Why on earth?

Vijay Nambiar, India8217;s deputy national security advisor, is in good company. Security policy wonks in the US, in Europe and in major Asian countries have, like Nambiar, looked at Google Earth as an information heaven for aggressors, whether non-state or state. But Nambiar, along with the rest, misses the point. If Google Earth snaps Indian Air Force bases, its eyes don8217;t miss Pakistan8217;s or China8217;s8212;as this newspaper illustrated8212;or even the Los Alamos nuclear enrichment facility. And this when Google Earth is a compendium, not really a primary image gatherer. Images of 8220;sensitive8221; sites are available commercially. Would a determined adversary not target an airbase simply because he would have to buy the image from a commercial satellite service?

So the problem, if there8217;s one, is about satellite overflying. But the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty-I has been universally read as allowing unrestricted overflying. And there are no regulations on image resolution resolution determines clarity; a 15-metre resolution will make Parliament look like scarred baked potato; a 15-centimetre resolution would allow analysts to identify the gender of those promenading on Parliament8217;s grounds. India, which has the capability and the ambition of becoming a major satellite launcher, should think very carefully before demanding regulation of satellite imagery. It should appreciate, in fact, that private satellite imagery has created a level playing field in a sector which would otherwise have been the monopoly of a few rich countries.

Three more issues remain. Censoring net access is simply not an option for India. We are not China. We should not think of putting filters or of asking Google to block its service from Indian IP addresses. Not even if Google is happy to do so 8212; and that8217;s the second point. Google caved in to Chinese demands on censoring its services inside China. That shameful cop-out robbed Google of a great deal of moral authority on issues of censorship. Democratic governments must take the lead. Governments come in on the third issue: how to protect 8220;security8221; installations from increasingly sophisticated image technology? The answer is if governments really want to hide something, they have to become tech-savvy, devise camouflage methods and be prepared to change with the times. That applies especially to India. Old-fashioned photography is banned near military installations in this country. And there is a raft of restrictions on local cartographic information providers. Such rules are silly considering they apply in a country with loudly proclaimed ambitions to be a high-technology hub.