N. Diplomats

By Norman Solomon, AlterNet. Posted December 27, 2005.


Before the invasion of Iraq, Bush used the NSA to spy on U.N. diplomats -- and it had nothing to do with fighting terrorism.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Norman Solomon

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Despite all the news accounts and punditry since the New York Times published its Dec. 16 bombshell about the National Security Agency's domestic spying, the media coverage has made virtually no mention of the fact that the Bush administration used the NSA to spy on U.N. diplomats in New York before the invasion of Iraq.

That spying had nothing to do with protecting the United States from a terrorist attack. The entire purpose of the NSA surveillance was to help the White House gain leverage, by whatever means possible, for a resolution in the U.N. Security Council to green light an invasion. When that surveillance was exposed nearly three years ago, the mainstream U.S. media winked at Bush's illegal use of the NSA for his Iraq invasion agenda.

Back then, after news of the NSA's targeted spying at the United Nations broke in the British press, major U.S. media outlets gave it only perfunctory coverage -- or, in the case of the New York Times, no coverage at all. Now, while the NSA is in the news spotlight with plenty of retrospective facts, the NSA's spying at the U.N. goes unmentioned: buried in an Orwellian memory hole.

A rare exception was a paragraph in a Dec. 20 piece by Patrick Radden Keefe in the online magazine Slate -- which pointedly noted that "the eavesdropping took place in Manhattan and violated the General Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, the Headquarters Agreement for the United Nations, and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, all of which the United States has signed."

But after dodging the story of the NSA's spying at the U.N. when it mattered most -- before the invasion of Iraq -- the New York Times and other major news organizations are hardly apt to examine it now. That's all the more reason for other media outlets to step into the breach.

In early March 2003, journalists at the London-based Observer reported that the NSA was secretly participating in the U.S. government's high-pressure campaign for the U.N. Security Council to approve a pro-war resolution. A few days after the Observer revealed the text of an NSA memo about U.S. spying on Security Council delegations, I asked Daniel Ellsberg to assess the importance of the story. "This leak," he replied, "is more timely and potentially more important than the Pentagon Papers." The key word was "timely."

Publication of the top-secret Pentagon Papers in 1971, made possible by Ellsberg's heroic decision to leak those documents, came after the Vietnam War had been underway for many years. But with an invasion of Iraq still in the future, the leak about NSA spying on U.N. diplomats in New York could erode the Bush administration's already slim chances of getting a war resolution through the Security Council. (Ultimately, no such resolution passed before the invasion.) And media scrutiny in the United States could have shed light on how Washington's war push was based on subterfuge and manipulation.

"As part of its battle to win votes in favor of war against Iraq," the Observer had reported on March 2, 2003, the U.S. government developed an "aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception of the home and office telephones and the emails of U.N. delegates." The smoking gun was "a memorandum written by a top official at the National Security Agency -- the U.S. body which intercepts communications around the world -- and circulated to both senior agents in his organization and to a friendly foreign intelligence agency." The friendly agency was Britain's Government Communications Headquarters.

The Observer explained: "The leaked memorandum makes clear that the target of the heightened surveillance efforts are the delegations from Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Mexico, Guinea and Pakistan at the U.N. headquarters in New York -- the so called 'Middle Six' delegations whose votes are being fought over by the pro-war party, led by the U.S. and Britain, and the party arguing for more time for U.N. inspections, led by France, China and Russia."


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Sad but true, and worse
Posted by: ScottP on Dec 27, 2005 5:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't doubt the veracity of spying on the UN at all. However, the reality of the situation is much deeper than portrayed here. By looking at the mechanics of spying one can see that this is the rule rather than the exception.

For example, consider the case of satellite based spying, which is significant since most telephone communication includes at least some wireless travel, either cell to station or station to station. We should presume that COMINT satellites fly low orbits close to a variety of targets, rather than geo-synchronous orbits which are many times as far away and have no ability to monitor alternative targets. Now take a look at their orbits, which must fly over the US by the laws of orbit mechanics. Are to believe that they capture the information at our borders and overseas, but not inside the US? Are we to believe they're commanded to stop listening just at the instant they cross above the border, and commanded on again just as they exit the border on the other side?

Looking at the mechanics of internet communication through the network of routers and computers between a source and destination, it's easy to see that monitoring the internet is similarly doable by ground based methods.

One should assume that all electronic communications are potentially monitored, and the chances of rolling back this decades old practice are nil (and in fact denying the monitoring is foolish if not dangerous). However, because of the vast quantity of information most of it is dumped without notice. Our task is to make sure this information is not used to promote wars or other acts against society. Our task remains the same: oppose wars of aggression, protect the environment and worker's rights, etc.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Us spying on the UN? Old news or...
Posted by: Ghoulman on Dec 28, 2005 10:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Us spying on the UN? Old news or... just business as usual?

This has ALWAYS been going on. Not just by the US of course.

There is a reason all diplomates at the UN have thier important meetings at lunch *chuckle*. It's assumed that all UN telephone lines, etc. are bugged. That's the nature of international politics and diplomacy... sure, it's illegal but ...

... it's not exactly "news". If anything, I find this "report" to be a red herring. If not a planted story to lure the press into yet another "strawman" argument to deflect from NSA taps on US citizens. THAT's the real issue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]