Is Mass Surveillance Ever a Good Thing - Research Paper Example

Is Mass Surveillance Ever a Good Thing? Introduction Mass surveillance has been on the increase over the years. Countries have adapted the system as part of their security procedures. There is the issue of national security verses the bill of rights in that other may argue on the impact mass surveillance may have on their right to privacy. The country would prefer national security and utilize it to advance in the quest of keeping vigil to all citizens within their territorial jurisdiction. The government’s policy on mass surveillance is aimed at ensuring a secure environment for all citizens. Government and other security organs invest heavily in surveillance equipment with a clear conscience of security. The benefit of mass surveillance exceeds its negative. The research will focus on mass surveillance and outline its impact on both the government and the citizens. History of Mass Surveillance According to Reuters (2013), mass surveillance can be traced back to the First World War were vital information was sourced from both the enemy territory and within a given country. This was to assist the country achieve a given objective in the war. The cold war period increase and the importance of mass surveillance with its aim being monitoring activities that could expose countries secrete policy. Traditionally mass surveillance was used as a tool to counter any move by an enemy country. Traditional ideologies used the concept to attain military and political supremacy. Over the years, technologies have evolved and gadgets that are more sophisticated introduced to aid a given country in mass surveillance. Surveillance has become a modality in modern day government (Ericson & Haggerty, 2006, 4). The ideology is traced back to the world war eras and the aim is to ensure a country protects its own interests. Sovereignty of a nation could be jeopardized if a country fails to gather enough information needed to protect the interest of a given nation. National Security The United States of America has invested heavy in mass surveillance. The driving point has been on the 2001 attack’s impact. The question has been on how to avert future calamities similar to it. New models have aided the country in their quest to counter terrorism. Bush (2006) attributes the effect of mass surveillance to national security. Different security organs relay on public information to ensure a successful plan that would protect national interests and at the same time secure a country from external attacks (Fussey, 121). Strategic planning involves designing models that would prevent an attack and at the same time source information that could lead to the arrest of suspects. A secure country implies a country that upholds the rule of law and protects its citizens from eternal attacks. Maintaining rule of law would only be possible if the country monitors activities within a country (Bush, p. 4). Domestic Terrorism National security is paramount to any public agenda driven by a government. The governments invest heavily in ensuring that all its citizens enjoy the fruits of a sovereign nation. Terrorism is major concern for any government thus countries from alliance to combat international terrorism. International terrorism being contained, government them are face with a wider concept of domestic terrorism. This then becomes the duty of a given state to ensure this type of terrorism is dealt with. The government then needs to retrieve information from the public pertaining potential terrorist (Laqueur, 2000). The government uses personal contacts, telephone conversations, emails and video surveillance to identify these terrorist (Ericson & Haggerty, 42) Mass surveillance will then go a long way in ensuring those terrorists are apprehended. This may also provide links to the where about of those radicalizing locals and thus aid in the joint efforts of international terrorism. Reducing terrorist threats will mean improved environments to conduct business and other economic activities. Border Trafficking The Mexican- USA border has been a point of conflict between the two countries. There has been a number of illegal immigrants and drug traffickers crossing over to the United States while gun smugglers crossing over to USA. The major concern has been on how to engage this illegal trade and movement gun be contained. Huge amount of resources have been invested in deploying cross border officers who sometime fail to apprehend those parties involved (Associated Press, 2013) It could be of great benefits if the two countries could invest in mass surveillance and apprehend the suspects before they cross over. The solution to the mass movement between the two countries lies on mass surveillance. Bush (2006) indicates how smuggling of weapons and drugs could endanger national security and effort to control these trades could be similar to those used to engage domestic terrorism. This should be done by both ends of the border thus cutting down the supply chain of these drugs. The European Union Strategy Borger (2013) indicates how major powerhouse in Europe has engaged in a joint initiative to enhance mass surveillance. The aim of these joint efforts is to ensure proper equipment is used in their quest to provide security and enhance international relationship between the region and the outside would. The effort would enhance communication between members state and provide alerts to countries with attack possibilities. The union managed to retrieve vital information on how the US tapped key leader’s information. This then called for immediate action within from the USA and averted a conflict that could occur if a single state was involved. The joint efforts by the European Union indicated the positive contribution that mass surveillance has had in matters administration and foreign policies. The union has also engaged other countries in ensuring their spaces are safe. Inter-Border Conflicts The current Ukraine conflict has been contained by mass surveillance. The European Union and other international organizations have used this concept to monitor the situation. These countries have used the concept to avoid external interference from Russia and other boarding the country. This has enabled the Ukraine’s government to contain the separatist and limit their sources of weapon. The absence of mass surveillance could calumniate into a major human crisis. Mass surveillance has enabled international bodies to contain this crisis. The same concept has been effective in the Israeli -Palestinian border where the United Nations has been able to access the ground. Integrated Cyber Crimes Cybercrime has been a major concern within countries in that criminals have transformed their nature of crime. These criminal have targeted the online users and internet providers. This has posed a threat to the online backing portfolio enhanced by a number of backs. Cyber bully also has been part of the integrated cyber crime thus could have major impact on the nature in which individuals use the online portal to trade and communicate. The duty of national security agency is protect individuals from crimes and other heinous acts (Kehl et al, 2014). Thus, the government usually spies on communication between people and institution as an effort of ensuring a safe cyber space that could be enjoyed by individuals regardless of their age or sex. Mass surveillance in this case may include the government eavesdropping on a person’s conversations or retrieving emails especially cross border emails and filter, those to eliminate any form of crime the message could have to the recipient. The model also helps in apprehending those termed to be promoting the integrated cybercrime. Business Application of Mass Surveillance Rival firms may use this concept to study the market trends. This may enhance the nature in which the firms approach the market. Firms may use mass surveillance equipment under regulated circumstances thus one may be required to seek permission from the court. Court orders are aimed at reducing the chances of parties involved misusing this privilege to intimidate their rivals. In a bigger spectrum countries usually use this concept to gauge, the international market and produce goods that are suitable for the market demand. In some cases, mass surveillance may lead to conflicts but countries only use them for economic purposes thus averting the chances of political conflict. Mass surveillance hence is helpful to the economy as it prevents the chances of flooding goods to a given market. High supply could mean reduced prices to increase the demand. Mass surveillance thus could be used as a tool in market research and strategic planning. Counter Statement Mass surveillance may have benefits to its end users but may be unlawful when indeed it infringes the set laws and regulations within a given country. There is the aspect of secrecy, which is a fundamental fright provided by the united nation and laws within each country. The right to privacy protects an individual from interfere with people private matters without their authorization (Granick & Sprigman, 2013). Nevertheless, in the case of mass surveillance, this right is denied as government agencies collect information from the internet and personal conversation based on their assumption of national security and enhancing public relations (Chasnoff, 2014).These negative assumptions may be short-term. Section of the public may be opposed to it but eventually would appreciate once it proves effective to their national security. The bill of right hence may only be enjoyed once a country is secured and mass surveillance may aid a country to overcome potential calamities. Recommendations While mass surveillance it is essential for a given government to regulate, the use of the concept in that people should be protected against mass surveillance from privet institutions. The concept should be restricted to national security thus limiting other parties from using the method in attaining personal interests. Mass surveillance should focus in improving the cyberspace while at the same time limit negative interactions within people. The other recommendation would be for more governments the continent and the world should embrace the concept and use it to safeguard their sovereignty. Governments should carryout civic education to alert the public on the importance of mass surveillance and the benefits it could have to their lives. This will reduce the chance of conflict arising due to rights being infringed. The collaboration between the government and the public will enhance the effectiveness of mass surveillance with its impact benefiting both the public and government strategies. Conclusion It is evident on how mass surveillance has been of aid to both governments and individual institutions. The sovereignty of a given country is always paramount to any other activities. The government should embrace sovereignty by first establishing means in which national security can be protected. A secure environment is essential to any democratic space in the world. Mass surveillance may infringe on privileges provided to a country by their constitution but the government on the based on interest of its citizen may jeopardize this by retrieving information from the public without their authorization. As much as technology is changing, national security should be in line with these technologies. Mass surveillance using sophisticated gadget are essential while realizing this philosophy. There are limitations for using mass surveillance but these are exceeded by benefits that befall those two use mass surveillance as part of their strategic plan in security and international relation. Works Cited Associated Press. U.S. tests surveillance balloons on Mexico border. The Herald. 19 Dec. 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2014. Borger, Julian. GCHQ and European spy agencies worked together on mass surveillance. The Guardian. 1 Nov. 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2014. Chasnoff, John. Caught In the Web of Mass Surveillance. 1 Oct. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014. Erickson, Richard & Haggerty Kevin. The national politics of surveillance and visibility. Toronto: university of Toronto, 2006. Print Fussey, Pete. Beyond Liberty, Beyond Security: The Politics of Public Surveillance. British politics, 3 (2008): 120-125. Print. Granick, Jennifer & Sprigman Christopher. The Criminal N.S.A. The New York Times.27 June 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2014 Kehl, Danielle, Bankston Kevin, Greene, Robyn & Morgus, Robert. Surveillance Costs: the NSA’s Impact on the economy, internet freedom and Cyber security. 10 Oct.2014 Web 4 Dec. 2014 Kleinwächter ,Wolfgang. Internet and security. New York; Internet & Gesellschaft Collaboratory, 2013. Print. Laqueur, Walter.The New Terrorism: Fanaticism and the Arms of Mass Destruction. New York: Oxford Univerity Press,2000 . print Reuters, Thomson. History of mass surveillance in the United States. Global Post. 26 June 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2014. Read More