Why does this page look this way?
It appears that you are using either an older, classic Web browser or a hand-held device that allows you to view our content but may not work with every feature of our site. If you are using an older browser, please upgrade for the best experience.
Navigation
home > by publication type > daily analysis > The Privacy vs. Security Conundrum
| Author: |
|---|
Telecommunications companies are at the center of a legal and ethical debate over how far the U.S. government should go to protect national security (AP/Mark Lennihan).
The delicate balancing act of maintaining national security while preserving civil liberties seems to get more complicated with each new generation of information technology. The House-Senate stalemate over extending a warrantless wiretapping law marks the latest case in point. President Bush says his ability to prevent terrorist attacks has been jeopardized by the infighting. House Democrats deny the charge, and Democratic Senators accuse the president of resorting to scare tactics (WashPost) to push an agenda. Similar concerns are now manifesting online. A “cyber initiative” (WashPost) unveiled by the president in January aims to expand the intelligence community’s role in monitoring U.S. information networks. Bush has said little publicly about the program, but some envision a repeat of the wiretapping imbroglio. Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, has called for the program to be put on hold (PDF) until Congress can adequately review it.
Politics aside, security experts agree on the need for flexibility in protecting the U.S. homeland. Threats from conventional terrorist attacks and, as this new Backgrounder explains, cyberspace, are of increasing concern to military and intelligence officials. Yet the row over monitoring communications in the name of national defense illustrates a growing divide between supporters of increased surveillance and protectors of civil liberties.
Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell told the AP the expiration of the wiretapping law could lead intelligence agents to “miss the very information we need to prevent some horrendous act from taking place in the United States.” Ed Giorgio, a security consultant for McConnell’s agency, told the New Yorker in January that policing the Internet “would mean giving government the authority to examine the content of any e-mail, file transfer, or web search.” Civil liberties advocates bristle at the thought. The American Civil Liberties Union likens Washington’s domestic surveillance tactics to the totalitarian society envisioned by George Orwell in his book, 1984.
Such analogies have not held up well in court challenges to stepped-up U.S. surveillance moves. On February 19, 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge (Detroit Free Press) to the spying program brought by a group of journalists and Muslim advocates in Detroit. Nor have U.S. citizens exhibited great alarm at increased government surveillance efforts. Polls in recent years have shown that Americans consider it more important for the government to investigate terrorism (PDF) than to protect privacy. A January 2008 survey of one-thousand adults by Rasmussen Reports affirms this, though it is unclear how recent privacy-versus-security spats might alter those opinions. (Free speech advocates have criticized a recent federal judge’s order forcing the shutdown (Newsweek) of the whistle-blower web site Wikileaks.org, and the U.S. army’s removal of unclassified documents (WashPost) from the public domain.)
What is clear is how politicized the debate has become. The dispute over the government’s wiretapping program hinges on whether to give telecom firms immunity from prosecution. Congressional Republicans have generally sought to extend immunity and legalize the wiretapping program, while Democrats favor holding telecoms accountable. A recent attempt at a bipartisan compromise was boycotted by GOP lawmakers (Wired); a trio of party leaders outlined the importance of the immunity issue in a Wall Street Journal op-ed on February 26. Yet some observers say the bickering is beside the point. As the Economist notes, “the statute’s demise has done little practical harm.” Current investigations can continue, the magazine says, and surveillance that needs a judge’s signature can be obtained retroactively.
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
Start-Up Nation addresses the trillion-dollar question: How is it that Israel—a country of 7.1 million, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies— produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the UK? With the insights of geopolitical experts and investors, the authors examine this nation’s adversity-driven culture to answer this question and offer prescriptions for a global economy on the rebound.
In Forces of Fortune, Vali Nasr presents a paradigm-changing revelation that will transform the understanding of the Muslim world at large. He reveals that there is a vital but unseen rising force in the Islamic world—a new business-minded middle class—that is building a vibrant new Muslim world economy and that holds the key to winning the cold war against Iran and extremists.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba's unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
Complete list of CFR Books
The report of this bipartisan Task Force of distinguished leaders and experts represents a strong consensus on the importance of repairing America's immigration policy. It makes the case that maintaining America's political and economic leadership depends on attracting talented and hard-working immigrants, and on securing the country's borders in a smart, effective, and humane way.
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
Identifying international threats and acting on them may be the most difficult job for U.S. policymakers. This report
provides an actionable road map for managing international threats before they erupt into crises and makes a strong case that preventive action is not a luxury but a necessity.
For more than a decade, the United States has mostly watched from the sidelines as Asian countries organize themselves into an alphabet soup of new multilateral groups. In this report, the authors review the relationship between pan-Asian and trans-Pacific institutions and suggest policy guidelines for a new U.S. approach to this new Asian landscape.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Browse Content By Region IssuePublication TypeThe Think TankFor The MediaFor Educators About CFR
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.
