4 ms·
> An anonymous executive at the AIVD said that the government may have deliberately not been informed of the operation due to the potential political consequenc
by dannyw 3y ago
> An anonymous executive at the AIVD said that the government may have deliberately not been informed of the operation due to the potential political consequences
Pretty bad when intelligence services customarily operate above the law and don't even tell the government they're supposedly beholden to.
- checkyoursudo 3y agoPretty bad for the rest of us, but not bad for the people in government who want plausible deniability for actions taken by the espionage services. I would assume that every government has this, at least to some extent, don't you think?
- cm2187 3y agoYes but this "independence" regularly leads to abuses. In France the secret services are strongly suspected to be behind several major political hoaxes against their president (Markovic affair against Pompidou, Japanese bank account against Chirac). I won't even get into what the CIA is suspected of...
- bananapub 3y agoDon’t forget French security services also terrorist attacked a notional ally, even: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warri...
- cm2187 3y agoYeah but that wasn’t the DGSE going rogue, that was ordered by the gvt.
- turquoisevar 3y agoIt would be great for governments, if that’s how it worked in European countries. The Netherlands specifically had cabinets (i.e., governments) fall due to the responsible ministers not knowing what their agencies were doing, with snap elections as result. In fact, in the last decade or so this happened quite often. Accountability in The Netherlands isn’t just based on knowing something and still doing the wrong things, its often also based on “should’ve known something as the person responsible for the agency in question” and not being in the know. In terms of accountability, in both cases the person in question is considered to have fucked up. So the plausible deniability angle, is not really a benefit. Provided it comes out during that person’s tenure, although in rare instances even current office holders have been held responsible for the lack of knowledge of their prior office holders, based on the idea that the current office holder should’ve been aware such a thing happened and should’ve informed parliament post haste upon learning about it.
- wkat4242 3y agoI wonder if they really didn't know though. There's not knowing and "not knowing". Plausible deniability and all.
- pests 3y agoIt's kind of the point though.
- pjmlp 3y agoAs the first generation after Portugal's dictorship, I think it is even worse how naïve people happen to be regarding intelligence services, even in democratic countries. The whole point is to do the dirty work it isn't supposed to be happen.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- t0mas88 3y agoThere is a podcast about how this works inside AIVD (civil intelligence) and MIVD (military intelligence) unfortunately it's in Dutch, but if you speak Dutch and are interested: https://open.spotify.com/show/6wZZ2ojf2XxwgfYT649wpO https://open.spotify.com/show/6wZZ2ojf2XxwgfYT649wpO They describe the process on how things can be approved and what needs to be done for that. But this thing sounds like it was more an MIVD (military) thing and I can imagine there isn't nearly as much legal due process on that side.
- mithras 3y agoI listened to the first season in 2021 and enjoyed it. Seems there is a second season now, thanks for bringing it to my attention. Would reccommend it for Dutch language speakers.