Echelon, or the naïve scandal. Have you noted that in the great political and media hubbub surrounding the Echelon affair of the British-American tapping system, the two groups of people who should at first sight be the most concerned are keeping remarkably quiet? Naturally, we are thinking about the European governments who should be furious and scandalised that their countries should be constantly spied on for the years, and the industrialists learning that their strategies are being recorded and controlled by the services of the countries of their rivals. Indignation and scandal? Nothing of the sort. The European Commission has invited all companies considering themselves to have suffered injury to step forward. Total silence.

The reasons for this extraordinary discretion are in fact quite simple. The princes that govern us know perfectly well that tapping systems have existed since techniques have made it possible. At the time of the "cold war", many EU countries were part of or participated in such antics in one way or another. And governments are aware that even their own secret services try to gather as much information as possible without caring much about means. Sure, no previous system and no current system has the capabilities of Echelon. It's exitence is not itself considered by the Americans as a secret, nor do the British deny their participation. Answers arriving at the European Commission from Washington and London do not dispute the facts, but their interpretation: there is said to have been no industrial espionage and companies are said not have received information.

The silence of industrialists is just as explicable. When Airbus was placed into question, it was for having in its time paid out substantial "back-handers" (and we know what that means: enormous amounts of money) to secure contracts. And Airbus was not unaware that this was at times indispensable but illegal. To protest officially against the result of Echelon tapping would have meant recognising the fault. Everyone having at some tome been more or less guilty in this field, the best thing for everyone was to remain silent, especially today as measures have meanwhile been taken and Conventions signed that have stemmed the tide of international corruption. There is not much to add to this subject following the astonishing interview of a former boss of the CIA (see our bulletin of 30 March, p.11). It is certainly permitted, however, to wonder to what extent the Echelon tapping may have played a role in certain high-profile scandals in France and Germany. Whatever, it is understandable that neither the authorities nor companies should seek to flesh out the Echelon affair.

This is why we qualified it as a "naïve" scandal. This in no way implies that it is unjustified or that parliamentarians are wrong to want to see what actually happened. On the contrary, it is essential to intervene, to apply pressure, to act on public opinion, so that rules are respected and tapping does not violate people's rights and is not used to the advantage of companies of one country at the expense of another. These guarantees do not now exist, whatever the good faith of the American and British governments. All has to be checked, as the United States in particular functions like an integrated system where political, strategic and industrial choices work together. And it is not simple to unravel them. (FR).