The writer is Editor, National Security Affairs at Capital TV and a visiting fellow at the SDPI in Islamabad
That Americans have chosen to stay away from the streets to protest not just the treatment that is being meted out to Snowden, a fellow citizen, but, more importantly, the kind of state they are living in, that state’s claims of respecting individual rights notwithstanding, is deeply instructive and troubling.
States are states, despite the vexing question in political science literature about where to place it; what exactly is its nature and essence, et cetera? It’s a deeply problematic concept and has, not without reason, been problematised. Even so, there is a broad acceptance that large collections of peoples require an organising principle which gives birth to the idea of a state with a sovereign. Over a long period of time the idea of a sovereign has evolved, with sovereignty resting, ostensibly, in the people and their choices rather than in a single person, a monarch or a dictator.
Yet, in essence, not much has changed apart from the mechanisms in and through which power is exercised. The wars for survival, pelf and territories fought by the monarchs are now fought by modern states, including democracies, in the name of the people, on their behalf, and for their protection — just like Athens did. And from what we have seen since World War I, democracies, in combination with what physicist Ralph Lapp called the tyranny of weapons technology, have killed as many, if not more, people than those disposed of by totalitarian regimes.
The paradox reigns supreme. If an organising principle is indeed needed to streamline a collection of people, then the principle must also be protected — as much from external enemies as from internal dissenters (I use the term very broadly). Protecting the people also means harming them if and when the need to do so arises. We are assuming here, for the sake of the argument, that states in fact seek to act in the interest of the people and are free from other problems like lying leaders, ambitious bureaucrats and entrenched interests that create their own interplay.
How must the people be protected if not by protecting the organising principle which, as should be obvious, begins to take a life bigger than the people themselves. If the greatest good for the greatest number is the benchmark, then it becomes relatively easier, albeit no less problematic, to determine who to harm for the protection of others. Bentham’s panopticon was the idea of a penitentiary designed in a way that would allow guards to observe the inmates without their being able to tell whether or not they were being monitored. Michel Foucault built on the idea his differentiation of the culture of spectacle and the carceral.
In Discipline and Punish, Foucault opened the discussion with the public punishment being meted out to Damiens the regicide and takes us through 293 pages to the birth of the prison and the idea of the carceral, “the disciplinary form at its most extreme, the model in which are concentrated all the coercive technologies of behaviour. In it were to be found ‘cloister, prison, school, regiment’.”
The school and the regiment are the more menacingly oppressive aspects. In the modern world, they work outside a penitentiary as effectively as they are supposed to inside a one. They are grounded in the idea of the acceptable and the accepted behaviour for a human being in all his/her incarnations, Auden’s Unknown Citizen who must be free because “Had anything been wrong, we should certainly have heard”.
The modern state, with help from technology, has created a carceral where we are all being watched. But we are happy. The democratic states — forget that democracy is as much a myth as the free market — give us a sense of rule-based system. There are shopping malls, much to consume, nice cars to drive, credit facilities, fascinating hand-held gizmos, compatibility across digital platforms, smart television sets, Google, Facebook, et cetera. Life has never been better. The state resides somewhere and its wars, in the case of the US, are fought elsewhere. Killing can be done from the safety of a shack in Nevada. “Was he free? Was he happy? The question is absurd”.
The panopticon Bentham sketched in the late 18th century has come to pass, not in the form of a secluded penitentiary but in the form of a modern state with global outreach. The things that make life easy for us are the very things that keep us in and help the guards watch us without our knowing that they do.
US President Barack Obama says states need information and it’s the job of the intelligence agencies to do what the NSA has been doing. He is not entirely wrong. Lack of perfect information has always been a problem in decision-making. States, organisations, individuals: we all need information. But where Obama is wrong is in not wringing his hands and saying that the world has a problem: we need information but we have also reached the dangerous point where states can look into everything. The paradox has kicked in and the American intelligence personnel — Snowden is an example — as well as Obama himself are both the operators of the panopticon and its victims. If you try to do the Snowden on the state, the state will crush you. In the age of information, we also have information and resource asymmetry.
The drivers are not threats, perceived for the most part. Technology is driving the state and the state is perpetuating itself in the interest of the peoples that it now threatens to destroy if they fall out of line. The average American is happy, Snowden languishes in the transit lounge of a Moscow airport, Obama avoids the tough questions, technology drives interest and the mode of war and it continues to ensnare people in an ever-expanding panopticon.
Will this change? No. Will it get worse? To that, perhaps Edgar’s aside in King Lear is instructive: And worse I may be yet. The worst is not/So long as we can say “This is the worst”.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 3rd, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (28)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1732243059-0/mac-miller-(2)1732243059-0-165x106.webp "article")
1672385156-0/Andrew-Tate-(1)1672385156-0-165x106.webp "article")
1732240377-0/mac-miller-(1)1732240377-0-165x106.webp "article")
@amoghavarsha.ii:
O'h I do value very much secure living! But not at the expense of others. American Government wants security at the expense of other Nations, riding roughshod on their domestic as well as international laws conventions and agreements and India by the way wants the security at the expense of Kashmiri and Pakistani citizens. This is paranoia and treatable illness in hospitals.
Rex Minor
@Rexminor, you are mixing more than three issues with issue of security of life. I am sure you do not understand what is meant by SECURE LIVING.
From an article in language too convoluted to decipher, to comments in language too mutilated to understand ...... it is becoming increasingly unproductive to go beyond the headline! I am against editing/censorship in any form, but perhaps accompanying faithful translations into commonly-accepted English would a useful feature. After all, how can we be sure the author, and his critics, did not have anything useful to say?
@Gp65,@antanu
I think both of you are mistaken in comparing Dr. Afridi with Snowden. Dr. Afridi was working for a foreign intelligence agency where as Snowden was not.
Dr. Shakeel done same work in Pakistan for usa and treated him as Hero in usa. But now why usa harsh to Snowden. As per adopted formula by usa I think he is hero for all the world to shown dark face of usa.
@gp65 I always wait to see your point of view on everything and truly respect your opinion. But today i feel disappointed a bit. You are more than 100% entitled to your opinion but pls tell me one thing truly: do you really believe USA's security agencies have been trying to make americans safer? With the saga of Snowden developing new things rapidly, have you not come across his leaks showing how many of their europena partners were bugged thoroughly for, yes you know it, bilateral trade talks. Do you think this is allowed in international law and its not cheating? How low can we go for money? I could be your student anyday based on all that you know. But i think most of the intellectuals on media in general are finding this whole episode too hard to digest or confront, or both. I hope you reply and say something about these points i raised.
@amoghavarsha.ii:
Good point," Security paradigm changes as the threat changes". The European Governments must undertake securiy requirements of their citizens and do not allow any American citizen, a group, an organisation as well as the Government leadership without prior security checks to ensure that None enter the commercial or Gvernment buldings with their spy gadgets, deferring talks on the Free Trade Agreement which aimed at providing two million jobs on both sides of the atlantic, until the confidence is restored.It is the Trust and the rights of the Citizens which have fallen victim of the Cyber War!!!
Rex Minor
brevity is the soul of wit! grandiose words are not required to express your erudition, sir.
The question is not about the rights of the States what they can or cannot or what they should or must not?. The question before the civilised and advanced industrial Nation is to redefine the rights of the Citizens of their countries as well as the International laws about international relations in the worl. American stands today in the dock having broken these persistently and caught red-handed by their own whistle blower Spy, whose function was to spy over friends and foes alike. The European Parliament will discuss the issue to determine whether the values of the democratic order in the USA is any longer compatable with that of the European civilisation!
Rex Minor
Gosh. What does 'panopticon ' mean? I thought my English was good till I read this. Thanks to the author for the language lessons. Unfortunately in the process of figuring out the words, the piece went totally over my low intellect.
The bottom line should be, If u can prevent a BOMB from Going off and killing 10s (not taking more numbers delibrately) by snooping on all data of millions of people, SO BE IT.
The millions ask THE GOVT only when there is a succesfull attack, it does not ask people like SNOWDEN. If there is a killing pakistan, which happens regularly, do you people ask question to govt and establishment or do u ask your HUMAN RIGHTS people ??? it is as simple as that. Security paradigm changes as the threat changes. Threat always learns to beat the Security.
The issue of the modern state was tackled by Karl Marx in his essay "On the Jewish Question". Google it. Until the contradictions in society are not removed there will remain a seperation between the state and the people with the state justfying it's existance as an arbriter between the conflicting interests of rich and poor or muslim and christian. The reason why the state is still playing the role of ancient monarchs is that class society remians despite all the great achievements of human progress. People must emancipate themselves from this primeval social order based on social classes, only then will the people BECOME the state instead of being clients of it.
okay...!!!!! I wonder even if 0.1% of your target audience could understand the gist behind such heavy stuff ! Keep it light and to the point mate ! Appears too 'try-hard' and you loose your point in this wishy-washy-mambo-jambo-gobbledegook !
Every major figure has called for a negotiation process. This obviously involves what are called "red line" deals, which are non-negotiable. This would include things such as women's rights. Most wars end with settlements, and this is just another version of that settlement.
Hopefully it happens.
In my last comment I wanted to say "not bcoz USA is moral". Thanx
Ejaz Haider writes well, tackles sensitive and complex issues and looks them in a hilosophical mode. Perhaps such comments are useful as a white paper beore the decision of taking radical actions and not after it has been taken. Because the consequences have their own dynamics. The Imperial America is bleeding and slowly going into history like the Romans and no one can stop this process, neither its leaders nor its people.
America was never a country of law nor a specimen of democracy. Those who thought differently or wrote about it differently were doing so with positive thinking, highlightng the positive aspects of the developments in he country, by the immigrant European pioneers who brought the country on the worl stage as a great country. Now it is in the reverse mode and the reporters in the world will use teir hindsight and tell us what we always knew but dare not speak up and tell us what the oppressed class knew but did not make a great fuss because other country were no better. The whisle blower has just given us a samlle to the American foes and the friens allies what America has done against them. More surprise will emerge. There were those who wanted to control the freedom of speech and there are neu-con forces today who want to control our thoughts and the means of communications. Neither former had success nor the latter will. The Eurpean civilisation will resist!!
Rex Minor
@khamosh pani The countries he has mentioned have been oppressive to their people. Thats where the irony is. People go to USA bcoz they want food. Not bcoz USA Iimoral.
Any state that has the capacity to collect data and interrogate that data with a view to sniff out threats to its power base will do just that !
Its the good ol' spying and every country on the planet with enough means has been involved in collecting information through its agents for centuries.
Just because it happens to be "US of A", the entire righteous mob jumps up and down pointing fingers at the only superpower and shouting off the top of their lungs "we told you so..".
I would hate to see our deeper than ocean friend "China" or holier than holy friend "Saudi" to have that kind of capacity (although China might not be too far behind).
The truth is that USA is still the most open, tolerant and responsible super power in the history of superpowers on the planet earth ! It just happens to spend 50% of the Global defence spending to preserve that power and liberty with other 200 + nations spending the other 50% on global defence spending.
I say, all power to US for having the intellect, resources and strategy to collect such vast trove of data and to mine it.
What did I just read?
Snowden is a hero. He has validated what so called conspiracy theorists around the world were cautioning about for quite some time but were always dismissed. US was blaming others of cyber attacks and intellectual property theft but it was the biggest offender herself all along. From internet backbones to GSM networks to universities across the world, nothing was off limits. Even top technology companies weren't able to protect their users including Apple, Google, Facebook, etc. Man in the middle attacks produced forged security certificates, and fooled top security experts in those companies. Fisa court is another joke. EU fax machines were bugged along with offices at UN in New York. Germany is ranked as a third grade ally according to these documents. Oh, and nobody is buying that we shouldn't be worried if we don't do anything wrong. We all have somethings secret. But whenever USA is confronted with incontrovertible evidence of wrongdoing, they start speaking the word, 'terrorism' three times in every sentence onwards. Countries should reconsider if computerized public records are really worth it.
Let's not indulge in homilies. The world has become dangerous. No one knows for sure, whether he will be back home in one piece, from a visit to nearest shopping mall, or the bus station, or a place of worship. I support the snooping. I can enjoy all my freedom if only I am alive.
dr.shakeel did the same thing in OBL case and he is a hero in US...then why Snowden is chased? dont tell me both are different case.both are identical in nature.both the cases involve the matter of not letting the common people live on their own accord.were
This is nothing but hypocrisy. WE all knew for a long time that US and west is doing this sort of thing with Pakistan and many other countries. Nobody raised any objections. Now that west is being spied, all media is full of reports on that. Germany says: This cannot be accepted. But it was alright when US was spying others. US overdid it, I agree. But morally nobody has any standards. It is just us and you.
"an American citizen, is requesting asylum in Russia, China, Nicaragua and Cuba, to name just four countries from where people used to run away to the United States to enjoy America’s freedoms."
haha what an imperialistic way of looking at things. The countries you've mentioned are known for giving real freedom to the masses, the downtrodden working classes of their lands.