N.Y. TIMES
The Chinese government made the final decision to allow Edward J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor, to leave Hong Kong on Sunday, a move that Beijing believed resolved a tough diplomatic problem even as it reaped a publicity windfall from Mr. Snowden’s disclosures, according to people familiar with the situation.
Hong Kong authorities have insisted that their
judicial process remained independent of China, but these observers — who like
many in this article spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk freely about
confidential discussions — said that matters of foreign policy are the domain of
the Chinese government, and Beijing exercised that authority in allowing Mr.
Snowden to go.
From China’s point of view, analysts said, the
departure of Mr. Snowden solved two concerns: how to prevent Beijing’s
relationship with the United States from being ensnared in a long legal wrangle
in Hong Kong over Mr. Snowden, and how to deal with a Chinese public that widely
regards the American computer expert as a hero.
The Chinese government was pleased that Mr. Snowden
disclosed the extent of American surveillance of Internet and telephone
conversations around the world, giving the Chinese people a chance to talk about
what they describe as American hypocrisy regarding surveillance practices, said
Mr. Jin and the person familiar with the consultations between Hong Kong and
China.
----
Mr. Snowden has denied giving China classified
documents and said he had spoken only to journalists. But his public statements,
directly and to reporters, have contained intelligence information of great
interest to China.
Two Western intelligence experts, who worked for major
government spy agencies, said they believed that the Chinese government had
managed to drain the contents of the four laptops that Mr. Snowden said he
brought to Hong Kong, and that he said were with him during his stay at a Hong
Kong hotel. If that were the case, they said, China would no longer need or want to have Mr. Snowden remain in Hong Kong.
-----
Diplomats and law enforcement officials from the United States warned countries in Latin America not to harbor Mr. Snowden or allow him to pass through to other destinations after he fled Hong Kong for Moscow, possibly en route to Ecuador or another nation where he could seek asylum.
The foreign minister of Ecuador confirmed receiving an asylum request from Mr. Snowden. As of early Monday morning in Russia, Mr. Snowden was believed to be staying the night inside the transit zone of a Moscow airport where he was visited by an Ecuadorean diplomat. It remains unclear whether he would be allowed to travel further or, if he were, whether Ecuador would indeed be his final destination.
Mr.Snowden planned his escape from Hong Kong over a surreptitious dinner of pizza, fried chicken and sausages, washed down with Pepsi. The foreign minister of Ecuador confirmed receiving an asylum request from Mr. Snowden. As of early Monday morning in Russia, Mr. Snowden was believed to be staying the night inside the transit zone of a Moscow airport where he was visited by an Ecuadorean diplomat. It remains unclear whether he would be allowed to travel further or, if he were, whether Ecuador would indeed be his final destination.
-------
The turn of events opened a startling new chapter in a case that had already captivated many in the United States and around the world. Mr. Snowden’s transcontinental escape was seen as a fresh embarrassment for the Obama administration and raised questions about its tactics in the case, like its failure to immediately revoke Mr. Snowden’s passport....they did not revoke Mr. Snowden’s passport until Saturday
It also further complicated Washington’s ties with Russia and China, where at least some officials take delight in tweaking what they call American double standards.
-----
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia appeared to rule out sending Mr. Snowden back to the United States to face espionage charges, leaving him in limbo even as Moscow and Washington seemed to be making an effort to prevent a cold-war-style standoff from escalating. The United States and Russia do not have an extradition treaty.
Mr. Putin said Russian intelligence agencies had not questioned him, although some independent analysts cast doubt on that assertion. “If I still worked there, I would talk to him,” said Aleksandr Kondaurov, a retired K.G.B. general
-----
It was a cloak-and-dagger affair. Mr. Snowden wore a cap and sunglasses and insisted that the assembled lawyers hide their cellphones in the refrigerator of the home where he was staying, to block any eavesdropping. Then began a two-hour conversation during which Mr. Snowden was deeply dismayed to learn that he could spend years in prison without access to a computer during litigation over whether he would be granted asylum here or surrendered to the United States.
Staying cooped up in the cramped Hong Kong home of a local supporter was less bothersome to Mr. Snowden than the prospect of losing his computer. ----
DAVID CARR N.Y. TIMES
Almost lost in the international drama was a
journalistic one in which Glenn Greenwald, the columnist from The Guardian,
found himself in the gunsights on a Sunday morning talk show. The episode was
part of a continuing story about the role of the press in conveying secrets to
the public.
If you add up the pulling of news organization phone
records (The Associated Press), the tracking of individual reporters (Fox News),
and the effort by the current administration to go after sources (seven
instances and counting in which a government official has been criminally
charged with leaking classified information to the news media), suggesting that
there is a war
on the press is less hyperbole than simple math.
For the time being, it is us (the press) versus them
(federal officials), which is part of the reason David Gregory ended up taking a
lot
of incoming fire for suggesting on NBC's “Meet the
Press” on Sunday that Glenn Greenwald may have committed crimes, not
journalism, when he published leaks by Mr. Snowden.
-----
“To the extent that you have aided and abetted
Snowden, even in his current movements, why shouldn’t you, Mr. Greenwald, be
charged with a crime?” he said in the interview.
Mr. Greenwald responded assertively.
“I think it’s pretty extraordinary that anybody who
would call themselves a journalist would publicly muse about whether or not
other journalists should be charged with felonies,” Mr. Greenwald responded.
“The assumption in your question, David, is completely
without evidence — the idea that I’ve ‘aided and abetted’ him in any way.”
Mr. Gregory may have thought he was just being
provocative, but if you tease apart his inquiry, it suggests there might be
something criminal in reporting out important information from a controversial
source.
====The current administration’s desire for control of information is not a new phenomenon, but at this juncture, there is a clear need for a countervailing force in favor of openness.
There will be, as Ben Smith pointed out on BuzzFeed,
an attempt to depict
the sources of information as rogues and traitors, a process that will
accelerate now that WikiLeaks has begun assisting Mr. Snowden. “Snowden is what
used to be known as a source,” Mr. Smith wrote. “And reporters don’t, and
shouldn’t, spend too much time thinking about the moral status of their
sources.”
Politicians would like to conflate the actions of
reporters and their sources, but the law draws a very clear and bright line
between the two in an effort to protect speech and enable transparency. Mr.
Greenwald may have a point of view and his approach to journalism is through the
prism of activism, but he functioned as a journalist and deserves the
protections that go with the job.
---------------------------------------------------------Igor Morozov, a Russian lawmaker, wrote that the case exposed an American “policy of double standards.” Xinhua, the state-owned Chinese news agency, editorialized that “the United States, which has long been trying to play innocent as a victim of cyberattacks, has turned out to be the biggest villain in our age.”
American officials said such arguments were false
equivalences, saying that there was no comparison between Congressionally
sanctioned and court-monitored surveillance programs, or the prosecution of Mr.
Snowden, and the actions taken by the governments in Moscow and Beijing. But it
is an argument that Washington may find difficult to sell in some parts of the
world, even among some American allies, and it is fueling criticism inside the
United States.
----
Mr. Obama has insisted that there is a difference
between common espionage and China’s behavior. “Every country in the world,
large and small, engages in intelligence gathering,” he told Charlie Rose in an
interview on PBS. But intelligence gathering is different from “a hacker
directly connected with the Chinese government or the Chinese military breaking
into Apple’s software systems to see if they can obtain the designs for the
latest Apple product,” he said.
“That’s theft,” the president added, “and we can’t
tolerate that.”