On September 11th 2001, hijackers flew planes into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and an empty field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. The nation was in shock. Questions were raised on how people could have committed such an unspeakable tragedy on American soil. Beyond all the talk about the attack was one crucial question for the future of American security: What do we do next? The United States created a new department called The Department of Homeland Security, new agencies like the TSA were formed, and a controversial act called the Patriot Act was passed giving the US Government broad power to enact new surveillance programs in ways they never could before. While the Patriot Act could help encounter and stop threats of terrorism both at home and abroad, it added a new dimension to American intelligence agencies not seen since the Cold War: the ability of the American government (more specifically the FBI, CIA, and NSA) to spy on its own citizens. The rise of government surveillance leads to debates over the role of security in the United States and the rights to personal privacy. Foundational to this discussion is the issue of individual and collective understanding of when infringements on freedom are necessary to protect/secure our rights.

Holding the title of a global superpower, the United States generates a lot of attention from people all over the world. While the attention can lead to forging powerful allies, it can also lead to the emergence of many enemies. In order to curtail threats to our nation, most people agree some type of surveillance is needed, but many disagree on the tactics used and the effects of them, especially when the general public is not aware. This is the case with Edward Snowden, an NSA whistleblower who is a fierce critic of United States government surveillance and the author of the essay “Edward Snowden: The World Says No to Surveillance“. Snowden is in exile in Russia for exposing classified documents that showed the NSA’s call tracking program that allowed the government to track and monitor phone calls of everyday Americans with no warrant or need to justify it. While that program was later struck down by the courts, he acknowledges that people’s privacy is still not secure.

Billions of cell phone location records are still being intercepted without regard for the guilt or innocence of those affected.

Edward Snowden

Snowden lays out a major concern he still has over privacy. Millions of law-abiding citizens are having their privacy taken away by an overreaching government, with little consequences or accountability. Snowden appeals to freedom and equality, two core beliefs of the American public, to make his argument against mass surveillance. He refutes the notion that these measures are necessary to secure the safety of Americans and views it as a government trying to gain information on its citizens for its own benefit.

On the other side, we see a need for government surveillance as a way to protect American citizens and American interests around the world. Edward Snowden was (and still is) very controversial, as he has been seen as endangering the security of american citizens and their interests. This is the view of two representatives, Mike Rodgers and Dutch Ruppersberger, members of the House Committee on Intelligence and authors of the op-ed “No, Edward Snowden does not deserve a pardon, President Trump“. While the piece is directed at President Trump, it describes in detail the harm caused by whistleblowers like Edward Snowden.

Snowden undermined the United States’ international relations, threatened our national security and jeopardized the sources and methods used by our dedicated intelligence professionals.

Mike Rodgers and Dutch Ruppersberger

Rodgers and Ruppersberger try to appeal a collectivist mindset that the US must work with its citizens to strengthen security. Part of that is accepting that the government needs to have some sort of system to monitor potential threats, and any leak of that system puts everyone in danger. They also try to discredit Snowden as being a hero of the people by showing that he got payed more than 1.2 million dollars in speaking fees because of his actions. Rodgers and Ruppersberger try to use money to show how Snowden could have been corrupted by fame and money to go against the best interests of his country. This approach is targeted at average Americans who could only dream to make that amount of money in less than 10 years.

Government Surveillance is no way a uniquely American concern, as every nation has to contend with its domestic impacts. Each country has some level of surveillance. However some countries don’t have the capabilities or needs for mass surveillance, while others find mass surveillance critical for security, as well as for political and economic interests. One country that falls in the later category is China. Since the rise of Xi Jinping in 2012, China has invested heavily in mass surveillance, particularly artificial intelligence for use of tracking its massive population. Ross Andersen speaks about China’s mass surveillance in his article “The Panopticon Is Already Here“. He writes:

Xi also wants to use AI’s awesome analytical powers to push China to the cutting edge of surveillance. He wants to build an all-seeing digital system of social control, patrolled by precog algorithms that identify potential dissenters in real time.

Ross Andersen

Ross Andersen, like most Western media members, portrays China’s ambitions in a negative light because it goes against the values of much of the free world, particularly the ability to speak freely and voice criticisms. While these values have never been stressed in modern China, the potential of these new technologies could prevent a free democratic China from ever becoming a reality, as any possible resistance would be suppressed before having a chance to organize. Andersen uses the words “all-seeing” and “social control” to scare people and portray both mass surveillance and the Chinese government negatively.

China is not the only country looking to use mass surveillance to spy on its own citizens. Israel has always been a leader in surveillance because its survival as a nation depends on it. Israel is a nation with powerful enemies who have sought to destroy the Jewish state since its founding in 1948. Recently, Israel’s Shin Bet ( the Israeli version of the FBI) has been using its surveillance capabilities to spy on its citizens during the coronavirus pandemic. Tom Bateman, author of the article “Coronavirus: Israel turns surveillance tools on itself“, writes:

The Shin Bet can access the location data of millions of mobile phone users to trace those who have been in proximity to confirmed patients. Israel credits the system, among other measures, with reducing the rate of infection.

Tom Bateman

For the first time ever in Israeli history, The Shin Bet can use phone GPS data to monitor Israeli citizens. This surveillance brings Israel closer to China in that respect. However the narratives are drastically different. Instead of being seen as something to be afraid of, Bateman frames this new government surveillance of citizens by Shin Bet as a positive and more like a civic duty for Israelis to comply with, instead of an overarching government limiting the freedoms of the masses that needs to be put in check. What is interesting about this argument of civic duties is that it is the exact same argument that China uses to justify its use of mass surveillance on its population. The only difference is that China is a single party state with no individual freedoms while Israel is a multi-party democracy, and possibly more important, a key ally of the United States and the Western world where many journalists covering stories of mass surveillance originate from.

When it comes to surveillance one word gets brought up: freedom. As Americans we hear this word constantly. Freedom is a virtue of American identity and culture. What is often forgotten is the fact that word freedom is subjective. We see this in American society today during the coronavirus pandemic with states implementing lockdowns and mask mandates to stop the spread of the coronavirus. This angered many people across the country. In Michigan, armed protestors stormed the capitol building to try to demand a lifting of the restrictions imposed to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Some people, like the ones protesting mask mandates, see freedom as being able to ignore government rules and regulations that they consider extreme. This is how Edward Snowden viewed freedom and why he leaked classified information. On the other hand, freedom can also be interpreted as the ability to be safe and secure from threats both foreign and domestic. This is the definition of freedom that persisted after 9/11 and allowed all of the post 9/11 changes like heightened airport security and increased surveillance to become reality. By not coming to an agreed upon interpretation of freedom in this country, we will remain divided on the accepted level and value of security and surveillance. This battle between privacy and security has been a part of our nation’s history and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future.

Work Cited:

Andersen, Story by Ross. The Panopticon Is Already Here. 30 July 2020, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/09/china-ai-surveillance/614197/.

Bateman, Tom. “Coronavirus: Israel Turns Surveillance Tools on Itself.” BBC News, BBC, 11 May 2020, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-52579475.

Censky, Abigail. “Heavily Armed Protesters Gather Again At Michigan Capitol To Decry Stay-At-Home Order.” NPR, NPR, 14 May 2020, http://www.npr.org/2020/05/14/855918852/heavily-armed-protesters-gather-again-at-michigans-capitol-denouncing-home-order.

Ruppersberger, Dutch, and Mike Rodgers. “Opinion | No, Edward Snowden Does Not Deserve a Pardon, President Trump.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 18 Aug. 2020, http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/08/18/edward-snowden-deserves-trial-not-pardon/.

Snowden, Edward J. “Edward Snowden: The World Says No to Surveillance.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 5 June 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/05/opinion/edward-snowden-the-world-says-no-to-surveillance.html.

“Surveillance Under the USA/PATRIOT Act.” American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU, http://www.aclu.org/other/surveillance-under-usapatriot-act.