US diplomats spied on UN leadership

[go west young man]

Source: The Guardian UK

Washington is running a secret intelligence campaign targeted at the leadership of the United Nations, including the secretary general, Ban Ki-moon and the permanent security council representatives from China, Russia, France and the UK.

A classified directive which appears to blur the line between diplomacy and spying was issued to US diplomats under Hillary Clinton's name in July 2009, demanding forensic technical details about the communications systems used by top UN officials, including passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications.

It called for detailed biometric information "on key UN officials, to include undersecretaries, heads of specialised agencies and their chief advisers, top SYG aides, heads of peace operations and political field missions, including force commanders" as well as intelligence on Ban's "management and decision-making style and his influence on the secretariat". A parallel intelligence directive sent to diplomats in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi said biometric data included DNA, fingerprints and iris scans.

Washington also wanted credit card numbers, email addresses, phone, fax and pager numbers and even frequent-flyer account numbers for UN figures and "biographic and biometric information on UN Security Council permanent representatives".

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un

---

The emperors clothes continue to come off.

[TheWraith]

1. This is a surprise to anyone?

Seriously, espionage has been intermingled with diplomacy since diplomacy was invented. If you think that there is one single country at the UN that is not trying to spy on others, or that any of our "allies" are not actively trying to spy on US, then you are not nearly cynical enough.

[go west young man]

2. It's not a surprise but it is proof.

Something that should be revealing for DU'ers is the fact that Hillary signed off on it.
Proof that when it comes to foreign policy Dems are as underhanded as Republicans.
One and the same.

[Arrowhead2k1]

3. Yup, contrary to popular belief, American foreign policy doesn't differ much between Dems and Repugs

Just remember how many of our lovely Democrats signed us off for the war in Iraq and are in the Obama administration now. *cough*Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden*cough*

[TheWraith]

4. No, just that American foreign policy isn't naive.

No one with any kind of brain in their head is going to come into office and say "we're not going to spy on foreign diplomats." Both because it provides important information to us, and because those foreign diplomats here in the US are usually the people who are spying for other countries. To turn that basic understanding of the world and the need for realism into "Democrats and Republicans are the same" is simply wrong.

[go west young man]

6. The key words are "when it comes to foreign policy".

[TheWraith]

7. And with those key words, it's still grossly wrong.

Democrats call for negotiating with Iran. Republicans call for invasion and regime change.

Democrats call for negotiating with North Korea. Republicans call for invasion and regime change.

Democrats call for sanctions on genocide in the Sudan. Republicans call for ignoring the problem.

And on, and on...

[go west young man]

11. And yet both are doing the bidding of Saudi Arabia.

And yet both are listed on the Chamber of Commerce BOD for Azerbaijan.
And yet both are complicit in not investigating the crime that is Iraq.

[TheWraith]

12. Your statement makes zero sense.

The Saudis came here to lobby for us attacking Iran, and the current administration gave them the brush off.

You are making up facts to suit your argument.

[No Elephants]

5. The UN is a country now?

I agree: everyone spies on everyone else--or tries to.

Children.

[melm00se]

8. Diplomats

since time immemorial have always been intelligence assets in the country where they assigned/stationed.

The US, compared to other countries, is pretty naive when it comes to intelligence gathering. There are intelligence services, at least their iterations, that have been in place/existence for longer than there have been Europeans in the New World.

Countries that fail to collect and analyze information collected by it's intelligence agencies are ripe targets for someone to sneak up on them and get bashed in the head with a rock.

Also, Will Rogers had it right when he said:

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

[pipoman]

9. Just to beat a dead horse...

I would be concerned if the US were not spying on those who are or may at some time be spying on the US. It is the job and a primary function of the Dept. of State. Is it comforting? No. Is it much, much better than the alternative of no counter espionage against the US? Yes, I believe so. The UN is not notorious allies of the US, it is an accumulation of allies and enemies of the US. Because of the structure of the UN, the leadership are often certainly no friend of the US. Many less free societies around the world hate the freedom, power and societal standard of living enjoyed in the US and are willing to undermine it.

[Ian David]

10. We know Bush bugged the office of the head of the U.N. before the Iraq war.

At least this shows that Democrats and the U.N. aren't working together in some vast New World Order conspiracy, like the wingnuts claim. This shows that we're at odds with each other.

Still, how stupid is it to put this sort of thing in writing?