"Frenchelon": France's
Alleged Global Surveillance Network
And its Implications on
International Intelligence Cooperation
By Kenneth Neil Cukier
Presented at Computers, Freedom +
Privacy 99 conference
Washington, DC - 6 April 1999
"In Europe, we talk about the four freedoms of the Union -- freedom for the flow of
information, of the mobility of people, freedom of goods and freedom of services --
but there is a fifth freedom: Intelligence. Nations want to retain the freedom to spy."
--
A European Commission official, October 1998.
*
*
*
While
ECHELON, the United States- and United Kingdom-led global surveillance program
gains widespread notoriety, there is evidence that European countries are also
carrying out international surveillance activities.
France
reportedly has developed its own "Frenchelon" -- a worldwide network
of spy satellites and listening stations that systematically eavesdrop on
communications in the United States and elsewhere. Monitoring stations are said
to exist in French Guiana, in the city of Domme in the Dordogne region of
southwestern France, in New Caledonia, and in the United Arab Emirates.
The
information gleaned is reportedly used for both political and commercial ends.
Additionally, some speculate that the French project may mark the first step in
a pan-European effort to counterbalance the U.S.'s global spying capabilities.
Germany is said to partially fund France's initiative in return for access to
the information it collects.
The French
project is said to be run under the Direction Genˇralˇ de la Sˇcuritˇ
Extˇrieure, an organization similar to the U.S.'s Central Intelligence Agency,
and that commercial information is sent directly to the presidents of large
French companies as well as government officials.
II. French Global Surveillance
The
existence of French global surveillance, first published in June 1998 by Jean
Guisnel of the French newsweekly Le Point, has not been officially confirmed or
denied by the French government. The lack of a denial has led observers to
speculate that such a program may exist.
Unlike the
ECHELON project -- which has been publicly documented by the U.K.-based human
rights organization Omega Foundation in a report for the European Parliament's
Scientific and Technological Options Assessment (STOA) unit in January 1998 --
there is no official evidence that France or any other European nation
practices systematic surveillance of international civilian communications.
However, a
French official familiar with France's system stated privately that such a
program indeed exists, but at a "vastly smaller scale" than ECHELON.
The person claimed that ECHELON intercepts around 3 million messages per
minute, while the French system intercepts roughly 2 million messages per month.
France has
acknowledged that it does have international surveillance capabilities.
Fran¨ois Roussely, the chief of staff at the French Ministry of Defense, was
quoted in Le Point (20 June 1998), stating that the system is used for
monitoring international crises that concern the French military, combating
terrorism, and preventing the spread of non-conventional weapons. The issue of
possible French intelligence ties with other European nations was not
mentioned.
Interception
of communications by the DGSE does not fall under the legal constraints imposed
by French wiretapping law which requires that tapped individuals are criminal
suspects, according to France's Commission Nationale de Contr™le des
Interceptions de Sˇcuritˇ, in its annual report of 1991-2. The goal of
surveillance may be broader; as the CNCIS notes: "[C]ertain telephone
wiretaps, in particular those practiced by the Direction Genˇralˇ de la
Sˇcuritˇ Extˇrieure, are not directly linked to the objective of preventing
penal crimes" (page 105).
According
to the Le Point report, France targets the Intelsat and Inmarsat civilian
communications satellites. One of the satellites used in the French
surveillance project is the country's Hˇlios 1-A, in a program called Euracom.
However, the satellite is said to have poor technical capacity for interception
and re-transmission. As a result, in August 1995 the French reportedly began an
experimental initiative called "Cerise" to intercept satellite
communications. However, a larger follow-on project named Zenon had to be
abandoned on budgetary grounds.
The French
monitoring stations are each manned by around six officials, Le Point reports.
Stations in New Caledonia, and the United Arab Emirates are used to capture
satellite transmissions in space, as well as cover Asia and the Middle East.
Listening posts in the Caribbean are used to intercept conversations in the
United States. The monitoring station in French Guiana is likely used for
launching the satellites, since the French space company Ariane has a launch
base there.
Although
the alleged existence of the French surveillance program has been reported,
there is no information concerning the regularity of possible interceptions,
specific targets, or the volume of traffic other than in terms of the number of
"messages."
III. French Ties with Germany
France's
DGSE has reportedly entered into an agreement with Germany's foreign
intelligence agency Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) to share the information
obtained in return for partial funding of the project.
The
financial constraints may have been the reason France has sought to broaden the
project with other European allies, noted Joseph Fitchett of The International
Herald Tribune in June 1998: "[It] would help explain why the Clinton
administration has been unsuccessful, despite considerable efforts over the
last three years, in inducing Bonn to shun French military satellites and
accept U.S. help to build Germany's capabilities."
Formal
cooperation between French and German intelligence agencies for global
surveillance by satellite apparently exists, according to one published
account, in the Journal Officiel de la Rˇpublique Fran¨aise, the government's
daily legislative and regulatory record. In a question to the prime minister's
office on 18 July 1996 concerning intelligence operations, Nicolas About, a
French senator, said: "[W]e congratulate the resources it [the government]
has committed under the law covering military operations for the recruitment in
this service [of intelligence], and their operational ability with the
Franco-German program of satellite observation, the Horus and Hˇlios 2."
(Journal Officiel, 31 October 1996).
These
satellites are used for imagery reconnaissance, and the photographs are shared
with intelligence agencies in Germany, Spain and Italy, according to Mr.
Guisnel, in his book "Les pires amis du monde." It is not clear
whether the satellites can also be used for communications interception.
IV. Europeans Accused of Surveillance
Many
sources in Europe and the United States in government and industry say
"friendly spying" for both political and economic ends is widespread
among Western allies. The European Parliament's STOA report details U.S.
surveillance operations, yet the U.S. has also publicly charged other nations
with global intelligence gathering, including activities aimed at U.S. citizens
and companies.
In its
"Annual Report to Congress on Foreign Economic Collection and Industrial
Espionage" in July 1995, the U.S. National Counterintelligence Center
(NACIC) identified "foreign governments conducting ... industrial
espionage," as a real and major concern, yet the specific countries were
only named in the classified version of the report.
"A
number of foreign countries pose various levels and types of threats to US
economic and technological information. Some [countries] are either longtime
allies of the United States or have traditionally been neutral. These countries
target US economic and technological information despite their friendly
relations with the United States," the report states (section IV.a).
One key
method of intelligence gathering is "telecommunications targeting and
intercept, and private-sector encryption weaknesses. These activities account
for the largest portion of economic and industrial information lost by US
corporations," says the NACIC.
The report
warns that "government-owned telephone companies" are a traditional
source of espionage, targeting "bulk computer data transmission and
electronic mail" as well as fax traffic. "Because they are so easily
accessed and intercepted, corporate telecommunications -- particularly
international telecommunications -- provide a highly vulnerable and lucrative
source" of information.
According
to the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, a number of countries practice
economic espionage against U.S. firms, including France, Germany, Israel,
China, Russia and South Korea. The revelation, uncharacteristic for the bureau,
was made by Edwin Fraumann, a New York-based FBI agent in an academic article
in Public Administration Review, published by the American Society for Public
Administration in January 1998.
Mr.
Fraumann stated that French intelligence agents wiretap U.S. businessmen flying
on the state carrier Air France, as well as intercept telephone conversations
and fax communications in France. The article also accused Germany of operating
a surveillance post outside of Frankfurt that monitors U.S. phone conversations
and attempts to penetrate American computer systems.
The head of
Germany's intelligence agency, Bernd Schmidbauer, denied the FBI's accusations
in an article in The Frankfurter Allgemeine published 14 February 1998. Yet he
stated that foreign espionage against German firms was a serious and costly
problem.
V. Europe Seeks to Counterbalance U.S. Surveillance
France, as
well as the European Parliament, has criticized U.S. global surveillance
operations, and shown deep reluctance to cooperate in cross-boarder
intelligence operations with the United States fearing that it may entail a
loss of privacy for citizens and espionage against European companies.
Numerous
French government officials have said that the country decided to liberalized
its cryptography policy in January 1999 and encourage the use of encryption
partly due to the existence of U.S. interception capabilities.
French
Foreign Minister Hubert Vˇdrine said in November 1998 that counterbalancing the
threat posed by ECHELON is a "preoccupation" for the French
government, according to the French daily newspaper Le Monde.
France and the
U.S. have long mistrusted each other on intelligence matters, dating from the
Cold War period where France forged a "Third Way" policy of
rapprochement with the USSR. In the early 1990s, France rejected an initiative
by the FBI to develop an international database on terrorists, since the
program was U.S.-dominated in its approach, according to a French official.
There have
been recent incidents of "friendly spying" that has led to tensions
between Europe and the U.S. In December 1995 at least five U.S. Embassy
personnel were evicted from France under accusations of being agents of the
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. The uncharacteristically public incident,
during the French presidential election campaign, led a U.S. intelligence
official to state (to The Washington Post) that it damaged U.S.-French
intelligence cooperation. Separately, a U.S. citizen was evicted from Germany
in March 1997 for attempting to bribe an official at Germany's Ministry of
Economics.
There are
also internal tensions in Europe to alleged European-U.S. surveillance
cooperation. Some officials at the European Parliament and the European
Commission say they are reluctant to accept an accord among European police
agencies for cooperation in interception activities, which one official said
was developed with input from the FBI.
Some
European officials, however, state the FBI was not involved in the drafting of
the plan, the European Council of Minister's "Resolution on the Legal
Interception of Telecommunications in the Framework of New Technologies"
(ENFOPOL 98 revision 2). However, the U.K.-based civil liberties organization
Statewatch has documented with what purports to be a confidential 1993 Council
working paper that the FBI participated in an "expert group" concerning
the technical requirements for interception.
It is
uncertain whether ENFOPOL 98 is intended only for law enforcement purposes, as
some European officials claim, or if the requirements for access to
communications could also be used by intelligence agencies, as privacy
advocates fear. Yet Council resolutions have no legal standing, and many of
these concerns will be aired publicly, for the first time, when the European
Parliament issues a formal "opinion" on ENFOPOL 98 rev 2, expected in
April 1999.
Meanwhile,
there have been calls in Europe for European intelligence cooperation,
specifically in a 1996 working document of the West European Union, Europe's
military alliance, entitled "A European Policy on Intelligence." Such
a program might encompass information- gathering outside of traditional
national security concerns. The author, Jacques Baumel, writes:
"Intelligence was for a longtime an essentially military matter, depending
on humans [supplying the] information. Today, it is a means to aid decisions which
naturally include military ones, but now to a large degree also involve new
threats and confrontations that are economic, political or religious."
VI. Trends in European and U.S. Surveillance
To focus
attention on possible European and U.S. surveillance cooperation is to miss a
vital nuance and significant undercurrent: European governments themselves are
wary of U.S. surveillance capabilities. This will make any trans-Atlantic
intelligence cooperation more difficult to forge.
The
political and economic unity witnessed in 1999 with the creation of a single
currency, the euro, may be extended to other areas, such as a joint European
approach to surveillance technologies, which France may seek to spearhead.
As a
result, rather than the creation of a single global surveillance system by
Europe and the U.S., Europe may prefer to establish its own independent project
to "compete" with the U.S. Although such an outcome will not make
privacy advocates more comfortable that civil liberties will be protected -- by
foregoing a single surveillance system for two separate ones -- this
possibility nevertheless reflects more accurately the divergent interests
influencing policies.
It is
apparent that France has some form of global surveillance technology, and that
it may serve as the start of a wider pan-European initiative for intelligence
gathering. This will likely exist outside traditional national laws that
protect privacy.
Furthermore,
a large motivation for Europe's drive to develop surveillance technology is to
counterbalance the U.S.'s alleged capabilities. Europe is also preparing to
strengthen its information security, such as with encryption technology, to
protect against possible U.S. interception of communications.
Additionally,
some factions in European institutions seek to resist accords between European
and U.S. police agencies, fearing that such cooperation may lead to civil
liberty abuses, specifically by the U.S.
Broadly,
the effect of this sentiment, and activity, is that Europe may be reluctant to
cooperate with the U.S. in intelligence matters because it feels vulnerable to
U.S. surveillance.
Ironically,
it comes alongside a trend towards inter-governmental cooperation on law
enforcement matters, such as efforts by the Group of Eight's "Lyon Group"
to combat high-tech crime, or the Wassenaar Agreement to control the export of
encryption technology.
While these
international discussions continue, the surveillance activities possibly aimed
against citizens and companies of allied nations for purposes outside of
traditional national security will likely continue as well.
__________________________
References:
Associated
Press; "[Germany's spy chief denies economic spying on U.S.]"
(Article title varies by publication). 15 February 1998, Dateline: Frankfurt.
Jacques
Baumel, "Une politique europˇen de renseignement." Assemmbly of the
West European Union; document 1517; Paris; 13 May 1996; p. 11. (As quoted in
Guisnel "pires amis" op cite.)
Commission
nationale de contr™le des interceptions de sˇcuritˇ, "Premi¸re rapport
d'activitˇ, 1991-2." La documentation Fran¨aise; 1993. Paris.
Commission
nationale de contr™le des interceptions de sˇcuritˇ, "Cinqi¸me rapport
d'activitˇ, 1996." La documentation Fran¨aise; Spring 1997. Paris.
Commission
nationale de contr™le des interceptions de sˇcuritˇ, "Sixi¸me rapport
d'activitˇ, 1997." La documentation Fran¨aise; May 1998. Paris.
Kenneth
Neil Cukier, "Information War." Communications Week International; 2
November 1998. London.
Kenneth
Neil Cukier, "France heralds fall of its crypto 'Maginot Line'."
Communications Week International; 1 February 1999. London.
Joseph
Fitchett, "Eavesdropping By the French Is Worldwide, Magazine Says."
The International Herald Tribune; 9 June 1998. Paris.
Jean
Guisnel, "Espionnage: Les Fran¨ais aussi ˇcoutent leurs alliˇs." Le
Point; 6 June 1998. Paris.
Jean
Guisnel, "Les pires amis du monde." Editions Stock; February 1999.
Paris.
Erich
Inciyan, "L'espionnage ˇlectronique, prioritˇ de la sˇcuritˇ
informatique." Le Monde, 21 Janaury 1999; Paris.
Journal
Officiel de la Rˇpublique Fran¨aise. (Citiations used in this paper are based
on re-published versions in the annual reports of the Commission nationale de
contr™le des interceptions de sˇcuritˇ, referenced above.)
Jack Nelson,
"FBI Warns Companies To Beware of Espionage." The International
Herald Tribune (originally published in The Los Angeles Times). 13 January
1998; Paris.
Statewatch report, "European Union and FBI Launch Global Surveillance System." Statewatch; London, 24 February 1997.
U.S.
National Counterintelligence Center, "Annual Report to Congress on Foreign
Economic Collection and Industrial Espionage" (Declassified version). July
1995; Washington DC.
Acknowledgments:
The author
thanks numerous sources worldwide from governmental and private sectors, who
have discussed these themes usually on a non-attributable basis due to the
sensitivity of the topic. The author underlines that nearly all of the
information contained in this paper comes from material freely available in the
public realm, most notably from Mr. Guisnel's reportage.
Copyright notice: This paper may
be freely copied and distributed in portions or in whole,
provided that the title and author is identified.
# # #