News Analysis: Will U.S. explain Snowden case to the world? (2)

OTHERS HAVE TO WATCH OUT FOR THEMSELVES

After the U.S. hacking of other nations' telecommunication networks was exposed by Snowden, countries from the European Union, Latin America and Asia expressed their indignation and demanded an explanation.

However, it is unlikely to prompt any changes from the United States, with analysts pointing out that, for target countries, strengthening their own network security is a wiser move.

For example, classified documents about the PRISM program show Germany appeared to be the EU nation most watched by the United States. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has been keeping a low profile, has responded with strong-worded remarks over the issue.

"The monitoring of friends -- this is unacceptable. It can't be tolerated," Merkel has said through her spokesman Steffen Seibert. "We are no longer in the Cold War."

Most Germans were angry, surprised and worried about the U.S. spying. Some 63 percent of the Germans thought their country's relations with the United States might be shaken by the PRISM incident.

It also raised fears in German business circles that U.S. intelligence agencies might disclose the technical and commercial secrets of German firms it has obtained to their rivals.

Though the Germans were infuriated at the U.S. snooping, they also knew better than to expect any changes from the U.S. side, German analysts said, adding Germany still needed information provided by foreign intelligent agencies for the fight against terrorism.

INT'L VOICES CANNOT BE NEGLECTED

Analysts said no matter whether the United States change its approach, or whether other countries could force change, the PRISM incident hurt U.S. relations with other countries. On this issue the United States should make some changes.

Rothkopf said what the PRISM incident had disclosed, especially the mass surveillance carried out by the United States on European countries, had not only harmed the U.S. relations with its European allies, but also damaged the standings of the Obama administration, which had sought to portray itself as different from its predecessor.

The expert said the surveillance programs might have initially had a reasonable purpose: to protect the state security. However, as most planning and implementation was carried out privately, it had reduced the regulatory measures to a ridiculous "rubber stamp." From this perspective, he said, these kind of scandals had not been disclosed too many times but too few.

Rothkopf said that according to U.S. government data the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) received 1,789 applications relating to the government's snooping actions in 2012, among which the FISC only rejected one. From here it was obvious the court which provided legal oversight of the U.S. secretive surveillance programs might be the most ineffective regulation mechanism, he said.

As a result, as Manach puts it, Snowden's disclosure has proved people have the right to expect the United States to investigate the actions of the National Security Agency, and better regulate its intelligence agencies.