<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
An op-ed by Parminder in Hindu, a leading Indian daily highlighting
structural geo-political and geo-economics issues of IG, and the
need for new alignments that can disrupt the increasingly more
powerful and more uni-polar networked-digital complex centred in the
US.<br>
<br>
regards,<br>
Guru<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/who-rules-cyberspace/article7287716.ece">http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/who-rules-cyberspace/article7287716.ece</a><br>
Who rules cyberspace?<br>
Parminder Jeet Singh <br>
<br>
A new architecture of social power and control is getting built with
its core in the U.S.India should work through the BRICS group to
develop an alternative to this Internet hegemony<br>
<br>
The Internet evokes a deep dilemma of whether ‘to govern or not’.
Few things work as well as the Internet does: it’s always on, always
obliging, and consists of endless possibilities, routinely conjuring
wonders that we have not dreamt of. On the other hand, it is
difficult not to be troubled by how the Internet is everywhere, but
without any clear means of accountability and political reaction to
how much it is changing around us. But without sufficient clarity
regarding the nature of the problems and the required solutions,
mere general political scepticism cannot hold a candle to the
populist governmental-hands-off-the-Internet sentiment. The latter
is expectedly strongest among the richer classes, who trust the
devices of the market to get the Internet to do their bidding. Other
than routine knee-jerk reactions over people freely expressing
themselves on the Internet, which could threaten various kinds of
power elites, while also sometimes causing genuine security and
cultural concerns, there exists no serious political conceptions
around the Internet in India today, much less its appropriate
governance in public interest.<br>
<br>
This state of affairs is quite detrimental to society as the
Internet is becoming closely associated with social power and
control in almost all areas. It has become like a global neural
system running through and transforming all social sectors. Whoever
has control over this neural network begins to wield unprecedented
power — economic, political, social and cultural. Two elements of
this emerging system are the connectivity architecture and the
continuous bits of information generated by each and every micro
activity of our increasingly digitised existence — what is generally
known as Big Data. Even a superficial scan of how the triple
phenomenon of digitisation, networking and datafication is occurring
in every area will suggest the nature of consolidation of power in
the hands of anyone who can control these two elements.<br>
<br>
Every sector is impacted<br>
<br>
Take the agriculture sector for example. Monsanto is now
increasingly a Big Data company, as it holds almost field-wise micro
information on climate, soil type, neighbourhood agri-patterns, and
so on. Such data will form the backbone of even its traditional
agri-offerings. It is easy to understand how data control-based
lock-ins are going to be even more powerful and monopolistic than
the traditional dependencies in this sector. Recently, John Deere,
the world’s largest agricultural machinery maker, told the U.S.
Copyright Office that farmers don’t own their tractors. Because
computer code runs through modern tractors, farmers receive “an
implied license for the life of the vehicle to operate the vehicle”.
There is a pattern of end-to-end informational controls.<br>
<br>
Similar developments are occurring in every other sector.
Policymaking and governance are becoming dangerously dependent on
Big Data, even as the public sector is all but giving up its
traditional responsibilities for public statistics. The state is
increasingly dependent on data collected and controlled by a few
global corporations. Data companies such as Google are entering
verticals like automobile and health in a manner that is threatening
the traditional players in these sectors. Doctors subscribing to
medical information networks carrying patient data, disease
demographics, pharma information, and so on could soon become but
appendages of the network. The network they think right now is a
mere support may become the primary agent in the relationship. Such
is the power of the network, vis-a-vis its peripheral users. Network
and data providers in the education sector sell their services in
the name of personalised offerings for every student, and every
context. Schools with resources may find them alluring, but then
they merely add to the power of the monopolistic networks, at the
expense of their peripheral users. As their power consolidates, so
do the terms of engagements mutate in the favour of the network
controllers.<br>
<br>
Here we have deliberately used examples of power shifts across whole
sectors induced by digital networks. On the individual-use front, it
is perhaps even easier to see the kind of social power exercised by
those who can at will alter the algorithms of Facebook and Google,
which increasingly provide us the logic and pattern of our social
relationships and of means of accessing information and opinion
making.<br>
<br>
All this should set us thinking about who really controls the
digital connectivity patterns and Big Data. In this regard, one can
speak of a global unipolar networked-digital complex, with its
elements of political and commercial power, both overwhelmingly
concentrated in the U.S..<br>
<br>
We are therefore witness to a phenomenon which is of extreme social
importance, spanning all sectors of society. And the powerful levers
of control of this phenomenon almost entirely lie in an
eco-political domain over which the Indian society or state has no
control, and very limited influence. This should be a public policy
nightmare. However, you would not suspect it if you were watching
the political discourse in India, not only inside the government but
also outside. One comes across periodic discussions on freedom of
expression issues, while the state, and some civil society actors,
have begun to show heightened security-related anxieties. But one
hears nothing about the overall new architecture of social power and
control that is getting built, with its core in the U.S. It
implicates very significant long-term economic, political, social
and cultural issues that should greatly concern a country like
India. Even freedom of expression and security are significantly
related to this new power architecture.<br>
<br>
Governments are traditionally slow on the take with regard to such
rapidly moving phenomena, however socially important they might be.
Civil society engagement in this area is dominated by middle class
interests, whereby markets tend to be considered as essentially
benign. Their major struggle is against the excesses of the state,
the Internet no doubt being a significant new arena for such
excesses. This has resulted in serious blind-spots regarding the
larger architectural issues about the global Internet, with
far-reaching economic, social and cultural implications. It is
urgently required to undertake a systematic examination of these
issues, situating them in the geo-political and geo-economic logics
that overwhelmingly drive them. Appropriate domestic and foreign
policies have to be developed within such a larger understanding.<br>
<br>
India’s geopolitical options<br>
<br>
Even for a country of India’s stature, it is not easy to play the
geo-political game on its own, and certainly not in an area viewed
by the dominant actors as among the most crucial for establishing
global political and economic domination. No quarters will be given
here, as has been clear from the pronounced non-activity in the
limited UN-based global forums dealing with Internet governance
issues. This, therefore, is not a field for the faint-hearted; it
requires strong real politik approaches.<br>
<br>
The only option left for India is to go with the strong nations that
are similarly placed with respect to U.S.’s digital hegemony.
Although this is one area where the EU countries are almost as much
the victims as other countries, it is unlikely that they will break
their geo-political alliance with the U.S. any time soon. They would
either keep suffering silently, or seek solutions at the bilateral
level with the U.S., and through strengthening EU level regulation.
Just last month, the economic ministers of Germany and France sought
a “general regulatory framework for ‘essential digital platforms’”
at the EU level.<br>
<br>
India should work through the BRICS group (Brazil, Russia, India,
China and South Africa) to develop an alternative to the U.S.-based
global unipolar networked-digital complex. This may be the only
viable path right now. It could be difficult for BRICS to work
together on issues involving civil and political rights, for which
reason the cooperation could focus on economic issues. The global
architecture of the Internet today is mostly determined by its
geo-economic underpinnings.<br>
<br>
Going beyond the typical one-off treatment of Internet and big data
issues, BRICS must begun to see them in a larger geo-systemic
framework. The last BRICS summit gave a resounding response to the
global financial hegemonies by setting up a New Development Bank,
and an alternative reserve currency system. The next BRICS summit in
Ufa, Russia, in July 2015 should come up with a similar systemic
response to the U.S.-centred Internet. This can be achieved by
pulling together a strong framework for BRICS cooperation on digital
economy. That would be the biggest game changer with respect to what
is now a complete stalemate over global governance of the Internet.<br>
<br>
(Parminder Jeet Singh works with the Bengaluru-based NGO, IT for
Change. He has been an advisor to the Chair of the United Nations
Internet Governance Forum. <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Email:parminder@itforchange.net">Email:parminder@itforchange.net</a>)<br>
<br>
<br>
<img alt="" src="cid:part2.07030701.08060507@ITforChange.net"
height="270" width="318"><br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>