<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
I had previously cautioned that some kind of important "Seoul
Principles' will be worked out at the conference. So, friends, it is
in these rather tightly-controlled forums, designed and run by OECD
countries (chiefly, the US and UK, in this case) where real global
Internet governance is taking place. But, from the reactions that my
post on this subject got a few days back, civil society seems still
insistent on keeping its head tightly dug in the sand. <br>
<br>
And we want to pursue in full vigor the rather non-consequential
events like WSIS plus 10 conference to be hosted by the ITU in April
next..... (Remember the UNESCO's WSIS plus 10 event earlier this
year!)<br>
<br>
Any reason, why we dont target events where the powerful OECD
countries, otherwise civil society's comrades-in-arms on
multistakeholderism, un-regulated, bottom-up Internet and so on,
undertake real global IG, and only target genuinely multi-lateral
forums, like those associated with the UN, where at least all
countries are allowed to participate...<br>
<br>
And these UN forums are much much more open.... Look at the Seoul
conference. It is not possible to even register and attend it in an
unhindered manner for a civil society organisation, what to talk
about substantially participating. And see how all the preparatory
processes, and actual text negotiations is shrouded in so much
secrecy. Compare it to the WSIS process, where any entity could get
its inputs into the text at any stage, which was then openly
negotiated over a vast screen...<br>
<br>
Friends, we have got something absolutely wrong here, and need to
reassess our positions and priorities. <br>
<br>
As a communication rights activist said on another list recently,
characterising the current situation about global Internet
governance, 'an 'irrational normal' always exists in tension,
awaiting its 'the emperor has no clothes' moment .<br>
<br>
It for the global IG civil society to make that call..... Or, in
default, it can awaits its own 'the emperor has no clothes' moment.<br>
<br>
What I am asking here is - do we want to write to the Seoul
conference organisers about how badly and wrongly organised their
meeting it, and therefore what comes out of it simply has no
legitimacy... And also, at the BestBits meeting in Bali, when we
discuss global IG spaces, give due prominence to such rich countries
run and controlled forums - and hit at the core of illegitimate
power, which is civil society's prime business to do. <br>
<br>
By the way, it is one of the funniest statements to hear<br>
<br>
------"Deputy of Preparatory Secretariat told " Though US and UK,
which regard cyberspace as neutral,........... "<br>
<br>
Yes, neutral for completely unhindered transgressions and theft of
other people's data..... Now we know what 'neutral' and
'unregulated' really is meant to mean.... Also perhaps why these
countries were so much against mentioning the term 'security' in an
international enforceable agreement like the ITRs.... They sure want
to keep the Internet 'neutral', and civil society merrily follows
the pipe piper's alluring tune...<br>
<br>
parminder<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Friday 04 October 2013 08:04 AM,
Byoung-il Oh wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAOGFQRxdN4i4As5-mVM3cfycEw2mo_WUSbV8f5cON0930Jc12g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hi all,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Several press reported that so called 'Seoul Principle'
will be made as an outcome of cyberspace conference in Seoul. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2013/10/120_143618.html">http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2013/10/120_143618.html</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>interview of Ambassador for International Security Affairs
at S. Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.koreaittimes.com/story/32042/inside-seoul-conference-cyberspace-2013">http://www.koreaittimes.com/story/32042/inside-seoul-conference-cyberspace-2013</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In other press, (which is in Korean, so rough translation) </div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Republic of Korea as well as the United States and the
United Kingdom, China and Hungary which had been under
constant cyber attacks, lead this principle and other major
20 countries including France and Germany have agreed to it.<br>
</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>Deputy of Preparatory Secretariat told " Though US
and UK, which regard cyberspace as neutal, had show
different view with China and Russia which see as
national sovereignty, but all countries sympathized with
general principle that cyberspace should be a peaceful
place, so they are tring to complete 'Seoul Principle'
through the intense debate. As of now, they are seeking
agreement for the draft from all participants, and most
major countries have agreed, so in the situation around
90~95% of the final stage." </div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best, </div>
<div>Oh Byoungil </div>
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.jinbo.net/support/"
target="_blank"><img moz-do-not-send="true"
src="http://blog.jinbo.net/attach/3778/1166155042.png"></a>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>