Clear sky
14 °C
Germantown, Maryland
Clear sky

Tue Oct 23 2018
none

NATIONAL INTEREST OR NATIONAL SECURITY?

28-09-2018
by 
in 

If there was ever an over-used (and mostly misused) term in the current political lexicon it would have to be the “national interest”. We are told that it would not be in the national interest for Chinese companies to control too much of our national energy infrastructure. And a short while ago it was decided that it would not be in the national interest for Chinese tech suppliers to supply our 5G mobile communications systems.

So, what really is in the national interest? How about creating jobs and wealth? But, when do we ever hear that a major contract has been won by an Australian company because it is in the national interest?

Having national assets under foreign ownership is nothing new. Nor is it uniquely Australian for us to feel uneasy about such a loss of economic sovereignship. (Ask anyone in the UK what they think about the water supply being under French ownership!)

Certainly, if there is a security issue with any given supplier or contractor, then that is reason enough to disqualify them from taking part in any part of the nation’s infrastructure. And this is why ZTE and Huawei were disqualified from the building of Australia’s 5G cellular network – as indeed they have been similarly barred in the UK and the USA.

Likewise, Russian computer security firm Kaspersky Lab has been disbarred from any government business in the USA (albeit perhaps a little late!).

These are matters of national security – and that is not necessarily the same as the national interest.

I am reminded of the historical case of the Great Seal Bug, which allowed the USSR’s security services to eavesdrop on successive US ambassadors for some seven years until its discovery in 1952.

This cleverly designed passive listening device was hidden inside an impressive gift to the ambassador near the end of WWII. As a gift from an important ally, no doubt it was considered to be in the national interest to accept it and display it prominently in the ambassador’s office.

The implications for national security, though, were entirely another thing!

 

 

Related news & editorials

  1. 13.09.2018
    13.09.2018
    by      In
    I was intrigued to hear of a study released this week from the University of Waterloo in Canada that concluded that companies should avoid scheduling important work tasks immediately following an election.
    Psychologists from the university surveyed a sample of American voters, asking them to rate... Read More
  2. 08.08.2018
    08.08.2018
    by      In
    When Donald Trump withdrew the USA from the Paris Accord on Climate Change, he gave climate change sceptics around the world a barrage of ammunition with which to derail their own national initiatives. And yet the ammunition remains unfired.
    The remainder of the world remains on track to meet (or... Read More
  3. 07.06.2018
    07.06.2018
    by      In
    Regardless of where you were born, chances are that your youth was punctuated with vacations by the sea and the odd cooling dip in the ocean. Admittedly for those of us from cooler northern climes, these were probably limited to the one month a year that might approximate to summer, but the idea is... Read More
  4. 10.05.2018
    10.05.2018
    by      In
    As if the latest Australian data security legislation wasn’t enough to get your head around, it now seems that we all need to look to Europe and take note of the EU’s new General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, which comes into force on 25th May.
    If there’s one thing that the European Union... Read More