Edward Snowden: Hero or Traitor?

Summary of case

Edward Snowden, a former US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) computer analyst, whistle-blowedthat United States has conducted an extensive illegal surveillance named “Prism” of its nations and other countries.

The scandal started in 6^th June 2013, accusing US in hacking telephone records, Google and Facebook data, live chats and search histories. Since that, it has drawn international attention in putting up a huge debate in ethics, privacy and security issues. On the other hand,Mr Snowden has been “hunted” and charged by US with the indictments below while each of the charges carries a maximum 10-year prison sentence:

• theft of governement property
• unauthorised communication of national defence information
• wilful communication of classified communications intelligence. 

(Source: BBC News, 2013, viewed on 5 Sept 2013, <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22837100)>

The breakout continues to distresses US authority with the constant leakage of black budget, asylum seeking, interest group’s pressure, and lawsuit with technology firms.

Ethical Dilemma

The case is an excellent example of ethical dilemma, one of the lecture topics today by my lecturer, Ms Diana. This dilemma happens because of the contradiction of Mr Snowden’s personal ethical principle and the act of eavesdropping people privacy. “The public needs to decide whether these programs or policies are right or wrong," he said. Bearing that in mind, he does not regret of his choice despite international dispute. Nonetheless, the case has brought up an interesting question: Is it ethical or unethical? Due to time constrain and limited exposure on the matter, I can hardly judge Mr Snowden is ethical or unethical. However, aiming to be critical, i will analayze the case in both perspectives as below. 

Standpoint: I think Edward Snowden is a hero, an ethical whistle-blower!

1.     He has a positive intention and motivation.

In an interview, Mr Snowden reemphasized that the reason of his act is to encourage transparency of CIA/NSA and public awareness on their rights. He has no intention to grab financial gain, personal media attention or international political harm as he filtered the documents carefully and maintained the very-confidential ones. If it is proven true, i believe he is giving up his high-paid salary, and is going to suffer lawsuits, bankruptcy, and risk of attempted suicide. Bearing with the "unaffordable" cost of whistle-blowing, this is why he is treated as “hero” in his fans' heart. 

2.     He provides accurate and convincing documented evidence on the issue.

Staying in the industry for years, he supports his claims with a series of evidence. In recent, he even under-covered a secret-filled 178-page summary of the CIA/NSA budget, claiming that a total of USD 52.6 billion has been spent in 2013. He believes that there will be necessary changes on the budget allocated in the future as it is “expensive” for the security needs in US. 

(Source:  Peter Grier, The Christian Science, 2013, viewed on 5 Sept 2013, <http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0829/Edward-Snowden-leaks-again-five-takeaways-from-the-black-budget)>

3.     He safeguards privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties.

According to the Constitution law, “Government do not have the right to search and check nations’ personal assets and information, unless warrant is issued by the Court”. Up to now, the “State of Liberty” does not oppose the claim with strong evidence on nations’ permissions against the issue. Hence the act of putting the finger on the State is considered correct and ethical.

Standpoint: I think Edward Snowden is a traitor, an unethical whistle-blower!

1.     His act of stealing is still a wrong-doing.

Despite he has successfully gained the strong evidence at CIA/ NSA, he does not respect and betrays the confidentiality of company information, annoyed by different voices. In receiving benefits and annual salary of USD 200,000.00, he is expected to be fully devoted and faithful to the leaders who helped him grow in his career. Plus, I believe Mr Snowden who retrieved the information without permission is generally accepted as “stealing” which is a serious crime in business world. 

2.     His asylum request triggers international tension.

Expelled and hunted by US, Mr Snowden is currently seeking asylum and legal protection from Russia, China, and South America countries that have the same political philosophy. In the opposite voice, Mr Snowden is claimed to be not ethical and professional as the issue has worsened the cold relationship among the countries as sensitive issues such as nuclear weapons, military argument, and Palestine war still exist and in conformity stage. The nations’ safety and security has been put at risk without thoughtful decision on the unethical leakage.

Personal comment:

Again, i insist to evaluate both perspectives because of my limited time, resource and understanding on the matter. But if I were him, I will learn how to make decision extra carefully and try my best to obtain a win-win situation. I might not leak the confidential secret because losing internet freedom is not as worse as firing up an international cold relationship. But at the same time, I will support interest group to create public awareness on cyber privacy.

Enron’s case and this incident have reminded me that: decision making is not as easy as we think! Especially when we are working at the top management level, every step and decision we make might cause to serious penalty and imprisonment. Meanwhile I realised how weak am I in the knowledge of business ethics and law. But at least, after the class, I learn how to solve ethical dilemma with the 3 resolution principles: Ends-based, Rules-based, and The Golden Rule.

Despite the intense argument, in my opinion, public surveillance project and eavesdropping is not a fresh new subject that should be up-roared and make a fuss with. Legal and illegal monitoring systems have been practiced in countries such as China, United Kingdom, India, France, North Korea and even Malaysia, for national security purpose.

For example, the Great Firewall of China has been initiated to keep track of nations’ credit smart card records, speech and voice database, and blocked content. Popular websites that Malaysians usually have access on such as Google and Facebook are even black-listed by the government. As a result, we can say, every one of us does not enjoy privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties.

In Malaysia, our surveillance system is integrated with CCTV, network recorder which installed at complexes and public areas, followed by IP locating and intelligence tracking software at your and my network area right now. We might feel irritated and furious being spied, but when accidents and misfortune happen, these data are the most useful and crucial clues that can help us. Thinking of this, why should we complain?

Again, I think we should treat it as a good chance to cultivate self-discipline. Knowing that government is watching over us, we should avoid making insulting comment towards the country’s royalty, stirring up religious tensions, and all prejudicial criticism that threaten country’s peace and serenity. In fact, Fahmi Fadzil’s defamation case is showing a good example of consequence of incautious blogging. He is demanded to post his apologies letter 100 times at Twitter. 

(Source: Sean Yong, Associated Press, viewed on 5 Sept 2013, <http://phys.org/news/2011-06-malaysia-defamation-case-twitter.html)>

No matter what, as an educated nation, we shall pay attention to our chosen words and legal responsibility while commenting sensitive issues online. At the same time, I believe that by sharing this hot issue and in relation to Malaysia’s surveillance system, they do inspire people’s thinking and train students to voice out their ethical standpoint in a mature way.

(approximately 1200 words)

Note: This blog may contain incorrect information as it is part of the learning process for a student who taking Contemporary Ethics in the Service Industry subject in college.