3 ms·

This is shockingly old news. I can't find the LA Times article on this from 1999, but here's a story from the Independent, circa 2000: "Documents obtained by

by alrs 12y ago

This is shockingly old news. I can't find the LA Times article on this from 1999, but here's a story from the Independent, circa 2000: "Documents obtained by the Independent on Sunday reveal how the CIA and National Security Agency (NSA) - propelled by the newly-elected Clinton administration's policy of 'aggressive advocacy' to support American firms compete for overseas contracts - have immersed themselves in the new hot trade war. Targets have included UK and European firms. At stake are contracts worth billions of dollars." https://web.archive.org/web/20110901092355/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-new-cold-war-how-america-spies-on-us-for-its-oldest-friend--the-dollar-707550.html https://web.archive.org/web/20110901092355/http://www.indepe... EDIT: found it. Covered in the US press in February 2000: http://articles.latimes.com/2000/feb/24/news/mn-2072 http://articles.latimes.com/2000/feb/24/news/mn-2072 EDIT AGAIN: And while I'm in the mood for digging, here's a story from 1995. French caught CIA engaging in economic espionage: "In the French operation, the CIA was, in effect, spying for Hollywood: At least part of the mission was reportedly designed to determine the strength of the French bargaining position in television and telecommunications trade negotiations. The United States was opposed to French demands to restrict imports of U.S. television programming into Europe." http://articles.latimes.com/1995-10-11/news/mn-55816_1_cia-officials http://articles.latimes.com/1995-10-11/news/mn-55816_1_cia-o...

otakucode 12y ago
It's long been known that the CIA is actively involved in all sorts of foreign espionage and operations to forward American business interests. I mean, hell, just look at Panama. We firebombed their capital city because the president had the gall to say that he wanted to hire Panamanian companies to do construction and maintenance on the Panama Canal after we ceded ownership back to them. The US government claimed that this was, somehow, 'socialism' and launched an attack. They've done similar things all over South America for decades. The CIA is the biggest enemy of democracy outside of the US, and the NSA is the biggest enemy of democracy inside of it.
mpyne 12y ago
I think that this is somewhat due to different definitions of parsing what "economic espionage" means. As you say, it's old news that NSA and CIA have tried to figure out bargaining strength. CIA was doing that even before SIGINT became the easiest way to find that information out. And this Economist story http://www.economist.com/node/1842124 http://www.economist.com/node/1842124 from 2003 flat-out states that NSA detected Airbus bribing Saudi officials in the 90s, causing the Clinton Administration to intervene. The U.S. government has never made statements that they're not trying to negotiate trade deals and treaties that are in the interests of U.S. companies, and they find data of companies like Airbus/EADS and Petrobras useful in figuring out their (the USG's) own negotiating strategy, or in detecting our allies and partners "circumventing" trade rules to assist their own domestic industry, must like your LA Times article relates to. But that's not the same as exfiltrating such data directly from Airbus to Boeing, which is the kind of thing NSA claims they're not (and have not been) doing. It's interesting that Greenwald's story mentions a strategy document that argues for going in that direction (the China strategy in reverse?) but a strategy proposal is just that--a proposal.

by alrs 12y ago

otakucode 12y ago

It's long been known that the CIA is actively involved in all sorts of foreign espionage and operations to forward American business interests. I mean, hell, just look at Panama. We firebombed their capital city because the president had the gall to say that he wanted to hire Panamanian companies to do construction and maintenance on the Panama Canal after we ceded ownership back to them. The US government claimed that this was, somehow, 'socialism' and launched an attack. They've done similar things all over South America for decades. The CIA is the biggest enemy of democracy outside of the US, and the NSA is the biggest enemy of democracy inside of it.

mpyne 12y ago

I think that this is somewhat due to different definitions of parsing what "economic espionage" means. As you say, it's old news that NSA and CIA have tried to figure out bargaining strength. CIA was doing that even before SIGINT became the easiest way to find that information out. And this Economist story http://www.economist.com/node/1842124 http://www.economist.com/node/1842124 from 2003 flat-out states that NSA detected Airbus bribing Saudi officials in the 90s, causing the Clinton Administration to intervene. The U.S. government has never made statements that they're not trying to negotiate trade deals and treaties that are in the interests of U.S. companies, and they find data of companies like Airbus/EADS and Petrobras useful in figuring out their (the USG's) own negotiating strategy, or in detecting our allies and partners "circumventing" trade rules to assist their own domestic industry, must like your LA Times article relates to. But that's not the same as exfiltrating such data directly from Airbus to Boeing, which is the kind of thing NSA claims they're not (and have not been) doing. It's interesting that Greenwald's story mentions a strategy document that argues for going in that direction (the China strategy in reverse?) but a strategy proposal is just that--a proposal.