International Espionage and Domestic Economic Ills

Half way through the week and I am most grateful to you for looking in.  You are very welcome and I hope you will consider becoming a regular and even adding comment as and when you feel like it.  To save speculative mouse clicking, you can sign up to have post notifications sent to your email inbox....see the 'follow by email' box top right.

On Monday we spoke about the latest international espionage revelations resulting from the Snowden leaks; and you might care to look back at that post, if not already read.  Following the stream of leaks about the USA's operations against Brazilian targets, the news agency Globo told us that Canada has also been spying on members of the Brazilian Government....and not in the name of security but in the form of commercial espionage advantage the commercial interests of the Canadian Government and privately owned entities.

President Dilma Rousseff, of Brazil, has now spoken on the issue and, as expected, she has reacted robustly to the allegations and demanded explanations from the Canadians; she could hardly have done otherwise.   To date, her concerns have been met with the Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, saying that he is 'very concerned' about the reports of electronic gathering against Brazilian Government targets and that his people are 'reaching out very proactively to their Brazilian counterparts' over the issue.  President Dilma has demanded a full explanation.

Some Canadian media outlets have suggested that the CSEC ('see-sec') agency is so secret and autonomous that the PM may, indeed, not have had knowledge of its Brazilian operations, believed to have been called the Olympia Program.  A former head of CSEC, John Adams has voiced concern about the alleged gathering activities against the South American emerging power and has suggested the setting up of something akin to the UK's Intelligence and Security Committee that was established to examine and monitor the policy, administration and expenditure of the Security Service (so called MI5), the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, also called MI6) and the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ).

We are not in a position to know whether the Canadian electronic spying agency would be able to mount operations against an friendly country, such as Brazil, without approval at the highest level but one would have thought that Canada, which presents as a very 'joined up' democracy, might be unlikely to allow its agencies to roam free across the electromagnetic spectrum, grazing on anything it liked the look of.  The question is begged, however.  Indeed, other 'security experts' have opined that CSEC would be unlikely to have launched such an operation alone, suggesting that it may have been jointly agreed upon by at least the USA and UK, if not the full 'five eyes' community (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK, USA) and this view may be supported by reports claiming that the USA shared the results of its collection operations with ally governments and even private commercial entities.

Perhaps what we are seeing here is a new, or updated version of Clausewitzian theory or of the doctrine of 'right is the prerogative of might'.  Nations and states have previously mounted offensive military operations against other sovereign states in support of national interest.  These days, most of the world (but not all, of course) shies away from open military conflict and seeks to advantage and advance its national interest by other means.  In the modern world of globalisation and international economic interdependence the new field of battle is found on the commercial plane and, one might argue, operations such as Canada's alleged Olympia Program are entirely in accordance with the theory of using all possible means to advantage and advance economic national interests.  In other words, if you have the capability, it is the logical and right course of action; right is the prerogative of might or, in this case, of technological capability.  If one postures such an argument, it might be seen as changing the rules or moving the goal posts of international diplomacy and politics, because it is self evident when one goes to war and one goes to war with enemies, violating their sovereignty in support of national interests.  The new technologies, however, afford those who hold them the potential to violate the sovereignty of friends and allies, unseen by them....unless and until a Snowden appears on the scene.

Some, even in the Canadian media, seem to believe that the alleged CSEC operations are a step too far, even under a Clausewitzian banner.  They do not see it as appropriate to conduct espionage of this alleged type against friends and allies.  The Canadian Globe and Mail carried an editorial that roundly criticised the alleged operations against a friend and ally by the CSEC and its Government bosses this week.  I have to admit, I cannot recall a paper in the USA taking the 'moral high ground' over the activities of the NSA against Brazilian targets; but then, my friends here in Brazil and many around the world do see Canadians as being far more focused on issues of 'right' and of democracy in practice than their North American neighbours.

By way of closing remarks on this issue, I can't shake the old saying in the back of my head that spying is the second oldest profession.  Being from the UK, one thinks of the activities of Sir Francis Walsingham who served Queen Elizabeth 1 as Secretary from 1573 to his death in 1590.  He is renowned as having been her 'spy master', making it his business to know the business of all, friend and foe alike, in protection of the greatest national interest, the Queen.  I also hark back to another saying I employed earlier this week, common to both criminals and those engaged in espionage, that cardinal rule is 'though shalt not be found out'.  Some will argue that the greatest crime committed by the USA and Canada was to be found out in a game played by most, if not all countries in one way or another; though one might like to think, or hope, that there are limits to the game, different rules when played against friend and ally?  Is it true to suggest that, there but for the capability, would go all countries?

Moving back home, to domestic issues in Brazil, I want to highlight a few recent media articles that shine a light on the realities of being part of the country's domestic economy.  The Economist examined a recent survey by the Tripadviser organisation.  The Survey focused on Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro and listed them as amongst the most expensive places to visit in the world.  It found that hotels were more expensive than in London and Zurich and that that was reflected in the prices of many, if not most goods in the surrounding shops; and I can vouch for that being mirrored elsewhere in the country, even the much poorer NE.  The Economist's 'Big Mac Index' found that burgers in the nation's two largest cities were more expensive than almost anywhere else on the planet and another report out this week identifies Brazil as having the most expensive mobile/cell phone bills in the world.  In an economy where the average wage is only around $600-$700 a month, one can perhaps understand why people are drawn in to live on credit, despite all the attendant dangers; particularly those tens of millions who have been raised from poverty in the last ten plus years into what Brazil classes as the middle class and, for the first time in their lives, seek to purchase consumer durables.  Household debt as a percentage of disposable income reached a record 44.8% in June of this year, according to the Moody's ratings agency.  Add that to the fact the Brazilian economic boom around the turn of the last decade was built on consumer spending, with about 3/4 of growth being derived from adding numbers to the work force and wages (and credit) to consumer spending, not from increases in productivity, and you have a recipe for serious problems, if not disaster.

We shall ponder the economy and its woes and how, or whether Brazil will be able to right them in posts in the coming days.

Thanks a million for joining me this morning (my time).  I am grateful to you.

There will be a second post, later today , that will discuss my perceptions of identity and community here in Aracaju, NE Brazil, taking up from where we left yesterday's second post on family and community.

I hope to see you later today or, failing that, tomorrow.

Stay safe.

Dave