Russian President Vladimir Putin proved to the whole world that fugitive NSA leaker Edward Snowden was used as a pawn during a Q&A session on Thursday. Snowden defends his question to Putin about surveillance in a Guardian op-ed piece saying, “I regret that my question could be misinterpreted, and that it enabled many to ignore the substance of the question – and Putin’s evasive response.” So, now he views Putin’s response as evasive? Something tells me he’s wearing out his welcome in Russia.
On Thursday, I questioned Russia’s involvement in mass surveillance on live television. I asked Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, a question that cannot credibly be answered in the negative by any leader who runs a modern, intrusive surveillance program: “Does [your country] intercept, analyse or store millions of individuals’ communications?”
I went on to challenge whether, even if such a mass surveillance program were effective and technically legal, it could ever be morally justified.
The question was intended to mirror the now infamous exchange in US Senate intelligence committee hearings between senator Ron Wyden and the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, about whether the NSA collected records on millions of Americans, and to invite either an important concession or a clear evasion. (See a side-by-side comparison of Wyden’s question and mine here.)
Clapper’s lie – to the Senate and to the public – was a major motivating force behind my decision to go public, and a historic example of the importance of official accountability.
In his response, Putin denied the first part of the question and dodged on the latter. There are serious inconsistencies in his denial – and we’ll get to them soon – but it was not the president’s suspiciously narrow answer that was criticised by many pundits. It was that I had chosen to ask a question at all.
I was surprised that people who witnessed me risk my life to expose the surveillance practices of my own country could not believe that I might also criticise the surveillance policies of Russia, a country to which I have sworn no allegiance, without ulterior motive. I regret that my question could be misinterpreted, and that it enabled many to ignore the substance of the question – and Putin’s evasive response – in order to speculate, wildly and incorrectly, about my motives for asking it.
Snowden writes that Vladimir Putin must be called to account on surveillance just like Obama. Um, one problem with that — the Russians are doing him a favor by granting him asylum. You certainly can bite the hand that’s feeding you, can you? Shows how incredibly egotistical and self-absorbed Edward Snowden really is. So much for morality.