Tapping the whalers’ wire
Reacting to the GCSB report released with the Lange papers yesterday Keith has called for an inquiry. In a release he’s just put out, he says :
“Is New Zealand intercepting Japanese communications with their whaling fleet? Is New Zealand keeping tabs on European countries that have opted out of the Iraq war? Without a definitive answer on the GCSB’s current activities, these are questions those countries will now be legitimately asking themselves.
Reasonable questions given what was reported yesterday in The Sunday Star-Times:
The GCSB also produced 238 intelligence reports on Japanese diplomatic cables, using “raw traffic from GCHQ/NSA sources”. This was down from the previous year: “The Japanese government implementation of a new high grade cypher system seriously reduced the bureau’s output.”
New Zealand and Japan generally get on, except for whaling, which is strictly quarantined as an issue. If we were spying on them in the 1980s, why would they think we’ve stopped since?
The Clark Government has made a virtue of being seen to have an independent foreign policy. If everyone knows you’re unquestioningly providing information to certain others, where does the ‘independent’ come in to it?
January 16th, 2006 at 1:35 pm
Of course we spy on the Japanese, and I am sure they spy on us also. Good grief it would be news if we were not spying on an ally.
January 16th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
Keith Locke is a half wit when it comes to his utterances on the defence of the nation. Every time he opens his mouth the greens drop a 1000 votes.
January 16th, 2006 at 10:58 pm
We try to get as much information as we possibly can so we can make better decisions, tougher negotiations. So?
DPF has the right of it. Not only do we spy, we are EXPECTED to spy. Not only are we spied on, we EXPECT to be spied on.
respectfully
BJ
January 17th, 2006 at 2:03 am
TomS:
Not everyone thinks in the same way…
Keith Locke also picks up votes for the Greens “every time he opens his mouth”.
January 17th, 2006 at 9:39 am
Is Locke really this naive? Are the Greens?
The release of the 1985/86 GCSB report shows we spied on France in those years; Locke had this to day in his press release:
“We don’t believe it to be in New Zealand’s national interest to be part of US operations to spy on countries like France and Japan,”
Do I really need to remind both Locke and you that in 1985 the Rainbow Warrior was bombed and one of her crew killed? And you still didn’t think we’d spy on France? And think we shouldn’t have spied on France?
January 17th, 2006 at 10:49 am
I don’t doubt the GCSB was spying on the French at the time of the Rainbow Warrior bombing. And it is likely that it was known within the intelligence community that the bombing was going to happen. But did the GCSB or the NSA or anybody else in the UKUSA club bother to tell Greenpeace or the NZ government about it? It seems not. So the bombs went off and Fernando Pereira died. It was only diligent work by the NZ Police that caught the French agents, unfortunately after they had done their bit of terrorism for the French government. French intelligence agents carried out the bombing while the rest of western intelligence kept silent. Yes indeed, intelligence agencies are great value.
January 17th, 2006 at 12:04 pm
Given that we are taking the moral high ground over whaling, why would it be such a bad thing if we were spying on Japan on this issue. And I also take Edge’s point about France.
Are we saying all spying is bad even if we perceive it to be in our collective interest and in line with our moral stance, or are we saying spying for the US when they tell us to is bad because it undermines our independent foreign policy and makes us lackeys to an imperial power. I suspect the latter, but it needs to be made clearer.
January 17th, 2006 at 12:13 pm
Spying on people, countires etc, it’s just one big pointless circle of corruption, hypocrasy and childishness….it’s sick and weak!!
These are adults we’re talking about!! How about just doing the right thing, talking straight up and leaving all the petty insecurities at the door.
Will we eva learn?
There’s a thing called pride that even the most loathsome of people, groups are stuck with. If things are shown to be done in an unprofitable and benevalent way, even the most shallow of people will be shamed into falling into line, or at least their public will demand it.
January 17th, 2006 at 1:34 pm
The world is a large playground, there are no teacher/supervisors, the bullies run the playground and even the best government acts from pretty much the same moral basis as a child (usually a spoiled child) on this international field of play. Lord-of-the-Flies on a planetary scale.
Straightforward international politics without spying, like pacifism or quakerism or communism, is an ideal. It is not realistic and it is NOT useful on this planet among these squabbling child-nations. You can’t “shame” them… all you can do is let them kick your teeth in without even trying to protect yourself or knowing why it happened.
This is not a good thing at a national level, it isn’t a good thing for New Zealand and if it is pursued as a goal of the Green party it will result in our being harried from our few representative offices by an enraged general electorate. Properly so.
I can decry the lack of civility and maturity among nations, but I know of NO way it can be corrected. We stand on the cusp of an enormous degradation of the quality of life on this planet, and the repercussions will include all manner of conflicts over resources. NZ has a good chance of remaining civilized, as we have energy resources and water and a smaller population to support. The rest of the world is not going to be so fortunate. It is however, distressingly well-armed.
2+2=3 for small values of 2 - the human population will be decimated - several times over.
I’d really appreciate it, and my kids would appreciate it, if we carry on with protecting New Zealand and New Zealanders and let our pacifist tendencies wait for the human species to evolve the social instincts needed to support our peaceful ideals. We have to SURVIVE in order to act ethically and set good examples. As ethically as possible, but we have to put survival ahead of other considerations or we may as well get out the kool-aid.
respectfully
BJ - who is now hastily donning an asbestos suit
January 17th, 2006 at 2:11 pm
Physical security is the very first duty of Gummint, and frankly, it needs all the tools it can get. Listening in is a simple, logical way to get a lot of raw data: and that applies just as much to bogan’s text messaging organising burnouts, as it does to ships at sea. Hell, anyone with a DC-to-dark comms receiver can do it, anytime: radio waves are not particularly selective about who they propogate to. Getting information from data is another matter, and that’s probably what this thread really is about. But when you consider that a lot of marine activity is distinctly suspect (think, Colombian drug cartels’ submarines, and pirates generally), then the Hoover (vacuum) approach to surveillance ain’t a bad idea. After all, without a functioning Air Force, courtesy of some pacifist ideas last century, how would we react if said Colombian submarine was right now offloading marching powder somewhere in Fiordland? Such spying as we are in fact now capable of, is the least we can and should do.
January 17th, 2006 at 3:59 pm
Well the strategy of military/secret service control/armies/repression and manipulation for relationships is as old and enlightened as all the wars waged for national pride and god’s grace.
It is the best cure for a hang over, get drunk again approach.
It is always in the interests of security despite it’s proven track record of discord and conflict too. The security it is protecting is a security for living an unbalanced, unsustainable living aesthetic; usually for the disproportionate benefit of whateva ruling clique is shooting up on their priviledges at the time, which continually disregards environment and quality of life, under the guise of whateva the current doctrine of “truth” is at the time.i.e. “free market” in these times.
You either respect national sovereign-ity or not, you commit to the rule of force or the partnership of community. Being inconsistent is making a choice.
January 17th, 2006 at 4:14 pm
Following bj’s school playground analogy:
As an experienced teacher, I am well aware that the peer group is a much more effective “disciplinarian” and cohesive force than any authority figure(s) weilding big stick(s).
Aotearoa NZ is better served by its relationships with like minded countries … Scandinavia, United Europe, Canada, Pacific nations, come to mind (to name but a few) … and its participation in collective agencies, such as the UN for example.
We would NOT be well served by “kowtow”ing to the bullies on the block. (The current US administration is the classic example.)
Interestingly many citizens within these bully nations cheer the little countries on. We are better respected (and admired) when we say “no thank you”.
Adapting to life in the global village is something that we can continue to contribute to … reaching hearts and minds, rather than futiley arming everyone to the teeth.
bj if you become afraid of the heat, you can no doubt return to your BIG birthplace. I, and mine, will be staying here in the Aotearoa that my ancestors worked to make the way it is now (and would be proud of).
Naiive?
We aren’t.
eredwen
January 17th, 2006 at 4:55 pm
Even - I read it twice and it still rambles without really helping me to see what you are concerned with. I am discussing the survival of Aotearoa.
Which goes along to your point Eredwen… I think…. Kowtowing to the bullies on the block isn’t something I suggested was appropriate, but it isn’t clear if you were using that phrase to characterize my position or just adding to the rant. ?
Peer pressure works on the playground, but what if you’re the “different” one and they’re all pressuring YOU? Sweden is, compared to us, armed to the teeth. As are Germany, France, Italy, Canada and England.
They ALL spy on one another… and us. Your exemplary collective group is not a great deal better than the pacific countries, just wealthier. The “global village” you refer to is almost as idealistic as the rest, but I never said to abandon it. I said it was doomed. It was the product of peace and plenty (relative) and those days are over, all over bar the shouting.
The power of the UN is limited by the insanity of the nations leading it… Bush should be impeached and imprisoned… with Cheney. Blair should at least face impeachment. We can support it, but its future appears quite delicate. We have to look out for our own interests.
Which means not only spying but spying efficiently and effectively. Which means shelving the purity of pacifism in favor of a more pragmatic self protection.
Heat is a relative thing. The sheeple of the US are in the pot, the water is already nearly boiling and they remain unaware of their plight. I am glad of my adopted country, ashamed of my former homeland, and dismayed by all our future prospects, but I am going to keep working for our collective survival.
Which means occasionally, pointing out the perils of pacifism.
respectfully
BJ
January 18th, 2006 at 3:01 am
bj:
I don’t regard “adding to the rant” as a productive way of communicating.
January 18th, 2006 at 7:55 am
Eredwen
I always appreciate a good rant, and a good one is usually productive and is always entertaining. My comment wasn’t ill meant in any way. I apologize for this unintended offense.
respectfully
BJ