Whistleblowers: Handing Out the Bitter Pills that Sustain Democracy
(Disclaimer: Wrote this for a client back in 2014)
Ever since Edward Snowden, who exposed the global surveillance system run by NSA, has ruled the headlines in America, there have been countless number of debates on whether he is a hero to Americans or a traitor to the country. While it is true that most conservatives think of him as an affront to democracy and a significant number of liberals believe what he did was necessary, the debate is not that binary. It extends beyond political affiliations.
Before passing judgement on Snowden, the one that needs to be remembered is this — there is a huge difference between the country and the state. Protecting the former can often mean challenging the latter. The immortal words of Kennedy made one thing very clear — “ask what you can do for your country”. He never said “state”. In revealing the NSA documents, did Snowden betray his country? As per the events that unfolded in May 2013, Edward Snowden left the country, arrived in Hong Kong and met up with journalist Glenn Greenwald, to whom he “leaked” the documents.
Here’s a fact — Glenn Greenwald is not an enemy of the United States. Yes, he has in the past been critical of many bipartisan policies of the US government, but that is what journalists and political commentators do. This shows that Snowden did not, in fact, “sell” valuable information to any enemy. The idea behind exposing the NSA spying reports was to reach out to Americans, who were victims of government secrecy, not to some rival economic or military power such as Russia or China.
However, Snowden did go to Hong Kong and then to Russia. Does that make him a traitor? It would have if he had sold or given up any information to those countries. So far, there is no proof of whether such a deal was made by Snowden with any other nation. What he did receive from those countries was merely shelter — in exchange for perhaps a chance for them to show the world the hypocrisy of the American state; not the country and its citizens, but that of the ruling power.
Another argument, that has been put forward by Rahul Sagar, Assistant Professor in the Department of Politics in Princeton University, in his book titled Secrets and Leaks: The Dilemma of State Secrecy, is that in a society where leaks are condoned, it is always self-appointed private arbiters such as bureaucrats and journalists who propagate these leaks. That is a very valid point and one that is hard to argue. But then, what is the alternative? Should societies have no arbiters at all? The way state agencies work, it is nearly impossible for an average Joe to expose their trespasses. Whistleblowers like Snowden are a necessary “inconvenience”. Without them, rule of any government would be shrouded in secrecy — which is the most anti-democratic facet of all.
Chelsea Manning, the US Army soldier who earlier went by the first name ‘Bradley’, is a classic example of what can go wrong when whistleblowers are not protected. When she leaked thousands of diplomatic cables to Adrian Lamo, her online acquaintance, it is said the resulting exposure led to an increased consciousness among American citizens regarding the mishandling of operations as shown by the Baghdad airstrike (which claimed the lives of two Reuters reporters amongst other innocents). The Arab Spring, which started with the self-immolation of a Tunisian fruit-seller, was the result of WikiLeaks releasing part of Manning’s leaks that talked about widespread corruption in the Tunisian government. You might think that the person who was responsible for these “pro-democracy” movements might be considered for a Nobel Peace Prize, but you would be wrong. Instead, the US government put Manning in a high security prison under a 35-year sentence.
It is clear that leaking information such as troop movements or counter terrorism tactics can be harmful to the country and its citizens and anyone who perpetuates such a leak, needs to be held responsible. However, if the leaked information talks about how a government is lying to its citizens under the guise of “protecting” them, then the source needs to be applauded and more importantly, protected. Calls for changes in the existing Whistleblower Protection Act is one place to start.
Sources –
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/are-leaks-an-affront-to-democracy/373031/
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/the-evidence-that-bradley-manning-helped-start-the-arab-spring.html
http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201406/glenn-greenwald-edward-snowden-no-place-to-hide
