Susan Rice - Snowden is no big deal

"I don't think the diplomatic consequences, at least as they are foreseeable now, are that significant,"

Others have previously said its the most damaging leak ever in US history.

I've been running some mental scenarios about the Rice remark, and I think I agree with her. Let me explain...

Suppose you were someone who had a vast quantity of choice data, data that extended beyond what we even suspect per the Snowden "leak"?

Suppose you wanted to use that data as a bargaining chip to get cooperation from other nations all over the world? Pretty much everyone has various and sundry problems with local malcontents, criminal organizations, and so on, right? Triads, drug smugglers, Red Brigades, skin heads, and of course terrorists.

Cutting a secret deal with those governments pre-Snowden might be a dicier proposition, since the other government might be kinda leaky themselves. With Snowden out in the open, you don't have to really worry about capability leaks per se from dozens of deals. That you can do "stuff" is already out in the open, although the actual extent of "stuff" is still unknown.

In a post-Snowden era, you don't have to seek out those partners; now they're seeking us out. They're the ones coming hat in hand begging to get in on the deal...which puts us in a stronger position.

Of course they'll mouth public denunciations and what not for appearance sake, but behind the scenes, the cables are probably being run and routers installed right now.

So, was Snowden a "leaker", or a prospectus? Rice's remark is making me believe he was a prospectus.

posted by Purp at 05:23 PM

| Access Comments