[rendall]

What would the purpose be? I can't imagine a motive or a rational end goal. Would it be in the hopes that sickened diplomats could cause an incident that the hosting country could exploit in some way? I'm not saying that countries always act rationally, I just don't see what could be gained by doing this. Petty sadism?

[p5a0u9l]

The motive is to make it harder for US personnel to carry out foreign policy objectives in these nations. if a hostile foreign state can cause these symptoms without being detected, hence deniability, that’s a win for them. which is why EM radiation alone is hard to accept, since it would be trivial to set up ultra wideband detection equipment at these locations. likely there is much more known that is not released for security reasons.

[rendall]

"The motive is to make it harder for US personnel to carry out foreign policy objectives in these nations."

If they were soldiers, sure, that makes sense. But I thought the the job of diplomats is essentially to be a messenger between governments. "Carry out foreign policy objectives" means to relay accurately the stance and desires of the home government. Hurting a diplomat in no wise hurts the home government, it just makes communication more difficult.

[p5a0u9l]

in a perfect world, and amongst allies, yes. between nations that see international cooperation differently, not so much. case in point, cuba.

[rendall]

What sorts of things can embassy staff do that works against the interests of the host country?

[p5a0u9l]

aside from old school spying, all sorts of soft power tactics: support or not a government measure with marginal support, connect people or not with resources in the home country, advocate or not for sales of defense products from home country.

[cainxinth]

My own unfounded conspiracy theory? It was done by Russia to submarine efforts by the Obama administration to normalize relations with Cuba.

[mturmon]

Or, to widen the possibilities somewhat, by Cuban interests who would prefer to not have normalized relations with the US, and who could enlist technically-advanced outside help — perhaps from Russia, but not necessarily the Russian government, directly.

One reason a Cuban entity might not want normalization is that a lot of property was taken over during the Revolution, and US Cubans (and other former property owners) have been clear about wanting it back.

Basic background: https://www.panoramas.pitt.edu/news-and-politics/property-ri...

[tekkk]

Hmm, even though that's a bit of a stretch that actually makes sense. Also Russia seems like the only geo-political adversary that could pull this off and have a vested interest in keeping Cuba in their sphere.

[sudosysgen]

Cuba really isn't close enough to Russia to be "in it's sphere".

[bumby]

I think they meant “political sphere” not “geographic sphere”.

[sudosysgen]

Yes. Politically, since the fall of the Soviet Union, there are few ties between Cuba and Russia.

[bumby]

After the Trump administration reversed the previous administrations opening of Cuba, Russia has increased diplomatic relations with the island nation. The trade between the two has doubled

[contingencies]

Possible means of wireless power transmission to a covert device?

[swayvil]

Raise stress level. Reduce efficiency. Decrease morale.

That's mere sabotage there. A very good reason to do it.

There could be more specific reasons too. The effects of all that on certain procedures and decisions. Part of a larger plan.

And such a convenient technology. It begs to be used.

[matthewdgreen]

Seems like this plan would work better if it didn't leave a big trail of breadcrumbs back to its perpetrator.

[hedora]

Speculation from actual victims suggests it was intimidation from Russian agents who knew there would be no response as long as Trump was in the White House.

Some victims were approached by the Russians and told to go back to the US immediately before (within a day or two) of the attacks.

Such warnings are apparently extremely unusual, and a violation of professional etiquette between the US and Russian intelligence agencies.

[rendall]

> "Some victims were approached by the Russians and told to go back to the US immediately before (within a day or two) of the attacks."

I'm skeptical, tbh. Every single time someone has proof that it's definitely the Russians, I follow that rabbit hole and the actual evidence is tenuous or non-existent

As for its being Russians in this case, it's still turtles all the way down: Just as it makes no sense that it's the hosting country, it makes no sense that it's the Russians, especially if they tip their hand in such a way. What advantage would Russia have for intimidating the US embassy staff by sending thugs to "get out or else"? The embassy are glorified messengers with limited negotiating skills. Even if the entire diplomatic corps quit en masse, the US would just send more.

If there were some advantage to sickening, crippling and otherwise poisoning diplomatic staff, why are there not more such incidents across the world?

[matthewdgreen]

I don't think you or I have any access to the real evidence that would allow us to make a meaningful determination. We have almost none of the raw intelligence, and we're facing off with foreign intelligence agencies who have strong enough operational security to ensure that we won't gain access to such evidence.

We have intelligence agencies that pour hundreds of billions of dollars per year into recruiting human sources at the highest levels of foreign governments, intercepting vast amounts of encrypted data, and doing all sorts of complex analysis. It's entirely possible that the CIA has a source within Russian intelligence that has already handed them a copy of the machine's blueprints and operational plans, but the CIA can't reveal that information because it would destroy sources and methods. So instead, they're taking secret internal actions while also pushing hard on public agencies like NAS to look carefully at the non-classified evidence.

I guess it's also possible that the CIA has no evidence and just wants to pick a fight with Russia for some private reason of its own. I can't rule that out, but it would rely on a lot of people -- including Trump appointees -- having seen the (lack of) evidence and basically agreeing to go forward anyway. That seems surprising to me.

I think at the end of the day the best thing you can do is weigh motivations. Does Russia have a reason to mess with embassy staff? Well, it doesn't make sense to me personally, but then again, neither does killing your opponents in public using Novichok or Polonium. Does the bureaucratic CIA have some incentive to promote a baseless intelligence war with Russian agents, one that is likely to get people on both sides hurt? It's possible, but also seems pretty unlikely.

[rriepe]

I think it's part of a method for mapping foot traffic inside a building. It came out around the same time as the "see people through walls using wi-fi" demo.

[jccooper]

There's a variety of covert surveillance devices that have been remotely powered, but most of those were very early before you could get good batteries. I don't see a lot of reason for one today.

[newsclues]

Cubans want the Americans to leave Cuba.

[rendall]

Well, yes, if you mean Guantanamo. As for the embassy itself, it is there only at the pleasure of the hosting government and of the United States. If Cuba wants the embassy gone, it merely has to tell them to leave. Sickening or crippling the staff does nothing to, say, help the cause of recovering Guantanamo Bay.

I know I'm missing something, because I don't think this would happen if there weren't an advantage of some sort somewhere. I just don't see how it's to the advantage of the hosting country. In fact, I would think it works against the interests of the hosting country.