Section 31--Let's try and settle this!

[StarryEyed]

^ Interesting that you should bring up Enterprise. Back then, it could be argued that Section 31 actually was a legitimate organization. But just because it might have been noble then, obviously it wasn't anymore by the time we saw it in DS9.

To put it another way: Why should any Federation citizen (if they had been aware of S31's existence) be sure that S31 wouldn't come after them next? Who decides what is a threat and what is not? Section 31 is no better than the Tal Shiar or Obsidian Order. Indeed, it's worse, since *nobody* knows about it. The average citizen of the Federation is unaware that they could be snatched away and eliminated in the dead of night if S31 deems them a threat. In this way, the Federation is a ruthless police state and doesn't even know it.

(You want to know how Section 31 could have survived all this time? THAT's how.)

I don't know how more clearly I can put it: I'm going by the assumption that you can't keep playing in somebody else' game for long unless you go by their rules.

There are always going to be bad people, either external or internal. The Federation MUST have agencies capable of weeding them out. They would be destroyed from outside or from within if they didn't. So how has Section 31 survived? The only logical answer is that they are NOT bad guys.

Do you honestly think an organization with the morals (or lack thereof) of the Tal Shiar or the Obsidian Order could possibly operate inside the Federation undetected? If such an organization could exist there they would quickly take it over!

 

[Robert DeSoto]

^ But why *would* Sloan lie about that? If Section 31 did have a legitimate structure and leadership that was accountable to the Federation at large, surely he would have said so, since Bashir would have been more likely to join if that had been the case.

If I was the Federation President and I had a section of intelligence agents that ran around doing all my dirty work, I wouldn't want them to tell anyone that they got their orders from me.

I mean its entirely possibly that Section 31 really does run its own show completely. Or maybe 31 quietly reports to Starfleet Command and the Federation President. And when the President needs something done, something that's against the Federation Charter , he calls on 31. It's not something that either the President or Starfleet Command could admit to publicly. But it would explain how it survived for so long and how any investigation into its existence gets quietly pushed aside. Plus it would make sense to have Starfleet Command coordinate 31's activities with the rest of Starfleet's resources. You wouldn't want waste time sending Section 31 agents to gather intelligence that Starfleet Intelligence officers already have. If anything, Starfleet Intelligence officers could assist S31 agents. Also, Starfleet could provide starships to help Section 31 (like having the USS Bellerophon take Sloan to Romulus).

 

[StarryEyed]

^ But why *would* Sloan lie about that? If Section 31 did have a legitimate structure and leadership that was accountable to the Federation at large, surely he would have said so, since Bashir would have been more likely to join if that had been the case.

If I was the Federation President and I had a section of intelligence agents that ran around doing all my dirty work, I wouldn't want them to tell anyone that they got their orders from me.

I mean its entirely possibly that Section 31 really does run its own show completely. Or maybe 31 quietly reports to Starfleet Command and the Federation President. And when the President needs something done, something that's against the Federation Charter , he calls on 31. It's not something that either the President or Starfleet Command could admit to publicly. But it would explain how it survived for so long and how any investigation into its existence gets quietly pushed aside. Plus it would make sense to have Starfleet Command coordinate 31's activities with the rest of Starfleet's resources. You wouldn't want waste time sending Section 31 agents to gather intelligence that Starfleet Intelligence officers already have. If anything, Starfleet Intelligence officers could assist S31 agents. Also, Starfleet could provide starships to help Section 31 (like having the USS Bellerophon take Sloan to Romulus).

Interesting take. In a way, it's more disturbing than an autonomous Section 31.

Based on the cannon, evidence, you could go in a lot of different directions with this. Maybe it would make a more interesting thread if this were about what we believe Section 31 really is - apart from whether or not we approve of it.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

There are always going to be bad people, either external or internal. The Federation MUST have agencies capable of weeding them out.

They already do. They have Starfleet. Everything that the Federation is entitled, under the rules of morality, legality and war, to do to an enemy is covered within legitimate Starfleet regs. Or the UFP's diplomatic corps.

So how has Section 31 survived? The only logical answer is that they are NOT bad guys.

Do you honestly think an organization with the morals (or lack thereof) of the Tal Shiar or the Obsidian Order could possibly operate inside the Federation undetected?

If they're really good at covering their tracks? Hell yeah!

I do not, OTOH, believe that Sloan was lying when he said that Section 31 operated entirely on its own. If they were unofficially sanctioned by the Federation, then Sloan would have said so. They needed Bashir, and anything that would be likely to help them recruit him would, by definition, be beneficial. So Sloan has no motive to lie. Why? Because Bashir, like most in Starfleet, pays attention to order, and is inclined to follow the rules. If Section 31 was receiving any kind of sanction from the Federation, then this would lend it an air of legitimacy in Bashir's eyes, and thus make it a more attractive option for Bashir to join. Thus, the fact that Sloan did NOT mention any of this, makes it apparent that no such sanction exists.

 

[Penta]

They already do. They have Starfleet. Everything that the Federation is entitled, under the rules of morality, legality and war, to do to an enemy is covered within legitimate Starfleet regs. Or the UFP's diplomatic corps.

By regs? Maybe, at best.

By mindset? Not even close.
---
On the issue of accountability:

I'd point everyone towards the ooooold, early-90s PC game "Floor 13".

It's a bit different than we discuss here, but rest assured that the immediate termination of a Section 31 "Director" who acted too blatantly (even if successfully) would be easy to arrange, perhaps at the hands of another S31 Director.

I mean, it is Starfleet. Accidents happen in space.

 

[Jerikka Dawn]

(this is a great thread)

In my opinion, I think it's a reasonable assumption that even in the presence of a Federation charter, Starfleet rules, and a legitimate government (Federation Council/President), there, inevitably, will be situations where the rules and the law are inadequate, or in some cases, a barrier to the safety of the Federation. As a consequence, basic human nature will drive some so-called patriots to do what they feel needs to be done to safeguard the Federation, rules be damned.

I firmly believe organizations like Section 31 form naturally in any society (maybe not in name, but they'll form nonetheless) because there will always be people, guided by their own morals and beliefs, who will do what they feel is necessary to safeguard their society and pool their resources with others who share the same sensibilities. Whether we believe they should exist or not, I think it's impossible for them to not exist, unless we discount human nature. I know it's probably not the point of the thread, though

As far as the attempted genocide of the Changelings; while it was wrong and reprehensible to both our values and the values of the Federation -- I think that by the time the Federation learned where the Changeling virus came from, the Federation had no choice but to deny the cure to the Founders. It may seem very convenient, and even contrary to the values of the Federation, but in light of the fact that curing the Founders could potentially cost them the war combined with the Federation's "clear conscience" of not having directly caused the virus, they had to withhold the cure at that point to safeguard the Federation. As far as the Federation was concerned -- "we didn't do it."

I know it's wrong -- I know it's convenient, and Odo was completely right to tell Bashir to STFU when Bashir tried to tell Odo "well, it was a rogue organization, blah blah" -- but at that point, and I'm sure Section 31 counted on this -- the Federation had no choice. They were barely winning the war with the Founders dying. They had to take every advantage they could get, and the "tidy little arrangement" was a simple, unavoidable fact.

Even more importantly, by offering the Founders the cure outright, the Founders would have found out who was responsible -- and from what we know of the Founders, I believe they would have, rightly I might add, been as indignant as Odo when he found out. They would have taken the cure, cured themselves, and then found a way to decimate the Federation because they would not have made a distinction between Starfleet and a "rogue organization." -- and the Founders would indeed have had the moral high ground here.

Once S31 released the virus, the destiny of the war was set. The Founders would either die, or the Federation would offer them the cure, and the Founders would not look at it as kindness or any type of olive branch -- they would re-triple their efforts to destroy the Federation Alliance and annihilate every Federation world in kind. It will have validated their mistrust of solids. The Dominion would not have ruled the Alpha Quadrant -- they would kill every living thing in it -- nonaggression treaty or not. Fortunately for the Federation, Odo had influence with the female changeling.

Anyway -- I believe in what Section 31 is trying to do -- the Founders disease, however, was the very definition of irresponsible behavior. They gambled the very existence of the Federation and its allies and the lives of every Federation, Klingon, and Romulan citizen on the Founders not finding out where the disease came from. Thank the Prophets for Odo.

At least -- that's how I see it.

 

[TheQman]

I chose the first option.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Okey-dokey. Reasoning, please?



Now...I'm fascinated by the concept that the alleged "autonomy" of 31 is purely cover for whoever it does answer to. Two words: plausible deniability.

It's most disturbing, too--as it follows that that someone was therefore the one really responsible for the virus, and 31 serves its purpose as a convenient scapegoat.

BTW...on that thought, I think the notion Commander Vaughn asserted in Abyss, that, "Oh, guess what, Admiral Dougherty wasn't acting on orders from the Federation Council--it was that evil SECTION 31!!!" is one of the most eye-roll-worthy, "Oh, come ON!" moments I have ever come across in TrekLit.

(It's not as awkward as the "None of that bodes well for a stable relationship" line of reasoning in Unjoined, but it's pretty darn close....)

It's also very strong evidence that the Council, confronted with its sin of forced relocation, threw the standard scapegoat to the wolves. On the record, they said Dougherty worked alone. Off the record, they "leaked" to the Kirk Cabal "evidence" that it was really Section 31.

 

[Withers]

It's most disturbing, too--as it follows that that someone was therefore the one really responsible for the virus, and 31 serves its purpose as a convenient scapegoat.

If we're talking about the Federation Admiralty (which, c'mon, is the only element of Starfleet that would condone an act like genocide as 'necessary' to the survival of the Federation) being ultimately responsible for Section 31's actions and Section 31 is used as simply Plausible deniability my question is to whom?

It was sheer luck Bashir uncovered the act at all in the first place and it is only speculation on his part as no direct evidence was ever shown on his part and wasn't verified until Sloan showed up to destroy his work. Why have such an elaborate cover story. The other Admirals who went to extremes (of which there was only in every series at least) had no such cover story and were thus punished (one assumes) for their behavior.

-Withers-​

 

[Rush Limborg]

^I never said it neccesarily had to be the Admiralty. It could just as easily be the President's Security Advisor, or the Director of Starfleet Intel, or someone on the bloody Federation Council, or whoever.

It might have been the President--but A Time To Heal strongly indicates otherwise, as does Articles.

 

[Withers]

Alright, you didn't say it, but I'm implying it. How many Admirals did we see that essentially did what Section 31 does? (Excluding genocide of course.) It fits that if anybody in Starfleet proper were actually controlling Section 31 it would be the Admiralty. They're the ones most closely aligned with that mind set ("It was all for the Federation!") so, to me, it would kind of make sense. But they didn't ever have any cover and they didn't use 31 agents; they did it themselves which, in my head, negates the idea of someone in Starfleet actually being responsible for them when the people who act most like them, aren't.

You could speculate about it being other elements in the Federation but there's no real evidence for it.

-Withers-​

 

[TheQman]

^Okey-dokey. Reasoning, please?

I just think that as long as it isn't an offical arm of the UFP, they can do whatever they want. It is their main goal to save the Federation from whatever can be perceived as a threat, present or future. It isn't very 'star trek', but it is very real.

 

[StarryEyed]

Section 31 needs to be plugged-in to an official agency somehow. They need resources, an information pipe-line, inside operatives. I always thought the Admiralty had to be connected to them in some way. Not all admirals of course but probably a select cadre. I don't think the admirals control them directly but probably have a great deal of influence over the agency's direction.

 

[Jerikka Dawn]

Section 31 needs to be plugged-in to an official agency somehow. They need resources, an information pipe-line, inside operatives. I always thought the Admiralty had to be connected to them in some way. Not all admirals of course but probably a select cadre. I don't think the admirals control them directly but probably have a great deal of influence over the agency's direction.

I've always kind of wondered how it went down when Sloan and Ross hooked up. Was it just like Bashir's late night meetings with Sloan? Admiral Ross wakes up and turns the lights on and Sloan is sitting there in a chair with his hands interlaced in front of him. HA HA HA. I'd love to see that scene.

 

[StarryEyed]

Section 31 needs to be plugged-in to an official agency somehow. They need resources, an information pipe-line, inside operatives. I always thought the Admiralty had to be connected to them in some way. Not all admirals of course but probably a select cadre. I don't think the admirals control them directly but probably have a great deal of influence over the agency's direction.

I've always kind of wondered how it went down when Sloan and Ross hooked up. Was it just like Bashir's late night meetings with Sloan? Admiral Ross wakes up and turns the lights on and Sloan is sitting there in a chair with his hands interlaced in front of him. HA HA HA. I'd love to see that scene.

I doubt it. I suspect Ross is much more "in" than Bashir ever was.

The more I think about it, it had to have been a cadre of admirals that built Section 31 in the first place. Sloan said the original Starfleet charter allowed for an agency like Section 31. Fine. There was language in there which allowed some latitude for going outside the normal boundaries during extreme circumstances. But how do you go from that to actually establishing an agency accountable only to themselves?

The Admiralty we see in Star Trek is a group with a lot of expertise, power and autonomy. This is a group who could have used the language in the Starfleet charter as a technical justification to establish the agency. They could have designed its hierarchy, built in the necessary checks and balances and allocated the resources necessary for building the agency - all while hiding it from everyone else. Who else could have done all that?

 

[Withers]

The Admiralty we see in Star Trek is a group with a lot of expertise, power and autonomy. This is a group who could have used the language in the Starfleet charter as a technical justification to establish the agency. They could have designed its hierarchy, built in the necessary checks and balances and allocated the resources necessary for building the agency - all while hiding it from everyone else.

If everything was really on the up and up what was the point in hiding it? You can have all the checks and balances you want- if those "fail safes" don't prevent operatives from committing genocide I would submit that they're useless.

-Withers-​

 

[StarryEyed]

The Admiralty we see in Star Trek is a group with a lot of expertise, power and autonomy. This is a group who could have used the language in the Starfleet charter as a technical justification to establish the agency. They could have designed its hierarchy, built in the necessary checks and balances and allocated the resources necessary for building the agency - all while hiding it from everyone else.

If everything was really on the up and up what was the point in hiding it? You can have all the checks and balances you want- if those "fail safes" don't prevent operatives from committing genocide I would submit that they're useless.

-Withers-​

Everything was not on the up and up. They used language designed to allow commanders in the field some latitude in unforeseen circumstances and took it to the extreme. They created an entire agency designed to operate in the extreme zone and gave it virtually unlimited latitude.

As to the genocide thing, I'm finding the outrage kind of stale. I think there is a huge difference between wiping out an entire species because you don't like them and wiping one out because they are unremittingly hostile and are actively engaged in wiping YOU out - especially when they routinely engage in genocide themselves for non-defensive reasons. One could make the argument that genocide of the Founders is morally justifiable (even morally required) to stop them for committing multiple genocides purely for reasons of conquest.

 

[DevilEyes]

As to the genocide thing, I'm finding the outrage kind of stale. I think there is a huge difference between wiping out an entire species because you don't like them and wiping one out because they are unremittingly hostile and are actively engaged in wiping YOU out - especially when they routinely engage in genocide themselves for non-defensive reasons.

Actually there isn't. Most genocides are committed with the justification that the Enemy is dangerous and presents a threat to Us, so We have to wipe Them out to protect Ourselves. I can't think of a single piece of racist/chauvinistic propaganda that simply states "we want to kill them all because we hate them", they're all about the evils and dangers of the other group of people and the need to use every method in "defense" of "our people".

 

[Withers]

As to the genocide thing, I'm finding the outrage kind of stale. I think there is a huge difference between wiping out an entire species because you don't like them and wiping one out because they are unremittingly hostile and are actively engaged in wiping YOU out

But they weren't in any fashion greater than any other threat the Federation faced outside of maybe the Borg. When they infected Odo hostilities hadn't even broken out between the Founders and the Federation. The O'brien changeling straight up admitted there were only a handful of them on Earth at the time the chaos was caused by, not Founders, but one Starfleet Admiral taking the law into his own hands in an attempt to commit a coup.

If the Founders had wanted to, at that point, they could have done a lot more damage than they did.

especially when they routinely engage in genocide themselves for non-defensive reasons

The Cardassian genocide happened well after the fact. One could speculate the Female Changeling wouldn't have reacted that way were it not for the duress she felt from the virus itself. Regardless of all of that though- just because they do it doesn't make it alright for the Federation to behave that way. That's a lesson everybody learns in Kindergarten.

One could make the argument that genocide of the Founders is morally justifiable (even morally required) to stop them for committing multiple genocides purely for reasons of conquest.

That's... outrageous. Imagine if the real world worked like that. What would happen if a nation adopted a policy of, not just preemptive war, but preemptive genocide? You think the Iraq war is unpopular and seen by the planet as American overreaching? Just imagine if the US took it to the extreme of wiping out people through genocide those that were inclined to do it in the past and might try it again in the future. Morally justifiable genocide; that's like healthy botulism or... child safe plutonium.

-Withers-​

 

[StarryEyed]

That's... outrageous. Imagine if the real world worked like that. What would happen if a nation adopted a policy of, not just preemptive war, but preemptive genocide? You think the Iraq war is unpopular and seen by the planet as American overreaching? Just imagine if the US took it to the extreme of wiping out people through genocide those that were inclined to do it in the past and might try it again in the future.