
US Threatened Germany Over Snowden, Vice Chancellor Says - etiam
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/19/us-threatened-germany-snowden-vice-chancellor-says/
======
balabaster
Wow... there's actual documentary evidence of this... they have officially [on
paper] crossed the line where they instead of just being perceived to being
the bully are actually _officially bullying_ nations into doing their bidding.
This is... I'm officially speechless. Are they trying to pen themselves into a
corner where the entire world ends up standing against them? After I heard
yesterday about Russia's plans for their nuclear program and now this...

...did I fall asleep and wake up in an alternate universe. This behaviour is
ridiculous. The U.S. got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and they're
threatening other countries with huge diplomatic consequences because they're
willing to stand up and protect the guy who embarrassed them?

How about they just say, "Hey, yeah, we fucked up, we'll fix it. Sorry guys"
and be done with it. They're walking down a very bad diplomatic path. If you
want to win the war on terror, try making friends instead of enemies; your
current path is not leading in that direction.

I'm actually astonished given Germany's strength in Europe that they didn't
just say GFY! We're not going to be seen to be bullied by you in front of all
of Europe. You don't make the rules here and if you want to play that game, it
goes both ways. You already have a significant portion of the middle east
unhappy with you - we stood by you on that; you have Russia against you - we
stood by you on that too; do you really want to turn Europe, your only
remaining ally against you too? Because that's where this path is leading. As
mighty as your military is, it would not stand against the rest of the world
if you keep up this idiotic behaviour.

~~~
pjc50
For "officially bullying", see e.g.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States)
\- invade Nicaragua, be ruled against by the UN, block payment of reparations
and then glare at Nicaragua for a decade until they agree to just drop it. The
US has long believed that might makes right and they're not going to submit to
anyone else's idea of justice. There's a long list of such instances.

As for Europe, sadly Ukraine is reminding us all that the choice is between
being American client states or Russian client states. At least as American
client states we get rock and roll and blue jeans, right comrades?

~~~
balabaster
> At least as American client states we get rock and roll and blue jeans,
> right comrades?

There is much truth in jest... :-/

------
TillE
I was sort of hoping that the forcing down of Evo Morales' plane would be a
turning point in terms of trust and good relations with the US. That was such
an outrageous step based on the merest suspicion, it's almost hard to believe
it actually happened.

Trade is important. Some level of cooperation is good. But these are
independent, powerful countries (especially Germany), and they ought to act
like it.

~~~
madaxe_again
I think the take-away from all of this is that the civilised world needs to
take a stand against the US, and collectively go "you know what, shove your
intelligence, and your 'friendship'".

Friendship from the the US is like that friend who comes by, puts his muddy
boots on your desk, tells you to fix his computer, stubs a cigarette out on
the carpet, and on his way out punches a neighbour for looking at him funny.
Once in a while he'll turn up with some guy he beat up, and tell you that this
is evidence of his benevolent protection... and you'd better keep on my good
side, bro. You wouldn't like me when I'm mad.

This act alone, if done publicly and loudly, would quite likely decrease any
variety of terroristic threat to cooperating nations, merely through the act
of disassociation with the USA, thus making their threats utterly toothless.

As it is, however, through TTIP and TPP the world is further embroiling
themselves in the affairs of this embattled state, and matters can only
worsen.

~~~
sremani
Europe is heavily subsidized by American security blanket. You guys get more
out of the friendship than you realize and those two bit caricature type
squabbles, I will excuse it as European snobbery.

~~~
Zigurd
> _Europe is heavily subsidized by American security blanket._

There are three countries in Europe that, by themselves, have a larger GDP
than Russia. The Soviet Union and Red Army are gone. As bellicose as Putin is,
he is militarily bogged down in Ukraine. Europe has no need of a US "security
blanket."

~~~
coldtea
Putin a threat to Europe? Americans make fun of Fox News, but concerning world
affairs, their other sources of information, up to the New York Times, are not
that better quality wise.

This is the same BS cold-war narratives in order to justify pressure on
Russia, as if Russia will attempt to take over Europe or something, which is
laughable. At least in the cold war era USSR was indeed more powerful, and had
control over Eastern Europe.

The whole game is about replacing Russian leadership with some friendly
Yeltsin like lackey figure, so foreign powers can pillage on Russian natural
resources, contracts etc. They could not give a rats arse about "human rights"
and the like, they just want to create the same devastation they created
elsewhere already.

~~~
dreamweapon
_as if Russia will attempt to take over Europe or something, which is
laughable._

As if this were anything other than straw man argument:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)

------
freehold
> Nonetheless, one of two things is true: > > 1) the U.S. actually threatened
> Germany that it would refrain from notifying them of terrorist plots against
> German citizens and thus deliberately leave them vulnerable to violent
> attacks, or > > 2) some combination of high officials from the U.S. and/or
> German governments are invoking such fictitious threats in order to
> manipulate and scare the German public into believing that asylum for
> Snowden will endanger their lives. >

I'm sure it's the second one. A scared public accepts reforms that strengthen
government power and budget shifts to allow more surveillance and less
privacy.

~~~
dataker
Makes sense. Couldn't Germany/E.U also claim to deny sharing information with
the U.S?

Yes, the U.S has the best intelligence agency in the world, but Europe is
closer to most hostile nations in the world. If EU said 'no sharing info with
the US', wouldn't that be a much larger problem than the other way around?

~~~
maxst
Yeah, France shared information about Moussaoui, Russia shared information
about Tsarnaev, so it's hard to imagine U.S. withholding similar kind of
information in similar situations, so it was probably a bluff.

But still, that's playing hardball.

------
javajosh
It's interesting to combine this news article with
[http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/hatethenews](http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/hatethenews)
from yesterday and ask: is this news item a waste of time?

Scott's fundamental assertion is that the news is a waste of time because it
can't possibly influence his actions (apart from politically, but he's happy
to vote off of voter information brochures provided with the ballot, a kind of
news proxy).

The actors in this particular Snowden story are heads of state:
Obama/Kerry/Hillary on the US side, and Merckel/Gabriel on the German side. At
it's heart is the revelation by Gabriel to Greenwald (the author of the piece)
that the US threatened Germany over Snowden.

We already know that the USG over-whelminging considers Snowden a criminal and
a traitor. (And one of his precious few supporters in the Senate, Mark
Udall(D-NM) lost his re-election campaign.

We already know that the USG has no moral scruples against taking any action
it deems in it's interest. It has tortured and killed innocent people, lied to
justify invading foreign countries, invaded the personal privacy of allied
heads of state, and invaded the privacy of everyone in the world, including
private US citizens and corporations.

We already know that the US public, the final arbiter of what is right and
wrong, isn't outraged by any of this enough to make a serious difference at
the polls.

What good does it do me to learn about _one more way_ in which my government
works against my interests and moral sensibilities?

~~~
Donwangugi
Why even vote at this point then?

~~~
alfiedotwtf
voting seems at this point to be theatre to silence the masses.

------
mindslight
The crux of what USG is saying 'Helping a person who exposed our spying
programs shows that you must not want the benefits of them'. Please detach
yourself and look at it from their perspective - does this really seem
unreasonable?

The vice chancellor's statement is phrased to be as incendiary as possible, to
throw USG under the bus and make it sound like the German government and USG
are two separate entities with some high level information sharing. But given
the USG military/listening outputs in Germany, how could anyone possibly think
this is the case? The people in both sides' intelligence services are trying
to protect against similar "threats" and their perspectives are more alike
than different. We've seen specifics with FVEY, and it's prudent to assume
that all USG allies are in similar conspiracies, with the countries' relative
power just determining how many bargaining chips they have. Make no mistake -
The German government is benefiting greatly from this information exchange and
would _never_ want to lose access.

Now, please don't peg me as _defending_ this state of affairs. I'd love to see
justice be served through political means, and I'd really love to see USG get
taken down a few pegs to _prevent_ the otherwise inevitable catastrophic
collapse of the US. But justice isn't the driving force here - _power_ is. And
power tends to coalesce. If you find yourself thinking of a distinction
between strategic information (wouldn't be shared with Russia) and protecting
against terrorists threats (should be shared freely), you've entered their
operating paradigm wherein governments protect each other by monitoring all
individuals for threats.

NSA isn't the only entity doing full takes; it's just a (now prominent)
nucleation point. Even if they disbanded tomorrow, many others will still be
tapping those cables. The only way to protect against black hats, _especially_
well coordinated global ones, is to secure the communications themselves.

------
tomelders
I cant see how this threat would be effective. The U.S. would simply be
forcing Germany - the most powerful member of the E.U and it's defacto leader
- to strike up alliances elsewhere. It would possibly force the E.U. to
bolster it's own intelligence gathering outfits to mitigate the dependance on
U.S intelligence.

Either that, or Germany would just shrug it's shoulders and resign itself to
the fact that it wasn't going to get any of the "good" intel anymore... which
seems unlikely to me.

So I think we're safe to assume that the "threat" was for the sake of keeping
up appearances.

~~~
exar0815
In my opinion, the US is slowly forcing Europe to rethink its overall alliance
with them, especially under a President who is maybe the worst foreign
politician, even after Bush, because he manages to show basically every ally
or partner that they can kiss their ass goodbye.

And Europe is reacting. France is strengthening its ties to the Maghreb and
north African states again, Germany plans on increasing it's defense spending
the first time since 1990, and from Top-Tier politicians the Idea of combined
armed European Forces is voiced more and more. Additionally, The EU is
actively charming the non-NATO-members like Finland into participation, and
with its East-Europe policy adds more strategic debt and more economic
powerhouses in waiting to their territory

Ironically, the Russian actions in Ukraine force Europe to stand closer
together, and may as well lead to even tighter integration.

Additionally, if you take the military capability of France, GB, Germany,
Italy and Finland, The necessity for an American "Proctection" is scarecely
needed. If you add the extremely capable european defence industry, which in
big parts was crippled by the "Standardization" enforced through the NATO
leading members to buy US defence technology, and the well-educated
"Mittelstand", an increasing US-Isolationism would only hurt in the short run.

~~~
rwissmann
I agree with everything but the last paragraph.

As much as I would like it to be different, we are still at least one or two
decades away from an effective European deterrent against Russian aggression.
If only because of our inability to coordinate decisive responses and our
unwillingness to pool military resources in a European army, rather than split
them into national militaries with incredibly amounts of redundancy and
ineffectiveness.

~~~
exar0815
Yes, but these hurdles to overcome are political, not technological or
financial. And for that period, the biggest deterrent against Russia is Russia
itself, because they are militarily, as a former german Chancellor once said
"The Republic of Upper Volta with nuclear Warheads"

------
DasIch
Between a violent Russia and an arrogant US we might actually get a strong
united Europe. As a European I can't help but feel that this is a very good
thing.

~~~
binarray2000
Don't hope for that. Europe is deeply divided. Everyone hates and blames "the
others" for their own mistakes and problems, most of which were caused by
political and economic (big business) elites in those countries. Not to
forget, both US and Russia have their minions in Europe.

~~~
DasIch
Of course there is a divide between European countries but should the divide
between Europe and Russia and the US become larger, the former will quickly
lose significance.

------
discardorama
"That would mean, if the threat were carried out, that the Americans would
literally allow the German population to remain vulnerable to a brewing attack
discovered by the Americans..."

Have there been any? From what I've heard, all this snooping has been good for
post-facto analysis, but useless as prior information.

~~~
josefresco
"From what I've heard"

That's the problem, you're not going to hear about how this intelligence
worked, or didn't. This leaves the public (and media) to speculate endlessly,
and less informed debaters to claim there "is no evidence" of the information
stopping an attack.

This little behind the curtain threat, basically reveals (or insinuates) that
when the "rubber hits the road" the information is in fact very valuable.

~~~
discardorama
"NSA Data Collection has no impact on terrorism" :
[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-01-13/nsa-
data-h...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-01-13/nsa-data-has-no-
discernible-impact-on-terrorism-report)

~~~
josefresco
The scope was very limited:

"Our investigation found that bulk collection of American phone metadata"

Also, using "arrests" or case arrests as the sole evidence or set of data is
also quite limited. I would imagine, foiled plots don't always result in an
arrest.

Details matter, and by the time reports like this hit the media, they get
boiled down in to attention grabbing headlines divorced from the original
conclusions.

------
Htsthbjig
It is interesting that Vice Chancellor tells us this now.

Germany has been forced by the US to make war to Ukraine and Russia and they
don't want to follow this path farther.

Europe just wants to preserve the status quo, preserve peace and commerce
relationships with Russia that benefit both sides.

US is desperate to break further Euro-Asian integration because it means the
facto end to American hegemony in the world, including the petrodollar.

The US does not care about war in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan or Ukraine
because it is so far from home, but it is the Europeans who are suffering from
avalanches of refugees and instability by war.

So finally they are saying "enough is enough" and showing a little common
sense.

------
josefresco
"That would mean, if the threat were carried out, that the Americans would
literally allow the German population to remain vulnerable to a brewing attack
discovered by the Americans by withholding that information from their
government."

Oh the irony.

~~~
gonvaled
Nobody is saying the government can not collect intelligence (and pass it to
their allies), but that it should do so lawfully.

~~~
adaml_623
I think his comment about irony was about the US government not acting on the
information it had about the September 2001 attacks

~~~
josefresco
Nope. The irony (maybe the wrong word) is that despite all the "public
outrage" when it came down to a decision on whether or not to have the data -
German officials (seemingly) chose to have the information. It shows a
disconnect from what those are saying publicly about Snowden and the NSA and
what actions are actually taking place.

Being "cut off" from American intelligence should be a no-brainer (as the
shout from the attendee showed) for any country that finds the NSA's actions
and data sharing to be unlawful or unhelpful.

~~~
gonvaled
What the German government should do is to refuse intelligence gathered using
criminal methods (and push for an international prosecution of the American
officials involved in such actions), and _request_ information sharing
gathered by legal means, as expected from any ally.

I understand that for any you-are-with-us-or-against-us mentality this is
difficult to swallow.

------
DyslexicAtheist
Looks like the US is inching it's way closer to the top of most "disgusting
country on the planet". Germans should sever the ties IMO and stop allowing
their bulling tactics and double-faced dealings. Country of "freedom" my ass.
Can't understand why some people from European countries still consider to
migrate there. But you're not allowed to say anything alas it's immediately
labelled "hate-speech", so self-censorship (especially among Americans)
remains strong.

------
PopsiclePete
The US was just not ready to be a Super Power, I don't think. It's not "grown
up" enough to act responsibly. It lacks a lot of subtlety and tact, it's like
a fat, loud obnoxious 12-year old bullying all other kids on the playground.

It's a shame, too, because it _can_ be a true leader that is followed out of
respect and not fear. It just chooses the other path, time and time again,
since it's easier.

~~~
speik
This is an absurdly broad comment. The US has been a super power for over half
a century. You've distilled decades of complex foreign policy involving every
nation on earth down to a five sentence blanket condemnation.

~~~
PopsiclePete
The more I think about it, the more I agree with you. That was pretty stupid
of me. Can't get emotions get in the way of reason.

------
zimbatm
> They told us they would stop notifying us of plots and other intelligence
> matters

What does "other intelligence matters" mean ? Also historically, what are the
cases where this intelligence was useful ? Being more specific would probably
help determine if it's even useful.

------
pluma
So what? Fuck the US then. US intelligence has had free reign in Germany
anyway. Most terrorist plots stopped in Germany didn't actually target Germany
anyway and it's not like the US would just pull out and ignore whatever
happens in Germany.

~~~
happyscrappy
> it's not like the US would just pull out and ignore whatever happens in
> Germany.

Nope. Europe is too important to US power to be trusted with their own
defense.

~~~
arethuza
Actually, there have been suggestions from European Commission President about
creating an EU army:

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31874418](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-
politics-31874418)

The total armed forces of the countries in the EU are actually pretty large -
the one thing they don't have is any sense of unity, which pretty much negates
their effectiveness:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_European_Union](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_European_Union)

