Guardian: US diplomats spied on UN leadership

[ProSense]

US diplomats spied on UN leadership

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 (secretary general) 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".

<...>

Interesting.

[jpgray]

1. Ho hum, I'm sure you already knew all this, right?

After all, one could make the supposition that such was taking place? Not to belabor the point, but actual evidence of this is important. Can you imagine the catcalls if someone were to claim without evidence "I think the US government is compiling biometric data on foreign diplomats?"

[ProSense]

2. No, I would not make this supposition

You need to be able to distinguish what's within the realm of real possibility (a high-level meeting) and what's unknown with no basis for such speculation (spying on the UN).

[Catherina]

3. I see. "unknown with no basis for such speculation (spying on the UN). "

In other words, you're doing damage control.

Unrec. Hide thread.

[ProSense]

4. "Unrec. Hide thread. "

It's too bad you will never know that you took a point out of context of a discussion you know nothing of.

[jpgray]

6. But there are many who would. Foreign embassies certainly have

Spying on the UN seems a pretty obvious move for the US, and I'm surprised you saw no basis for speculating that it takes place. But the particular form and execution of such things is what makes for insight, not a general idea that such-and-such is going on. I would never have guessed, for example, that we are seeking iris scans. I also never would have guessed that there would be testy meetings between Rice and German diplomats so close to the war, and that they would have such a tone.

The details are important. This is true for high-level meetings and espionage alike.

[ProSense]

7. "Spying on the UN seems a pretty obvious move for the US"

Not to me, but if you're accurate: What's the big deal?

[jpgray]

8. The specifics. The who, the what, the where, the why, and the how

You know, the actual fact of the matter, rather than vague speculation. "Germany was probably meeting with the Bush administration and still strongly opposing the war throughout the runup" and "the US is probably spying on the UN" are worlds apart from having the actual documents to prove such things, and to a level of detail that is impossible to suppose without evidence.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

5. what about the 'spying' of the UN around the time of the Iraq war?

did they forget to include this?

[tpsbmam]

9. According to the NY TImes, this is banned by "several international treaties" but

happens anyway. Article link.

While several international treaties prohibit spying at the United Nations, it is an open secret that countries try nevertheless. In one embarrassing episode in 2004, a British official revealed that the United States and Britain eavesdropped on the conversations of Secretary General Kofi Annan of the United Nations in the weeks before the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Doesn't surprise me.