The courageous indictment arrived at a time when Washington was becoming very concerned about two of the three most viable future homes for Snowden. The presidents of Venezuela and Bolivia were alongside Putin during the two-day Gas Exporting Countries Summit. As it had done several times before, the U.S. government was on the verge of stacking the deck against itself when Snowden was concerned. A world divided was about to make one Latin American country’s asylum decision very easy.
Venezuela’s leader, Nicolás Maduro, was preparing to leave the energy conference when he told Russia’s Interfax news agency, “We [the people of Venezuela] think this young person has done something very important for humanity, has done a favour to humanity, has spoken great truths to deconstruct a world that is controlled by an imperialist American elite.” When asked if he intended to take Snowden back to Venezuela with him, Maduro sardonically responded, “What we’re taking with us are multiple agreements that we’re signing with Russia, including oil and gas.”91
Bolivia’s president, Evo Morales, informed Actualidad, the Spanish-language provider for the Russia Today news network, “If there were a request, of course we would be willing to debate and consider the idea.”92 Morales had also recently congratulated Correa for threatening to back out of the ATPDEA.93 Neither world leader had been informed that their country had already received Snowden’s asylum request.
Late Tuesday, Bolivian Air Force flight FAB-001 left Moscow with Morales onboard en route to Bolivia’s capital, La Paz. As it passed over Austria, Portugal informed Morales’ flight crew that the aircraft’s reservation to refuel in Lisbon had been cancelled for “technical reasons.” As the Dassault Falcon 900EX94 changed flight paths and rerouted to the Canary Islands off the coast of Africa, French authorities reported it could not permit FAB-001 to fly over due to “technical issues.”95 Morales had no choice but to make a circle and land in Vienna. Once in Austria’s capital, the aircraft was subjected to a “routine” inspection by Austrian authorities, and all of its passengers’ passports were verified. Twelve hours later,96 Morales departed. FAB-001 was now cleared to refuel in the Canary Islands on the condition its passengers consent to another inspection, this time by Spain.
Austria later claimed it had merely responded to FAB-001’s request to refuel. Audio records confirm that the flight crew had cited a possible fuel indicator problem. Purportedly, they were unsure how much fuel they had. Even if this were the case, they could have easily made it to Lisbon: Assuming it had not been refueled during the two-day layover in Moscow and granting the greatest benefit of the doubt in respect to distance, the FAB-001 would have been forced to refuel in Lisbon after crossing 5,382 Atlantic miles. During the return voyage to Bolivia, it would have been scheduled to stop in Vienna and not Lisbon because the Dassault Falcon 900EX has a flight range of only 4,598 miles.97 The aircraft wouldn’t have had the fuel to make the 4,850-mile round trip to Portugal from Moscow. Vienna and Lisbon are 1,037 and 2,425 miles from Moscow respectively. It is clear the FAB-001 had been refueled in Moscow and could have easily made it to Lisbon.
The problem Morales encountered was that he had attempted to cross allied airspace. After expressing support for Correa and suggesting Bolivia might harbor Snowden, Washington wanted to intimidate Morales as well as confirm that the American exile, which had not been seen in days, was not being flown out of Russia. After Morales was forced to land, the U.S. ambassador to Austria, William Eacho, made several calls from his embassy to various officials. He “claimed with great certainty that Edward Snowden was onboard” while referencing a “diplomatic note requesting Snowden’s extradition.”98 After first denying Morales had been forbidden passage, Spain’s minister of foreign affairs, José Manuel García-Margallo, conceded on national television, “They told us that the information was clear, that he [Snowden] was inside [the airplane].” He did not specify who “they” were and declined to comment whether he’d been contacted by American authorities, yet he added that other European countries’ similar responses were based on the same information he’d been issued.99 When later questioned, France’s president, Francois Hollande, apologetically stated there had been “conflicting information” about the airplane’s flight manifest.100 The U.S. government declined to comment, saying the matter should be redirected to the countries involved.101
Morales arrived in La Paz close to midnight on Wednesday, July 3.102 He was met by cheering crowds. An emergency meeting was quickly organized, and a portion of the Union of South American Nations (Unión de Naciones Suramericanas or “UNASUR”) assembled the following day. As protesters burned France’s flag in front of Bolivia’s French Embassy103 and international headlines quoted Bolivian vice president Alvaro Garcia’s assertion that Morales had been “kidnapped by imperialism,”104 the presidents of Ecuador, Argentina, Uruguay, Venezuela, Suriname and Bolivia met in Cochabamba, Bolivia, to discuss the issue. Since it had already refused to acknowledge Snowden’s asylum petition, Brazil felt it only needed to be represented by an advisor. Due to their strong ties to the U.S., Colombia, Peru and Chile were not in attendance. Juan Manuel Santos, Colombia’s president, tried to remain politically neutral. He tweeted, “We’re in solidarity with Evo Morales because what they did to him is unheard-of, but let’s not let this turn into a diplomatic crisis for Latin America and the EU.”105 Maduro informed the UNASUR congregation that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry had contacted his government officials, attempting to pressure them not to accept Snowden’s asylum request.106
It could be argued the U.S. knew Snowden wasn’t on the flight but had deliberately commandeered Morales’ airplane to set an example for any nation that might want to host him. It proved Snowden’s arrival in a receptive country would be arduous, if not impossible. But this is unlikely. To merely make the point in the wake of any present asylum offers atop creating international ill will while asking favors of already hostile EU members would be politically expensive. France had recently suggested the free-trade talks between America and the European Union should be postponed.107 The most likely explanation for Washington’s actions was it merely acted before thinking. What it accomplished was inflaming already-strained relations with South America and gave various Latin American nations a reason to collectively discuss Snowden.
The impact of the Morales incident was twofold. It solidified the Latin American coalition whose members already viewed the U.S. and its allies as antagonistic to their countries’ political philosophies and practices. “We are not colonies anymore,” announced José Mujica, president of Uruguay. “We deserve respect,” he continued, “and when one of our governments is insulted we feel the insult throughout Latin America.”108 In a speech in Buenos Aires, Argentina’s President Cristina Kirchner declared, “[These actions are] vestiges of a colonialism that we thought were long over. We believe this constitutes not only the humiliation of a sister nation but of all South America.”109 Morales had told the UNASUR summit members, “My only sin is that I’m indigenous and anti-imperialist, [that I question] those economic policies planned and implemented by politicians that just starve us to death.”110
The other consequence was that economic sanctions against the offending nations might ensue. In response to the Spanish ambassador to Austria first requesting to inspect FAB-001 when it was grounded in Vienna before telling Morales he could refuel in the Canary Islands only if he consented to another search, Maduro proclaimed, “We’re going to re-evaluate our relations with Spain.”111 Morales left the impromptu conference stating, “My hand would not tremble to close the US Embassy. We have dignity, sovereignty. Without America, we are better off politically and democratically.”112 Morales was so outraged that he refused to accept an apology from France’s foreign minister, who professed there was “never any intention to block the access to our air space.” Bolivia’s leader shot back, “What happened these days is not an accident but part of policies to continue intimidating the Bolivian people and Latin American people.”113
Upon arriving in Cochabamba for the UNASUR meeting, Maduro said, “We’re here to tell president Evo Morales that he can count on us. Whoever picks a fight with Bolivia, picks a fight with Venezuela.”114 It was little surprise that the next day, July 5, Venezuela granted Snowden asylum. Nicaragua did as well. Maduro implied his country’s decision was based in part on the Morales plane incident: “I, as head of state of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, offer humanitarian asylum to the young American, Edward Joseph Snowden, the ex-functionary of the CIA, so that he can come to live in the country of [Venezuela’s founder Simon] Bolivar and [late President Hugo] Chavez and [escape] U.S. imperial persecution.”115 Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega quietly justified his nation’s motives: “We are an open country, respectful of the right of asylum, and it’s clear that if circumstances permit, we would gladly receive Snowden and give him asylum in Nicaragua.” Both countries had already received and rejected extradition requests from the U.S.116 The Central American country’s entry onto the international stage was largely symbolic. Pundits doubted the sincerity of Ortega’s offer. They suspected he was using the opportunity to appeal to regional heads of state.117 Even though it was not delivered in person, Snowden’s application had been accepted at Nicaragua’s foreign ministry in Moscow.118 As expected, the next day Morales announced Bolivia was “willing to give asylum” to Snowden.119 Unlike Maduro, Morales explicitly affirmed Bolivia’s offer was due to the European debacle. He stated the offer was a “justified protest” in response to what had taken place.120
Until now the United States had appeared justified in its persecution and hunt for Snowden because a large number of nations had rejected him in less than a day, and a majority had done so in under a week. But when not one but three countries suddenly consented to host the American exile, it insinuated that Snowden’s actions could be legitimate, especially since the offers came from smaller, less powerful nations which many believed would be made to suffer for their decision. Publicly the White House characteristically downplayed the countries’ defiance. When asked for an official response to the first nation that made an asylum offer, an unnamed U.S. official stated, “You’d have to ask the Venezuelans what it means, as it is their offer.”121
In actuality, Washington could say little to Venezuela. Even though Kerry called Venezuelan Foreign Minister Elias Jaua mere hours after Maduro made his announcement,122 declaring that if Snowden should arrive in the South American country, the U.S. would close NATO airspace and cease oil deliveries, Venezuela’s officials knew he was bluffing. The global economy could not survive without the resources provided by the world’s largest oil exporter.123 As expected, Capitol Hill let the ATPDEA expire,124 but as a sign of protest, Bolivia had resigned from the treaty four days prior.125 The U.S. government didn’t take Nicaragua’s offer seriously: For Snowden to arrive in the country, he would first have to travel through Venezuela.126
Washington’s comparatively complacent response was odd. Perhaps the Capitol realized it had overstepped its bounds and created asylum offers which might not have otherwise been made. Maybe the U.S. government had slowly come to understand that Snowden did not intend to leave Russia. But if history is any guide, Washington was exhibiting humility because it believed that Snowden was trapped and it was only a matter of time before the U.S. could convince the former Soviet Union to hand him over.
For Snowden to arrive in any of the receptive countries, he would have to transverse American and U.N. airspace if traveling by commercial jet. When en route to Latin and South America, Russia’s Aeroflot airline passes through Cuba and other nations with extradition treaties with the U.S.127 In spite of this, Snowden now qualified for unquestioned safe passage. America is a signatory on UDHR. In principle the U.S. is obligated to recognize asylees from all countries, especially participating UDHR nations. Nicaragua, Venezuela and Ecuador are also UDHR signatories. If he had not been granted asylum, the United States would have the right to ask any U.N. member to land Snowden’s plane once it entered their territory. Since he was granted asylum by another UDHR nation and not charged with a crime outside of the U.S., the other United Nations members had no right or cause to detain him. As the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees makes clear, “As such it [principle of non-refoulement or the returning of the persecuted to the persecutor] is binding in all States, regardless of whether they have acceded to the 1951 [Refugee] Convention or 1967 Protocol [Relating to the Status of Refugees]. A refugee seeking protection must not be prevented from entering a country as this would amount to refoulement.”128 A commercial flight also has the international right to fly over and refuel as needed, whereas government and private aircraft must request permission to enter each country’s airspace and land. But as the world witnessed, international politics trumps theoretical law.129 Washington was violating international law and justifying it by stating its own legislation had been broken. The irony of the situation was not lost on the press.130 The U.S. government desperately chased an individual whose alleged crimes were committed under the same reasoning.
It was clear Snowden’s safety could not be guaranteed even if Maduro sent a government aircraft to pick him up. Snowden’s only viable option would be to take a private airplane with the fuel capacity to travel directly from Moscow to its western destination while avoiding American or allied airspace along the way. The Bombardier Global 8000 can travel 7,900 miles. It is geographically possible to bypass hostile zones by flying north from Moscow to the Barents Sea, alongside Norway then between Britain and Iceland on the Norwegian Sea. Snowden could arrive safely after carefully navigating through Caribbean territory. Barring prevailing headwinds, even Bolivia resting on the western coast of South America is within Snowden’s hypothetical flight range.131
But neither Olafur Sigurvinsson nor WikiLeaks began scrambling to get Snowden to long-term safety. No official announcement was immediately released or plans put in place to relocate the whistleblower. Snowden remained hidden from public sight. He was where he wanted to be and couldn’t have planned it better. It had been sheer luck Morales and Maduro had voiced support for Snowden while they were in Moscow. He now had a legitimate reason to stay in Russia.
MacAskill had been working alongside Greenwald in his home in Rio de Janeiro when the Dropmire report premiered.132 The synchronicity of the Der Spiegel EU article thematically matching MacAskill’s editorial was the obvious product of Poitras and The Guardian team being in steady communication. But Greenwald had not left Hong Kong merely to seek refuge. Like Poitras, he was delivering classified data to the country which it applied: Brazil. After waiting for the headlines to clear, Greenwald led another succession of classified exposés.
Arriving on the coattails of Latin America’s discontent with the U.S., on the Saturday afternoon that Morales told the world he would accept Snowden, Greenwald published “U.S. spied on millions of e-mails and calls of Brazilians”133 and “U.S. expands the surveillance apparatus continuously”134 in O Globo, a Portuguese-language newspaper based out of Rio de Janeiro. Greenwald speaks fluent Portuguese.135
Referencing confidential U.S. intelligence documents, in his first article Greenwald announces that by January 2013 the NSA had monitored 2.3 billion Brazilian calls. The number was just below those that American intelligence had domestically surveilled. The Brazilian surveillance is reported to be “constant and [of] large scale.” The NSA accomplishes this using an internal labor force of 35,200 employees and “strategic partnerships” with more than 80 of the “largest global corporations.” However, the relationship between America’s clandestine agency and foreign communication firms is not as benign or mutual as the term “partnerships” implies.
When U.S. intelligence found international data lacking, the NSA began using its domestic “partnerships” to gain greater access to foreign information. American intelligence exploits the U.S.-foreign business alliances by “bridging” them: “The partners operate in the U.S., but do not have access to info
rmation passing [through] networks of a nation, and for corporate relationships, provide exclusive access to the other [telecommunications companies and service providers’ internet].”
The agency collects the data using a program called Fairview and includes a “corporate portfolio” filled with foreign assignments’ code names: “Darkthunder,” “Steelflauta,” “Monkeyrocket,” “Shiftingshadow,” “Orangecrush,” “Yachtshop,” “Orangeblossom,” “Silverzephyr,” “Bluezephyr,” “Cobaltfalcon,” among others. It is unclear whether the foreign communication providers are complicit in, or even aware of, the data release.
Having regained his journalistic stride, Greenwald’s disclosure of Fairview provides a better understanding of how the NSA is able to obtain its monumental amount of foreign data. He also answers one of the lingering questions from the PRISM debate. It was now understood that the previously revealed Chinese and German intercepts were not the sole product of hacking but of the U.S. government forcing its domestic providers to allow American intelligence to “bridge over” into foreign communication systems. This undoubtedly breaches the U.S. communication providers’ confidentiality agreements with its foreign partners and also subtly implies that other nations may also be exploiting their domestic telecom and Internet firms’ U.S. relations, especially interactions involving the other Four Eyes and “friendly governments.”
The Edward Snowden Affair Page 16
