Last Tuesday during a speech in the Netherlands , President Barack Obama announced sweeping reforms that would drastically curtail the National Security Agency’s controversial data collection program leaked last year by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.
Under the proposed plan, the NSA would end its blanket acquisition of phone call records. Phone companies would retain this data, with the government able to access certain records only with permission granted from a judge. For the average citizen, this reform would mean that the government would no longer have the ability to systematically snoop through our private phone records.
Since Snowden infamously leaked more than 1,000 classified NSA documents detailing the once-secret intelligence program, many of my friends and classmates have accused the president of overstepping his authority. Feeling betrayed, these students, many of whom who voted for Obama last election, have expressed disappointment in the president’s apparent disregard for civil liberties and the right of privacy. Some have accused him of acting like “Big Brother,” or something even worse — a Republican.
Given all the criticism from young and old people alike, Obama has apparently decided that a change is necessary. In an attempt to show his good faith, Obama’s announcement has been successful in de-escalating criticism directed at his administration. Michelle Richardson , a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union called the White House plan a “crucial step in the right direction” and said that the changes would “replace the dragnet surveillance of millions of innocent people with targeted methods that are both effective and respect Americans’ constitutional rights.”
Since announcing his proposed changes, I have observed a sudden change of heart among the president’s formally demoralized supporters. The criticism that once was so passionately expressed by students seems to have dissipated and been replaced with sighs of relief and praise for the president.
My question to these students is why on earth does President Obama deserve any credit whatsoever? Let me be clear, I fully support reigning in NSA surveillance. The current intelligence gathering system is a blatant form of government intrusion and is in direct contradiction with the ideals of a free society. But were Obama’s actions truly a reflection of his commitment to a freer society or political calculation aimed at quieting his detractors?
Here are the facts. If it wasn’t for Snowden, no changes to the NSA would have been made. Period. Not only that, if he hadn’t come forward, we wouldn’t even be aware that our privacy is being invaded. The idea that we should feel comforted because the Obama administration has decided to gradually reform a previously classified government spying program is laughable. The notion that we should feel appreciative is insulting.
This is the same man who as a candidate in 2007 railed against the Bush administration for its intrusive warrantless wiretapping policy on phone calls of suspected terrorist threats.
“This administration puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide,” Obama said. The Bush administration “acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security.”
After the Snowden leak, however, Obama seemed quite comfortable with NSA snooping.
“You can’t have 100 percent security and also then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience,” Obama said. “We’re going to have to make some choices as a society.”
He denounced the actions of whistle blowers like Snowden, asserting “If any individual who objects to government policy can take it into their own hands to publicly disclose classified information, then we will not be able to keep our people safe, or conduct foreign policy.”
The president’s remarks last Tuesday should be considered more than a shift in policy — it’s a confession. By recommending reforms, he was admitting that the secret NSA surveillance program Snowden made public is an abusive overreach of power. In his statement, Obama called his plan for reform an example of us “slowly, systematically putting in more checks, balances, legal processes.” He argued that the proposed changes will help achieve and safeguard “the core values that America has always believed in — in terms of privacy, rule of law, individual rights.”
Then why is Snowden not being celebrated as a hero? If these reforms truly do eliminate the abuses of the current NSA surveillance system, doesn’t Snowden deserve a thank-you? Since the administration is admitting there is a problem and that civil liberties are not being properly respected, why is the man responsible for alerting the American people of this injustice being persecuted? Why has he been forced to take asylum in Russia? And why, Mr. President is he a traitor in the eyes of the U.S. government?
Do not be fooled. These NSA reforms might actually protect our civil liberties. They might, if indeed implemented, limit government surveillance on ordinary citizens and prove to be a step in the right direction. But look at the circumstances necessary to achieve these changes. What if Snowden would have stayed quiet? What if he had done what he was told and instead of taking matters into his own hands had kept the damning secrets of an abusive state quiet? Would we be having this conversation today? I doubt it.
Don’t be manipulated. I am not a Republican, I am not a Democrat. This column is not being written to score opportunistic political points for either side. This is not an issue that should be boiled to petty party politics. Red and blue, they all have mud on their hands. It’s about time we recognize that our liberties are gradually being eroded by the very individuals we pay to be our ‘representatives.’ Reason, therefore, must be prized more than rhetoric, skepticism embraced over blind party allegiance, and truth valued above all else.
Alex Dardas is an international relations and journalism junior. Reach him at dardasal@msu.edu.
