Germany ends information sharing pact with Britain, United States

[EC]

Via CNN: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/03/world/europe/germany-uk-privacy/index.html

(CNN) -- Germany has canceled a decades-old agreement on information-sharing with Britain and the United States, in the wake of controversy sparked by American leaker Edward Snowden's disclosures about mass surveillance programs.

Germany's Foreign Ministry announced the move Friday, saying it was effective immediately.

Foreign minister Guido Westerwelle said cancellation of the pact -- which dates back to the late 1960s -- "was a necessary and a correct consequence resulting from the latest debates in regards to protect privacy."

The move is likely largely symbolic but reflects the public pressure Germany's leaders have been under following the revelations by Snowden, a former U.S. National Security Agency contractor.

The issue dominated a conversation last month between President Barack Obama and German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Other European nations, including France, have also voiced concern.

The White House last month promised joint EU-American discussions on the collection and oversight of intelligence, and questions of privacy and data protection.

The row blew up after German news magazine Der Spiegel reported that classified leaks by Snowden detailed NSA bugging of European Union offices in Washington and New York, as well as an "electronic eavesdropping operation" that tapped into an EU building in Brussels.

UK Foreign Secretary William Hague has said that Britain's GCHQ intelligence agency operates withing a strong legal framework.

A UK parliamentary committee found last month that media claims GCHQ had made use of a U.S. mass surveillance program known as PRISM to illegally spy on UK citizens were "unfounded."

Not Excerpted.

Oh, crap.

[Oceander]

It'll be interesting to see which dominoes continue to topple in the coming months.

[EC]

What worries me - badly - is the information sharing pact was actually part of the agreement to end the war. Combine that with the fact the Japanese have also broken their surrender terms in the past 6 months and it raises ugly memories of the Axis powers.

[flowers]

What worries me - badly - is the information sharing pact was actually part of the agreement to end the war. Combine that with the fact the Japanese have also broken their surrender terms in the past 6 months and it raises ugly memories of the Axis powers.

What have the Japanese done in the past 6 months to break the surrender terms?

[EC]

What have the Japanese done in the past 6 months to break the surrender terms?

Shifted their military from a defensive capability only to an offensive one - something that is prohibited by the terms of surrender.

Edit: sorry for the answer delay. Some days are busier than others. 

[flowers]

Shifted their military from a defensive capability only to an offensive one - something that is prohibited by the terms of surrender.

Edit: sorry for the answer delay. Some days are busier than others. 

Thanks. I remember they were not supposed to do that BUT with China being able to flex its muscles now  is this a bad thing?

 

[EC]

Thanks. I remember they were not supposed to do that BUT with China being able to flex its muscles now  is this a bad thing?

 

It both is and is not. A strong ally in the region is of course desirable, and one willing to be proactive in dealing with aggression is moreso. However - it breaks the terms of the surrender treaty. That is something to also consider.

[flowers]

It both is and is not. A strong ally in the region is of course desirable, and one willing to be proactive in dealing with aggression is moreso. However - it breaks the terms of the surrender treaty. That is something to also consider.

I understand that is something to consider....YET with the way everything is upside down these days  (obama destroying USA and helping all of our enemy) I cannot blame them or find fault with it. They need to protect themselves.

 

[Cincinnatus]

They need to protect themselves.

Plus it is past time that the Japanese provide for their own defense instead of the American taxpayer. We have carried that burden since WWII relieving them of the need for military spending thus aiding their economy to make inroads into ours.

And, yes, EC, I know why we did it and it might have made sense in 1945, but not now in 2013.

[EC]

They need to protect themselves.

Plus it is past time that the Japanese provide for their own defense instead of the American taxpayer. We have carried that burden since WWII relieving them of the need for military spending thus aiding their economy to make inroads into ours.

And, yes, EC, I know why we did it and it might have made sense in 1945, but not now in 2013.

Totally agree. It is beyond time for them to take up the task of defending themselves. But - as with the Germans in the original article - a unilateral decision to break a formal treaty is not the way to go.

[truth_seeker]

I doubt our allies are happy that these types of security breaches take place.

If we are coordinated with them, sharing data, theirs is also in jeopardy, because it points to their sources and methods.

We become less reliable as a partner, when we are so sloppy.

They still need intelligence against Islamic threats, even if traitorous whistleblowers and low information naive isolationists in America laugh about it.