
Putin Says Snowden Must Stop Hurting U.S. to Stay in Russia - 1337biz
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/02/world/europe/snowden-applies-for-asylum-in-russia.html?_r=0
======
sethbannon
Entire article can be summarized in this paragraph: "“Russia never gives up
anyone to anybody and is not planning to,” Mr. Putin said. He added, “If he
wants to go somewhere and they accept him, please, be my guest. If he wants to
say here, there is one condition: He must cease his work aimed at inflicting
damage to our American partners, as strange as it may sound from my lips.”"

~~~
malandrew
Basically, "Stay here as long as you need to figure out where to go next and
how to get there. Just don't put us in a difficult position in the meantime."

~~~
cynoclast
Nailed it!

------
kposehn
There are two basic scenarios here that I see, both of them extremely bad for
US national security (something I care about, and everyone reading this should
too because it is core to our safety). *

1\. Obama made a _huge_ back-channel concession to Russia to get them to deny
Snowden asylum. He had to do something to get Putin to decide not to shelter
Snowden, and it would likely be an extremely painful concession. Most likely
something security related in eastern Europe, probably BMD.

2\. Putin cannot keep Snowden from releasing information and has done what he
can to bind Snowden to Moscow. By forcing Snowden to stop publishing, he can
keep any revelations from being released and instead give him a thorough
debriefing to gain sole access to a treasure trove of counter espionage
intelligence.

This is bad. Very, very bad.

(*)Understand that every country spies on every other. Germany moaning about
us spying is highly hypocritical because they do the same exact thing to every
ally. So does France to Germany, the UK to France, so on and so forth. Hell,
Israel spies on us and we spy on them. Spying is core to our safety in the
modern age, and has been core to the safety of every country since the days of
the roman empire.

~~~
danbruc
_Understand that every country spies on every other. Germany moaning about us
spying is highly hypocritical because they do the same exact thing to every
ally. So does France to Germany, the UK to France, so on and so forth. Hell,
Israel spies on us and we spy on them. Spying is core to our safety in the
modern age, and has been core to the safety of every country since the days of
the roman empire._

At the risk of being proven wrong in the (near) future I challenge your
statement. I doubt the German government or an intelligence agency would dare
to bug an US embassy, the headquarter of one of your parties or whatever comes
closest to the EU buildings supposed to be bugged. Equally I doubt they are in
the business of mass surveillance.

There is a huge difference between USA and Germany (and probably many other
European countries) - we don't have this paranoia that everyone is against us
(justified or not). People don't care about terrorism. Admittedly I have never
been to the USA and can not judge how much a concern this really is in the
general population but the impression that arrives on this side of the ocean
is that there is a widespread fear. There are of course people dealing with
terrorism - we don't simply ignore the problem - but the general population
really does not care. I am also not old enough to judge if this was different
when Germany experienced terror attacks, for example by the RAF from the 1970s
to the 1990s.

I think the USA was a very different place before 9/11\. I read the recently
leaked NSA IG Report and what it says about the time before 9/11 is very
different from what the current situation seems to be - they are talking about
what they can not do and what court orders they need and so on. But then 9/11
happens and they go completely nuts.

~~~
cube13
>At the risk of being proven wrong in the (near) future I challenge your
statement. I doubt the German government or an intelligence agency would dare
to bug an US embassy, the headquarter of one of your parties or whatever comes
closest to the EU buildings supposed to be bugged. Equally I doubt they are in
the business of mass surveillance.

All intelligence services are in the business of mass surveillance, period. If
they're not, they aren't a good intelligence service. The simple fact is that
with the way the world is today, it's foolish to blindly assume that your
allies are always acting in your best interest. They are, obviously, going to
act in their own best interests, but it's important to know when your
interests coincide, and when they don't. And it's more important to know that
now than any other time.

The difference between today and 30 years ago is that there isn't a Warsaw
Pact for NATO to oppose. Keep in mind, every major player in the Warsaw Pact
is now either a member of NATO, or in a "partnership for peace" with NATO. The
current major "adversary"(and I use that term very, very lightly) is China,
who enjoys good trade relations with the entire world, to the point where open
conflict with China would be so disastrous to everyone involved(including
China), that it's completely off the table.

That's why this kind of spycraft is even more important now than ever. Large
scale military movements are easy to see. But knowing things like what the EU
as a whole is going to do with trade agreements, or if the Chinese are talking
to the Russians about a new oil pipeline, is hugely important.

~~~
danbruc
_All intelligence services are in the business of mass surveillance, period.
If they 're not, they aren't a good intelligence service._

Isn't it the other way round? You fail at targeted surveillance and have to
resort to mass surveillance?

 _The simple fact is that with the way the world is today, it 's foolish to
blindly assume that your allies are always acting in your best interest. They
are, obviously, going to act in their own best interests, but it's important
to know when your interests coincide, and when they don't. And it's more
important to know that now than any other time._

I mostly agree - usually the best you can expect is that someone is acting in
common best interest. But there are also some exception like help after a
natural disaster where states might indeed act in your best interest.

 _The difference between today and 30 years ago is that there isn 't a Warsaw
Pact for NATO to oppose. Keep in mind, every major player in the Warsaw Pact
is now either a member of NATO, or in a "partnership for peace" with NATO. The
current major "adversary"(and I use that term very, very lightly) is China,
who enjoys good trade relations with the entire world, to the point where open
conflict with China would be so disastrous to everyone involved(including
China), that it's completely off the table._

For Germany China is an important trade partner with between 5 % and 10 % of
the total import and export volume. Stopping all trading relationships will
without doubt have a noticeable effect but I don't know if it will be our if I
would call it disastrous.

 _That 's why this kind of spycraft is even more important now than ever.
Large scale military movements are easy to see. But knowing things like what
the EU as a whole is going to do with trade agreements, or if the Chinese are
talking to the Russians about a new oil pipeline, is hugely important._

Yes, it might be interesting to know, but obtaining this information by spying
at others is not legal. In this world it is also important to have some money
at hand but that makes a really bad justification for robbing a bank. Just
because you want something does not mean you can have it or are even entitled
to have it. If law and justice means something to you, deal with it, otherwise
you are just opportunistic.

------
skwirl
The short of the news coming out over the last few days is that things are
starting to look grim for Mr. Snowden. Ecuador has bowed to U.S. pressure and
no longer looks interested in hosting Snowden. Wikileaks admits he is
"marooned" in Russia and they don't seem to have any more tricks up their
sleeves to get him out. Now Putin seems to be threatening Snowden not to leak
anything else or be unwelcome in Russia, while it seems like Snowden has
already set the leaks in motion and may not be able to stop them. The Russian
official who spoke to the New York Times about Snowden's asylum applications
called them a "desperate measure."

I think it is quite probable that Mr. Snowden will be coming home soon.

~~~
mc32
It's not clear that Ecuador bowed to political/economic pressures as much as
Mr Assange upset Ecuador by appearing to be the orchestrator (showboating)[1],
[2].

[1][http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/06/ecuador-
snow...](http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/06/ecuador-snowden-
asylum-julian-assange/66704/)
[2][http://www.elcomercio.com/politica/RafaelCorrea-Assange-
Snow...](http://www.elcomercio.com/politica/RafaelCorrea-Assange-Snowden-
Patino-EE-UU_0_947905395.html) Use google translate.

------
nemo1618
>"It seems to me that Snowden is the greatest pacifist. This person has done
no less to win the Nobel Peace Prize than Barack Obama."

love it.

------
corin_
If a country agrees to grant him asylum are they under any obligation to stick
to that agreement?

i.e. Can he just apply to as many places as possible, and trust whichever of
the offers he likes the most, or does he have to worry that maybe a country
would offer the asylum while having a secret agreement already in place with
the US to extradite him as soon as he is in their power?

~~~
skwirl
I think that would seriously damage the reputation of the country granting
"asylum." I cannot imagine that could possibly be worth it.

~~~
znowi
I'd say whoever grants Snowden asylum will be seen as Robin Hood by many
people :)

~~~
jessaustin
GP meant that offering asylum _and then_ turning Snowden over to USA custody
would cause a damaged reputation. I think that's optimistic...

------
laureny
This is the heart of the matter:

> But over the week that Mr. Snowden has spent at Sheremetyevo airport, top
> Russian officials have tried to remain neutral on whether Mr. Snowden should
> be granted asylum, perhaps because they are wary of the damage it would do
> to their relationship with the United States.

The same scenario is going to repeat with most countries on the planet. There
are three kinds of countries: 1) those that have an extradition treaty with
the US, 2) those that don't and are neutral to the US and 3) those that don't
and that are enemies of the US.

Countries in situation 1) and 2) will never accept to offer political asylum
to Snowden. At worst, countries of type 2) will have to be given incentives
(trade, money, etc...) to extradite Snowden but they can certainly not afford
angering the US.

Which leaves countries that are enemies of the US (e.g. Iran, Afghanistan,
Cuba to some extent, etc...). Such countries couldn't care less to damage
their relationships with the US and will gladly have Snowden over, but for
Snowden to accept to move such countries would be openly admitting that he is
an enemy of the US as well, which is what Putin is hinting.

Blowing the whistle is one thing, disclosing confidential matter that damages
the US on the geopolitical scene is usually referred to as treason.

~~~
PavlovsCat
"for Snowden to accept to move such countries would be openly admitting"

.. that no other country gave him asylum?

Also:

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

 _Oran 's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's
actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously
injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered
treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign
country is aiding or involved by such an endeavor._

^ that's a long queue, but Snowden isn't in it. But I think it could be argued
that those who habitually hand over the democratic process to the highest
bidders are.

------
cynoclast
It's not Snowden that is inflicting damage to America, it is those who have
corrupted the government with their prodigious wealth.

Congress is 51% lawyers despite the fact that less than 1% of Americans are.
Congress is ~40% millionaires (or more) despite the fact that less than 4% of
Americans.

Vote out the rich and their lawyers lapdogs and we will have our country back
peacefully.

~~~
qwertzlcoatl
I was interested in a source for these numbers and I might just post them here
for anyone wondering :

Percentage of lawyers: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-
fix/files/2013/01/Co...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-
fix/files/2013/01/Congress.jpg)

Percentage of millionaires:
[http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2013/feb/04/rob...](http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2013/feb/04/rob-
woodall/congress-millionaires-club/)

------
deletes
>there is one condition: He must cease his work aimed at inflicting damage to
our American partners, as strange as it may sound from my lips.”<

Didn't Snowden already give all of his information to various persons around
the world? Is he really revealing all of this from an airport?

~~~
skwirl
Perhaps that is the game. It sounds like the U.S. is successfully pressuring
Ecuador and Russia behind the scenes. If Russia wants to give Snowden over
while saving face, this is the way to do it. Give him an ultimatum you already
know he cannot possibly comply with. Then you make it look like his fault.

~~~
notahacker
I see it as the opposite: Russia is completely in control here. They avoid
complying with US wishes whilst portraying themselves as keen to avoid
antagonism, get rhetorical ammunition to defend their own policies of
censorship, and retain Snowden and any actually useful information he might
actually be able to supply them with as a bargaining chip.

------
eightyone
Maybe this is why Greewald tweeted this earlier:

"NOTE: Snowden's leak is basically done. It's newspapers - not Snowden -
deciding what gets disclosed and in what sequence."

[https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/351730381478821888](https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/351730381478821888)

~~~
codex
I wonder if Russia is setting up Snowden for eviction. If Russia knows that
newspapers will soon publish more Snowden leaks, it can publically demand that
Snowden stop leaking and then kick him out when the leaks inevitably appear--
even though the leaks have, in fact, already occurred. In this way, Russia
complies with U.S. demands without appearing to just hand him over.

~~~
sneak
Putin's direct quotes in the article are entirely unambiguous: he's not
getting handed over/kicked out, just that he won't get asylum.

Also, he's not leaking anything anymore, as all the data's been handed off to
journos already. Technically his role in all of this is done now—his is now
but to do and die.

------
blueprint
What is the evidence that Snowden's activities have harmed US?

~~~
freehunter
You haven't read about the outrage from countries, citizens, human rights
activists, etc? Lawsuits from the ACLU? Ecuador dropping their favored trade
status (trade favors go both ways). At the very least, this has harmed the
public image of the US government just by the very nature of its public
reveal.

~~~
betterunix
There is something that angers me a bit about this sentiment, and I am
speaking as a US citizen here. Snowden has harmed the US government by
_embarrassing_ it, causing civil rights groups to file lawsuits, and by
causing a trade agreement to possibly fail over his request for asylum? It
sounds like you are saying we should just keep quiet about government abuses,
which is basically the opposite of what America is supposed to stand for.

~~~
freehunter
I'm not arguing right or wrong. Just that yes, in fact, the US has been hurt
by this. I want to know why you're jumping to the conclusion that I think this
is okay. I never once implied anything of the sort.

If I tattle on the school bully and he gets detention, he has been hurt by me
(even though once he catches me I'll be hurt worse).

~~~
blueprint
A bully's actions are detrimental to his own self as well as others and to
awaken a bully has no implicit cause to harm the bully. On the contrary, it is
motivated by love.

Under the guidance of those who are in power currently, the US will be run
into the ground. Do you know why that will be the result? It's because of
falsehood that our society is being ruined. It will never happen that
revealing the truth will ruin a society.

So our efforts to reveal the facts of what is happening in reality are not to
the detriment of the country - it is to save it from destruction.

That's why I demand evidence of your words.

How has the US been hurt by this? You said it is fact, so please show us
something we can confirm.

~~~
freehunter
Seriously how does a simple comment like "yeah, getting called out hurts" lead
to this much fucking witch-hunting? I feel like you guys are about to dox me
and send SWAT to my house. Why aren't you ganging up on kalms, who responded
in agreement?

I already answered your question that you're somehow still demanding an answer
to. There's a TV channel devoted to people who want to ignore the fact that
someone responded to their question and make conveniently and intentionally
false accusations in an attempt to discredit them.

I broke my hand once, and before I could get to the hospital the bone started
to heal. It needed to be rebroken in order to heal properly. Sure the doctor
broke my hand out of love for his patient. _IT STILL FUCKING HURT_.

~~~
blueprint
Snowden didn't begin the spying program, he is the one who informed people
about the fact so that they can protect themselves from being cheated by a
lie.

The thing which hurt the US is the activities that its present government has
been taking - and those activities are what people overseas are upset about.

Indeed, you need to re-break a break sometimes, but it is not an action that
harms the break or the person: it is the only action that enables them to
heal. We judge if they are harmed or not by the result, and the result of this
method of treatment if correctly followed is decidedly good. So it's not true
that temporal pain is implicitly indicative of harm.

The people who are in power in the US right now do not represent the real will
of the people and thus they do not have the people's mandate. As such, no
matter whether the EU withdraws from a trade deal with the current US
government, it is not withdrawing from a government which is of the real
people. As such, it would in fact be right of the EU to withdraw its agreement
with the current US government so that more truth about the degree of
legitimacy of the current US government is revealed. It's only by admitting
the truth that we can finally start to go on the right path. To continue the
way things are going now, where these dire problems are hidden, is even more
painful to truthful people than it is to have the truth come out. Because the
truth always exists.

I hope this helps things make more sense to you.

~~~
freehunter
Again: not what I'm arguing. I don't know who you're arguing against, but it's
not me, so I'm going to bow out of this conversation. All I mentioned was the
negative reactions from this leak that were directed towards the US government
as things that have hurt the US government.

------
asaarinen
Read: Snowden should publish everything he has, because after that he will be
granted asylum.

What better way to get everything out of Snowden, still stay "neutral" and
give USG the diplomatic finger

------
znowi
It's unfortunate there's not a single country that can withstand US influence.
Not even so called "dictators".

~~~
NegativeK
Snowden could probably go to North Korea, but it's doubtful that he wants to.

~~~
MichaelGG
The DPRK isn't going to stick to principles. They'll sell him off or use him
as a bargaining token whenever they need, without thinking twice.

------
vbtemp
Champions of human rights don't go to russia for "asylum" \- it's where
defecting spies go.

So let's just call it like it is: he's defecting.

Less and less, at this point, are his actions about government accountability
and civil rights, and more and more about damaging US national security for
the benefit of its (completely _NON_ -free) adversaries

I hope he relishes his unbounded freedoms in Russia, since it's a place of
government/defense/intelligence-agency transparency, a bastion of free speech
& democracy, and a place where journalists are not routinely murdered. At
least he's out of the tyrannical USA.

Oh, wait...

~~~
Terretta
I cannot see the relevance of conditions in Russia to Snowden's decision that
conditions in the United States need to be fixed.

Every country in the world could be far worse, without releasing the US from
its principled goal of fostering a new birth of freedom through a government
of the people, by the people, for the people.

~~~
embolism
If that's what Snowden cares about he's not doing much to make that point.

------
jdp23
And 14 other countries as well ...

------
United857
The US will quietly offer to release one or more Russian "spies" caught in the
USA in exchange for them handing over Snowden. This type of thing happened all
the time during the Cold War.

------
codex
It sounds like Russian intelligence services have finished rifling Snowden for
classified information. They don't want Snowden leaking to anyone else what
they've rightfully pilfered.

