Obama’s Dragnet: Speech versus Action

Surveillance © Rolffimages | Dreamstime.com

Today I explore the relationship between Obama’s national security address with his surveillance policies. Many see the distance between his speech and action as proof of their cynicism about Obama and more generally about American politicians. I note that the distance can provide the grounds for the opposite of cynicism, i.e. consequential criticism. But for this to be the case, there has to be public concern, something I fear is lacking.

I am an Obama partisan, as any occasional reader of this blog surely knows. One such reader, in a response to my last post on Obama’s national security address, on Facebook declared: “your endless contortions in support of this non-entity make you look increasingly ridiculous.” He wondered: “Is this really what a ‘public intellectual’ looks like today?” I am not profoundly hurt by this. I am enjoying the one time in my life that I actually support an American political leader in power. I was an early supporter of the State Senator from the south side of Chicago and find good reasons to appreciate his leadership to this day. Through his person and his words, he has changed American identity, to the pleasure of the majority and the great displeasure to a significant minority. Obamacare is his singular accomplishment. He rationally responded to the most severe economic crisis since the Great Depression, despite sustained opposition. Perhaps he could have done more, but powerful forces were aligned against him. He has carefully redirected American foreign policy, cooperating with allies and the international organizations, engaging enemies, working to shift the balance between diplomacy and armed force. Obama has worked to move the center left, as I analyze carefully in Reinventing Political Culture, and I applaud his efforts even when he has not succeeded.

That said I have been disappointed on some matters, and I want to be clear about them here. In my judgment, the surge in Afghanistan didn’t make much sense. The escalating use of drones, without clear . . .

Read more: Obama’s Dragnet: Speech versus Action

The Cyber Warfare Age?

Did someone mention cyber-warfare? © doctorwho | bbc.co.uk (c/o Kevin Marks | Flickr)

The 12th Annual Cyber Defense Exercise was held by the National Security Agency at a Lockheed Martin Corporation facility in Hanover, Maryland during April 17-20. Cadet teams from the U. S. service academies competed with one another to defend their own team’s computer network designed, built and configured by them against attacks by the National Security Agency and the Department of Defense. This year’s winner was the Air Force Academy. The Army team from West Point had won the prior six. Previously, the Air Force Academy had two wins, the Naval Academy two wins and the Merchant Marine Academy one win. The United States is taking cyber warfare very seriously. Tony Sager, Chief Operating Officer of NSA’s Information Assurance Directorate who created the contest in 2000, noted that cyber defense is extremely difficult, in part because things like home banking, military applications and power systems all share the same network.

Serendipitously, on Friday the 13th of April, I attended a presentation by Paul A. Strassmann on cyber warfare at the New Canaan Senior Men’s Club. Strassmann is a member of the club, and an internationally recognized authority on the subject. Strassmann convincingly argued that cyber warfare is a legitimate concern, which affects us all.

FBI Director Robert Mueller at a Senate hearing indicated that he believes that cyber threats are becoming the number one threat to the USA, according to Strassmann. James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, believes that cyber threats are a danger to economic and national security. The magnitude of the danger is indicated by the inter-connectivity of the following systems: oil and gas. electric power, transportation, emergency services, government services, banking and finance, water and communications. To help thwart attacks from a broad range of attackers — “crackers”; “insiders,” “hostile countries,” and “terrorists” — the Department of Defense established the U. S. Cyber Command in May 2010 under the U. S. Strategic Command, working hand in hand with the Department of Homeland Security. I’m not sure what the clandestine services are doing. A . . .

Read more: The Cyber Warfare Age?