<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
Milton/ Lee<br>
<br>
I think both the US gov-corporate establishment and the ITU will
take a considerable hit by this breakdown. And more I think of it,
it appears to me to be a somewhat historic moment. The kid gloves
are off. US plus has clearly said - off with the ITU, we are done
with the polite noises that we used to make at and about ITU with
regard to its various Internet related activities. (Among other
things, the ITU's May WTPF meeting is in serious trouble; if the
Internet resolution at the WCIT was the real problem, with WTPF
almost entirely about what was written in the Resolution, I dont
know what is going to happen to it. )<br>
<br>
On the other side, G 77 may also begin to assert; and
correspondingly respond by saying, the detente on passive acceptance
of US led/ controlled private IG systems is over now ..... With US
plus having walked out of what was a harmless ITR, its diplomatic
resources will get seriously depleted to defend the status quo. <br>
<br>
It seems that 2013 is going to an important year for global IG....
The battle lines are more clearly drawn. I hope civil society
contributes in a positive way, in what can in a way be constructed
as a 'significant opportunity' having opened up for appropriate
agenda framing and insitutional development that is in the best
global public interest.<br>
<br>
<i><b>BTW, two days back second committee of UN GA approved the text
on CSTD WG on enhanced cooperation,</b></i> after a week of what
seemed to be a complete impasse, with chances of a WG looking low.<br>
<br>
Also, the WSIS review will take place by the end of 2015 now, rather
than towards end of 2014. So more time now before the what is
expected to be a high level event (though the decision for the level
and modalities has been put off to the next GA). <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Friday 14 December 2012 08:22 PM,
Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2292FC8@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:"Consolas","serif";}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier
New";color:#1F497D">Lee:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier
New";color:#1F497D">The more I look at this, the more
it seems that the US misplayed its hand.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier
New";color:#1F497D">There is nothing objectionable or
demonstrably harmful in the ITRs per se.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier
New";color:#1F497D">The fact that countries like the
Netherlands, Tunisia and Brazil plan to sign the ITRs (if
that list is correct) is not quite consistent with the
contention that the new ITRs are a massive deviation from
“MS governance” or part of an attempt by authoritarian
states to take over the internet.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier
New";color:#1F497D">If and when the refusniks are
limited to a handful of Anglo-Saxon countries they will end
up looking isolated.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier
New";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier
New";color:#1F497D">--MM<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier
New";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Lee W McKnight<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, December 14, 2012 9:37 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>; parminder<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [governance] WCIT melt down<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">Parminder,<br>
<br>
I don't know that you can pin this on civil society, who
remember was not even an invited guest to the party at
the start of the WCIT preparatory process.<br>
<br>
IF the resolution had a different more conciliatory
phrasing oriented towards 'exploring' what to do as
Internet progresses etc etc, maybe then the split could
be have been avoided. The resolution was too directive
for issues for which a consensus does not exist.<br>
<br>
In a treaty-making poker game, if key players blow their
hand....things happen. <br>
<br>
And at that final table, CS still didn't have a seat
even if it had a peek at a few players cards.
<br>
<br>
Lee<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span style="color:black">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%">
</span></div>
<div id="divRpF626531">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>] on behalf of
parminder [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, December 14, 2012 12:40 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [governance] WCIT melt down</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">On
Friday 14 December 2012 10:00 AM, Adam Peake
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><snip)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">So why
did he encourage plenary to spend so many hours on
Human Rights? It seemed to obsess him, he was
personally stung by comments and concerns (very
legitimate) that some proposal had potential to harm
fundamental rights. How many full sessions discussed
a single line of text in the preamble, 2, 3, more?
All for his own PR, he said as much, it was about
the press and perception. So I wonder, if he has
used the same passion and time to persuade and
cajole delegates to think of ways in which the ITRs
could contain high-level and lasting principles that
encouraged the spread of/access to broadband across
the globe, perhaps we would have had something
useful and lasting.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><br>
Adam, <br>
<br>
Can you suggest how ITRs could have encouraged
spread of broadband without mentioning Internet or
broadband (which is Internet) in the ITRs? You know
that one side was completely intent that, what come
may, Internet/ broadband cannot find mention in the
ITRs....<br>
<br>
The problem with the WCIT process was that it was a
battle between two sides both with an entirely
negative agenda. One side wanted to prevent US et
all from making a historical point that Internet is
an unregulated space - whereby their new global
domination strategy could be unrestrained. The other
side was trying to prevent China/ Russia et all from
changing the basic nature of the global Internet
into a tightly state controlled space.
<br>
<br>
The middle, which is supposed to be the sane lot,
and that should have included many countries, as
well as, prominently, the civil society, which is
supposed to contribute a positive agenda, failed.
That I think is the primary failure here. The 'sane
public interest-oriented middle' did not get formed.
And the civil society was supposed to have a big
role in it. So, perhaps, we failed, more than anyone
else. (Do we want to look into this failure?)<br>
<br>
A global treaty, especially as concerning a matter
of such monumental importance as the Internet, is
supposed to give the people of the world some
hope.... Take any treaty or global summit process
till now, whether concerning climate change, trade,
traditional knowledge, etc etc........... There is
always some hope built from a summit/ treaty
process, and civil society is on the side of this
positive hope. Mostly leading the positive hope
brigade.
<br>
<br>
What was the hope or positive expectation offered by
the WCIT? Was there any? No, none. It was a battle
between two perverse agendas. And, I dare say, good
that neither won, and the process broke down. I
highly appreciate the sentiment of Marilia's email,
but in this case, I am not too unhappy that the
treaty process kind of failed. I am not celebrating
the breakdown of dialogue. I am hopeful that this
breakdown will come as a positive shake-up to our
collective and selective slumbers that many of us
seem to be caught in, in terms of public interest
regulation of the Internet. My hope is that such
shake-up will now start a real honest dialogue. Thus
I am still celebrating the process of dialogue -
honest and open dialogue about real issues (and not
shadow boxing) and beyond selective hype, focussed
on global public interest and not narrow partisan
agendas as the WCIT process was.<br>
<br>
The situation which had been reached in the WCIT
process, I am completely unable to figure out, if
WCIT process had succeeded,
<i>what would it have succeeded at.</i> I am unable
to form any conception of what I could have
considered as WCIT success - that, one could say
proudly, <i> it gave the world this and this</i>....
I will be happy if anyone here can share any such
possible conception of a 'successful WCIT' (keeping
within the limits in which WCIT process has been
trapped for a long time now), and perhaps I can
still be persuade to feel bad about this 'failure'.
But right now, I am unable to do so.<br>
<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Instead
he seems to have allowed the Union under his
leadership to become divided. We'll see how badly
later on. Also found his comments last night poor:
Last night: "I have been saying in the run-up to
this conference that this conference is not about
governing the internet. I repeat, that the
conference did not include provisions on the
internet in the treaty text." etc. Opening plenary:
"In preparing for this conference, we have seen and
heard many comments about ITU or the United Nations
trying to take over the Internet. Let me be very
clear one more time: WCIT is not about taking over
the Internet. And WCIT is not about Internet
governance." Sorry, that's twisting words and
twisting generally. The resolutions are part of the
ITRs, they can be binding on the secretariat, they
are "WICT. So I wonder if Toure's blown his chance
for a legacy. Best, Adam
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<pre><span style="color:black">Cheers<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Keith<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">On 14/12/2012 4:31 p.m., Adam Peake wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<pre><span style="color:black">Toure's words of congratulation (and sound-bites for the media) we hollow.<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Adam<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre><span style="color:black">____________________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">To be removed from the list, visit:<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">For all other list information and functions, see:<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>