Global Trends by Martin Khor
Monday 26 May 2014
The United States has accused some Chinese of hacking into American companies’ computers, but the US itself has been engaging in massive spying of foreign companies and trade officials.
We live in a world where “spying” by electronic means is now pervasive and practically no one or institution that uses telephones, smart phones, emails and the internet is protected from intelligence gathering.
This much we know, from the media revelations emerging from files leaked by Edward Snowden, a former contractor with the U.S. National Security Agency.
They showed that the US has been tapping the telephones and emails of Americans and others around the world in a sweeping and systematic way.
It was revealed that even the top political leaders of Germany, Indonesia and Brazil had their mobile phones tapped, leading their countries to protest against such a bold intrusion of privacy and national security.
Last week, the intelligence issue was highlighted again when the United States Justice Department indicted five individuals who are members of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.
They were accused of hacking into the computers of American companies in the nuclear power, steel, aluminium and solar power industries to obtain trade secrets for the benefit of Chinese state owned enterprises.
A Chinese foreign ministry spokesman denounced the allegations as baseless and said China “never engages in the activity of stealing commercial secrets through the internet”, and accused the US of hypocrisy.
It is common knowledge that intelligence agencies use all kinds of devices to gather information and spy on foreigners as well as their own citizens.
The US has the most sophisticated system with the broadest coverage, as the Snowden files revealed.
By charging China of spying on specific American companies for the commercial benefit of Chinese enterprises, the US was trying to draw a very fine line.
It would have been clearly double standards to accuse other countries of spying on government personalities or agencies or on civilians, as the US itself has been shown to be more systematically doing this than any other country.
In announcing the indictment on the five Chinese, the US Attorney General said the hacking was conducted to advantage Chinese enterprises, a tactic that the US denounces. “We do not collect intelligence to provide a competitive advantage to U.S. companies, or U.S. commercial sectors.”
But in fact the US does spy on companies and trade policy makers and negotiators of other countries, presumably in order to obtain a commercial advantage.
Two articles by David Sanger in the New York Times last week commented on the “fine line” the US attempts to draw between spying for the benefit of specific companies, and for overall commercial advantage.
He gave examples of revelations of US agencies targeting foreign companies. These include Huawei, a major Chinese internet and communications company. According to his article, the Snowden documents showed that one purpose of this spying was to “get inside Huawei’s systems and use them to spy on countries that buy the company’s equipment.
“Huawei officials said they failed to understand how that differed meaningfully from what the United States has accused the Chinese of doing.
The US agency also hacked into the computers of Petrobas, Brazil’s national oil company, which has data on Brazil’s offshore oil reserves and perhaps its plans for allocating licenses for exploration to foreign companies. State owned oil companies in Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Africa are also intelligence targets.
The NSA also went into the computers of China Telecom, one of the largest providers of mobile phone and Internet services in Chinese cities, and Pacnet, the Hong Kong-based operator of undersea fiber optic cables.
“Once inside those companies’ proprietary technology, the N.S.A. would have access to millions of daily conversations and emails that never touch American shores,” said Sanger.
The NSA spied on Joaquín Almunia, the antitrust commissioner of the European Commission, who had brought charges against several US companies.
In each of these cases, American officials insist the US was never acting on behalf of specific American companies, but the government does not deny it routinely spies to advance American economic advantage as part of national security, said the Sanger article.
This includes spying on European or Asian trade negotiators, using the results to help American trade officials and thus the American industries and workers they are trying to bolster.
According to Sanger, the United States spies regularly for economic advantage when the goal is to support trade talks. When the US was in was negotiating in the 1990s to reach an accord with Japan, it bugged the Japanese negotiator’s limousine and the main beneficiaries would have been US auto companies and parts suppliers.
The US is also “widely believed to be using intelligence in support of trade negotiations underway with European and Asian trading partners. But in the view of a succession of
Democratic and Republican administrations, that is fair game.”
An earlier New York Times article, citing Snowden documents, also revealed that the US and Australian agencies gathered intelligence on Indonesia and a law firm acting for it during US-Indonesia trade negotiations.
This line the US is attempting to draw between what is illegitimate (spying to benefit particular companies) and legitimate (spying to broadly benefit companies and the economy) is not appreciated nor accepted by other countries.
Responding to the allegations against it last week, China accused the US of hypocrisy. “For a long time, American authorities have conducted large-scale, organized cyber-theft and cyber-espionage activities against foreign dignitaries, companies and individuals,” said a foreign ministry spokesman. “This is already common knowledge.”
The Global Times, a state-owned Chinese paper, said the United States’ accusation against Chinese army officers as ridiculous and shameless, given that the NSA had engaged in widespread cyber-spying through its Prism programme.
A report in Xinhua News Agency alleged that China itself was a victim of massive cyber attacks emanating from the U.S.
It cited data from China’s official internet coordination agency showing that US-based computers had hacked into some 1.18 million mainframe computers in China in March to May, and 135 U.S. mainframe computers had targeted Chinese websites, causing about 14,000 cases of online fraud, including personal identity theft and stealing of trade secrets.
We can expect more accusations and counter-accusations as the cyber-battles among countries continue. One fallout of last week’s episode is China has called off talks between the two countries in their Internet Security Working Group.