<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 15 February 2015 11:50 PM,
Carolina Rossini wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK-FJAfGtnANo6Y7pS4Nt6X2V8UJQws3gJ1JT18BtG8oLY4m9w@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">I do agree with you parminder. Burcu and I have been
saying for a long time - years - this community should pay more
attention to trade. The problem is where the rules are actually
made and are biding (=trade negotiations, such TPP and TTIP) there
is no multistakhoderism and even worts no transparency or means of
real accountability.
<div>We are losing in TPP (which has provisions worst than Acta,
and where internet is impacted in at least 3 of the agreement
chapters) and we lost Wyden in the fight against fast track - so
it is done there...</div>
<div>TTIP is a tiny better since is begging and EU has been
publishing its position documents. </div>
<div>But another interesting thing is that India, Brazil and
Russia are not part of this trade efforts ....</div>
<div>US don't want the ITU to take over the Internet, but then US
make rules trough trade with countries that have less bargain
power and need access on commodities </div>
<div>It is a joke<span></span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
The ITU is a convenient bogey raised by USG (supported by US based
transnationals and some 'civil society' members') to prevent other
countries from having any role in IG democratisation. Accepting that
ITU need not be the institution to 'take over the Internet' (bogey
statement), the USG game needs to be firmly resisted. And global CS
needs to firmly be with such resistance (read WEF v/s WSF)<br>
<br>
Guru<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK-FJAfGtnANo6Y7pS4Nt6X2V8UJQws3gJ1JT18BtG8oLY4m9w@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div><br>
On Sunday, February 15, 2015, parminder <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <font face="Verdana"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/rm/2015/237436.htm"
target="_blank">http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/rm/2015/237436.htm</a><br>
<br>
How US </font><font face="Verdana">sees </font><font
face="Verdana">trade rules </font><font face="Verdana"> </font><font
face="Verdana">being </font><font face="Verdana">basically
</font><font face="Verdana">the rules for the Internet,
because the Internet is the 'new shipping lanes' for
global trade, and so on.<br>
<br>
And of course, the rival model is China's and how, and see
the blunt shift here, it is bad for human rights and the
open Internet.<br>
<br>
Open trade and open Internet are basically one - and so
you choose the side you want to be on (So much for the
Seattle protesters, and the World Social Forum and
'Occupy' kinds, who stand against unbridled 'open' trade!)
<br>
<br>
Also, since the US is on the right side, it is clear that
it is the US who will make the international trade rules,
and thus, by derivation, the Internet rules.<br>
<br>
And when they call the Internet as the new shipping lanes,
to many of us the connection to colonialism comes through
strongly, and somewhat chillingly. But then the US now has
the global 1 percent across the world supporting new forms
of hegemonies, of which the WEF is a good symbol. <br>
<br>
The US establishment's case is rather clear and precise.
The rest of the world, or people in general (including of
the US), need to state theirs. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br>
</font><br>
<span>Remarks</span>
<div><span>
<div><span>Ambassador Daniel A. Sepulveda</span><br>
<span>Deputy Assistant Secretary and U.S. Coordinator
for International Communications and Information
Policy</span><span>, Bureau of Economic and Business
Affairs</span><span></span></div>
</span> </div>
<div><span>U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Association of
American Chambers of Commerce in Latin America<br>
</span> </div>
<div><span>Los Angeles, CA<br>
</span> </div>
<div>February 11, 2015</div>
<h1>Trade Promotion and the Fight to Preserve the Open
Internet</h1>
<br>
<ul>
<li> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/rm/2015/237436.htm"
target="_blank"> original </a> </li>
</ul>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p>Three billion people are connected to the Internet
today. And trillions of devices are set to join them
in the Internet of Things. Together, the
connectivity of people and machines is enabling
economic and social development around the world on
a revolutionary scale.</p>
<p>But it will take open markets, the cooperation of
leaders around the world, the participation of a
vibrant and diverse range of stakeholders, and
strong trade agreements, with language preserving
the free flow of information, to protect the
Internet’s potential as the world’s engine for
future growth, both at home and abroad.</p>
<p>As the number of Internet users worldwide has
ballooned from 2 to 3 billion, the increase in
Internet use creates significant economic potential.
The Obama Administration is working to unlock the
promise of e-commerce, keep the Internet free and
open, promote competitive access for
telecommunications suppliers, and set digital trade
rules-of-the-road by negotiating new trade
agreements. Trade Promotion Authority legislation
and the pending trade agreements we expect Congress
to consider over the coming months and years will
provide that kind of protection. These agreements
aim to ensure that the free flow of information and
data are the default setting for nations. This will
preserve the architecture that has empowered the
Internet and global communications to fuel economic
growth at home and abroad. It is in our interest,
across parties and ideology, to ensure we move
forward and approve TPA and the pending agreements
for many reasons, but promoting the preservation and
growth of global communications and the open
Internet is one of the strongest.</p>
<p>Senator Ron Wyden, the ranking member on the Senate
Finance Committee, has made the argument well,
stating, "America’s trade negotiating objectives
must reflect the fact that the Internet represents <i>the
shipping lane</i> for 21st Century goods and
services… Trade in digital goods and services is
growing and driving economic growth and job creation
all around the country. U.S digital exports are
beating imports by large margins, but outdated trade
rules threaten this growth by providing
opportunities for protectionist policies overseas.
The U.S. has the opportunity to establish new trade
rules that preserve the Internet as a platform to
share ideas and for expanding commerce..."</p>
<p>Senator Wyden is absolutely correct. Our pending
agreements with nations in the Pacific community
will establish rules for the preservation of those
virtual shipping lanes as enablers of the transport
of services and ideas, allowing startups and the
voices of everyday people to challenge incumbent
power in markets and ideas.</p>
<p>If we are successful, the partnership of nations
across the Trans-Pacific Partnership and
Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
regions coming behind agreements to preserve the
free flow of information will serve as a powerful
counterweight to authoritarian governments around
the globe that have demonstrated a clear willingness
to interfere with open markets and an open Internet.
And make no mistake about it, if we do not seize
every opportunity at our disposal to win commitments
to an open, global Internet, we risk letting others
set the rules of the road.</p>
<p>Authoritarian regimes view the Internet’s openness
as a threatening and destabilizing influence. The
Russian government, just last month, pressured
social media companies to block access to pages used
to organize peaceful political protests. In China,
authorities have blocked Gmail and Google’s search
engine. In addition to ongoing and systematic
efforts to control content and punish Chinese
citizens who run afoul of political sensitivities,
such measures are an effort to further diminish the
Chinese people’s access to information, while
effectively favoring Chinese Internet companies by
blocking other providers from accessing its market.
And we know they are urging others to take similar
action. These trade barriers harm commerce and slow
economic growth, and they produce socially
oppressive policies that inhibit freedom.</p>
<p>The rules of the road for commerce, and
Internet-enabled trade and e-commerce, are up for
grabs in Asia. We’re working harder than ever to
bring home trade agreements that will unlock
opportunities by eliminating barriers to U.S.
exports, trade, and investment while raising labor,
environment, and other important standards across
the board. Right now, China and others are
negotiating their own trade agreements and seeking
to influence the rules of commerce in the region and
beyond. These trade agreements fail to meet the high
standards that we strive for in our free trade
agreements, including protection for workers’ rights
and the environment. And they don’t protect
intellectual property rights or maintain a free and
open Internet. This will put our workers and our
businesses at a disadvantage.</p>
<p>We know that both old and new American businesses,
small and large alike, are dependent on the global
Internet as the enabler of access to previously
unreachable consumers. In the U.S. alone, American
Internet companies and their global community of
users contribute over $141 billion in annual revenue
to the overall U.S. GDP, simultaneously employing
6.6 million people. And the Internet is not simply
about the World Wide Web, it is the communications
platform for managing global supply chains,
distributing services, and acquiring the market
information necessary to succeed anywhere.</p>
<p>Many countries no longer primarily produce
products. Rather, businesses produce product
components and provide services, many of which are
delivered digitally. In order to remain competitive
globally and promote the capacity of businesses to
innovate, the United States and our partners in the
Western Hemisphere must build the Americas into a
shared, digitally connected, integrated platform for
global success. By working with our trade partners
in Latin America and Asia to conclude the
Trans-Pacific Partnership we are advancing this
vision and making it a reality. We will set the
standards with twenty-first century trade
agreements.</p>
<p>We know that not everyone is convinced of the
merits of open markets. And to win their hearts and
minds, we have to demonstrate and communicate how
these two values – open markets and the open
Internet - are interconnected. And we have to show
that Trade Promotion Authority and our agreements
embrace the values that underpin the Internet today.</p>
<p>As Ambassador Froman has said, “Trade, done right,
is part of the solution, not part of the problem.”
And, because it is true, our progressive friends
should recognize that the fight for open markets is
the position most consistent with our progressive
tradition and values.</p>
<p>It was Woodrow Wilson who said, “The program of the
world's peace, therefore, is our program; and that
program, the only possible program, as we see it, is
this” and he listed his fourteen points. Among them
was number three: “The removal, so far as possible,
of all economic barriers and the establishment of an
equality of trade conditions among all the nations
consenting to the peace and associating themselves
for its maintenance.”</p>
<p>It was Franklin Roosevelt who asked the New Deal
Congress for the first grant of trade negotiating
authority.</p>
<p>In his remarks at the signing of the Trade
Expansion Act of 1962, it was JFK who said,
“Increased economic activity resulting from
increased trade will provide more job opportunities
for our workers. Our industry, our agriculture, our
mining will benefit from increased export
opportunities as other nations agree to lower their
tariffs. Increased exports and imports will benefit
our ports, steamship lines, and airlines as they
handle an increased amount of trade. Lowering of our
tariffs will provide an increased flow of goods for
our American consumers. Our industries will be
stimulated by increased export opportunities and by
freer competition with the industries of other
nations for an even greater effort to develop an
efficient, economic, and productive system. The
results can bring a dynamic new era of growth.”</p>
<p>And it is consistent with the sentiments of these
giants in our tradition, our progressive tradition,
that President Obama most recently stated,
“Twenty-first century businesses, including small
businesses, need to sell more American products
overseas. Today, our businesses export more than
ever, and exporters tend to pay their workers higher
wages. But as we speak, China wants to write the
rules for the world’s fastest-growing region. That
would put our workers and our businesses at a
disadvantage. Why would we let that happen? We
should write those rules. We should level the
playing field. That’s why I’m asking both parties to
give me trade promotion authority to protect
American workers, with strong new trade deals from
Asia to Europe that aren’t just free, but are also
fair. It’s the right thing to do.”</p>
<p>Friends, we have both a political and economic
interest in promoting open markets and an open
Internet. Preservation of these ideals is and should
remain a bipartisan, and broadly held goal. It is
critical to our future and contained within the
language we are asking Congress to approve.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.666666984558105px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><span
style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">-- </span><br
style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">
<div dir="ltr" style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">
<div
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.666666984558105px"><i>Carolina
Rossini </i></div>
<div
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.666666984558105px"><font
color="#666666"><i>Vice President, International
Policy</i></font></div>
<div
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.666666984558105px"><b><font
color="#666666">Public Knowledge</font></b></div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="arial, sans-serif"><span
style="font-size:12.666666984558105px"><u><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/"
target="_blank">http://www.publicknowledge.org/</a></u></span></font><br>
</div>
<div
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.666666984558105px"><a
moz-do-not-send="true" value="+16176979389"
style="color:rgb(102,102,102)">+ 1 6176979389 | </a><font
color="#666666">skype: carolrossini | </font><font
color="#0000ff">@carolinarossini</font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>