Your email is not valid
Recipient's email is not valid
Submit Close

Your email has been sent.

Click here to send another

thescroll_header

The Rosenbergs, Edward Snowden, and Treason

On the 60th anniversary of their execution, the Rosenbergs’ legacy persists

Print Email
(RareNewspapers)

If you haven’t caught Liel Leibovitz’s journalistic act of civic duty today, then I recommend you check out his piece on Glenn Greenwald’s bombast, Israel, and the NSA leaks. As Liel points out, many comparisons have been made in recent weeks to leaker-on-the-lam Edward Snowden and the likes of Bradley Manning and Daniel Ellsberg, whose names straddle an odd American divide between worship and condemnation. But for others yet, the Snowden ordeal is evocative of another historical throwback, the espionage case of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, which technically ended in their 1951 conviction, but more accurately ended on this day, sixty years ago, when the two were executed at Sing Sing despite furious and widespread protest.

June 19, 1953 was a Friday and the execution, which had already been postponed a day after a stay of execution was granted, was set for 11 PM. When their lawyer, Emanuel Hirsch Bloch, was said to have protested on the grounds that it was offensive to execute the Rosenbergs on the Sabbath, the execution wasn’t postponed, but rather moved up earlier to 8 PM, just before the summer sundown.

The reasons why we still hear about the Rosenbergs are innumerable, even before the Snowden Affair enthralled and disgusted. Despite their guilt, the trial was riddled with questionable moments and courted conspiracy theorists and ideologues alike. Throughout the decades, many have maintained that the couple was innocent, including the Rosenbergs’ sons, one of whom admitted (albeit very defiantly in 2011) that he believed his father had spied, but not in the service of the Soviet atomic project. Robert Meeropol, who was adopted along with his brother by the author of the song “Strange Fruit” after the death of his parents, still believes his mother was innocent.

(For a thorough historical look, read Ron Radosh, who was in the courtroom when the verdict was handed down in 1951, and wrote a piece about the trial and the different sects of Rosenberg supporters for Tablet here.)

How the legacy of the Rosenbergs feeds into the public view of Snowden isn’t cut and dry. In recent weeks, a number of public intellectuals and officials have used the word traitor and the charge treason to describe Snowden and his actions. Among them have been Speaker John Boehner, Senators Dianne Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss, and former ambassador John Bolton. (Like some of the Rosenbergs’ supporters, others like Senator Rand Paul have defended Snowden, calling his work an act of “civil disobedience” on par with Thoreau and MLK.)

“I don’t look at this as being a whistle-blower,” Feinstein said. “It’s an act of treason.” Boehner called Snowden a “traitor.” “This guy thinks he has a higher morality” Bolton said. ”I say that is the worst form of treason.”

Others have openly called for Snowden to be tried for treason. The minutiae will no doubt be debated in the coming months and years, regardless of whether Snowden is caught or extradited or simply disappears. But for now, it seems important to note that not even the Rosenbergs were convicted of treason. From reading some of the Snowden coverage, you wouldn’t know it.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were the last Americans executed for treason, back in 1953. The United States has only tried about 30 people for treason.

The second part is true; treason trials have been extremely rare in the United States for a number of reasons.

Why do U.S. prosecutors avoid treason charges? One reason is that the standards of evidence are high: The Constitution requires “two witnesses to the same overt act.” Another likely explanation, however, is that treason convictions simply aren’t worth the trouble. Most traitors can be put away for life on several counts of espionage and conspiracy. That’s less work for the prosecution.

Snowden’s crime doesn’t fit the standards of treason, anyway. If captured, he will be prosecuted for offenses similar to those of Manning. One likely charge: the disclosure of classified information “concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States,” which is a federal crime. If past leakers are any indication, he will be in prison for decades, if not the rest of his years.

Sixty years ago, the Rosenbergs became the only two American civilians to be executed on spy-related charges during the Cold War. In some circles, the debates have roiled ever since. It’s easy to imagine that the Snowden Affair will birth its own partisans who, for decades to come and with similar ferocity, will fight over whether Snowden’s deeds constituted a war against Americans or a defense of them.

 

Print Email
SteveZStein says:

Why do you call the comparisons of Ellsberg and Snowden “lamentable”? Ellsberg himself has made it. What I find lamentable is that Snowden is on the lam. If he had real courage, he would come home and fight for his principles in court (like Ellsberg). But that *would* take real courage.

People might forget the point, but MLK Jr’s “Letters From A Birmingham Jail” was written FROM JAIL.

Binyamin the Prophet says:

Bradley Manning is IN JAIL. Indeed, he has already pled guilty to charges that could draw a 20-year sentence. His prosecutors have (reluctantly) taken the death penalty off the table so the only issue is whether he will go to jail for life.

You are absolutely correct to invoke MLK and the Letter. Why? Because clearly, Snowden, Manning and Ellsberg were engaged in acts of conscience, not acts of treason.

Yes, King took the consequences of his civil disobedience because he knew he would be spending only a few days in jail. What is repulsive about your commentary is that you would impose a penalty on these men that bears a greater resemblance to North Korean legal principles than our own.

SteveZStein says:

I don’t equate Snowden and Manning. And I don’t think Snowden has committed treason. (At least if he doesn’t start talking to another government.)

Snowden and Manning violated their oaths of secrecy. (Manning, being military, is subject to different rules.) Yes, they did it out of conscience, but civil disobedience and crimes of conscience are nonetheless crimes.

I still think the wisest course for Snowden is to come back and face charges, and mount his challenge in court. Certainly that would further the goal of greater transparency, and hold out the possibility of changing the secrecy policies he is challenging.

2000

Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.

Thank You!

Thank you for subscribing to the Tablet Magazine Daily Digest.
Please tell us about you.

The Rosenbergs, Edward Snowden, and Treason

On the 60th anniversary of their execution, the Rosenbergs’ legacy persists

More on Tablet:

I Grew Up in Toronto, but You Can’t Tell From My Accent

By Karen E. H. Skinazi — I don’t talk like my fellow Torontonians because I was raised inside the ‘Bathurst Bubble,’ the city’s Jewish community