<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 03 May 2015 02:04 AM, Ralf
Bendrath wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:554534CD.9060708@zedat.fu-berlin.de"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Am 30.01.2015 um 12:04 schrieb "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang":
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">good that you remember the Geneva CS declaration from 2003.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">FWIW, it's here -also the CS statement on the 2005 WSIS II:
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.worldsummit2003.de/en/nav/14.htm"><http://www.worldsummit2003.de/en/nav/14.htm></a>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">As you
know, the WSIS 10 conference in December 2015 will be a purely
intergovernmental meeting with a final intergovernmental document.
They want to have a multistakeholder discussion phase before the
intergovernmental negotiations phase. With other words, there is no
way for CS to participate in the drafting of the final document from
a CS perspective.</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
Do however know/ remember that <br>
<br>
1. Developing countries fought for almost two years seeking a WSIS
plus 10 'summit' in the full original WSIS style, with prep coms and
all , which would have followed all practises adopted during the
original WSIS... There are G 77 drafts for UN resolution with that
language.<br>
<br>
2. US led developed countries group simply refused to allow it,
strongly and consistently, which is why the UN assembly decision
about WSIS plus 10 kept being postponed over a year and a half, and
*which is why* we are having a truncated WSIS 10 in NY rather than a
full summit process with preparatory processes in Geneva.<br>
<br>
3. Rather significantly, and that may interest this list even more,
prominent civil society players, either actively or implicitly,
followed and supported the US led developed countries' approach.
Which of course have contributed to where we are now with the WSIS
plus 10. I often raised this issue during the last many months,
seeking support for G 77 position for a 'full' WSIS plus 10 but
always met a stony silence. Wolfgang, would you refuse this fact
that CS did not seek original WSIS style WSIS plus 10 when
developing countries were fighting for it, and that includes
yourself... So why rue it now... This to me appears extremely
strange. Other then, well, of course, to play the routine band of
decrying 'governments (read developing country governments) claiming
more control'. No, this is untrue.. WSIS is happening in NY in a
truncated manner - not following original WSIS processes - not
because of G 77 but because of the so call global IG
multistakeholder-ists - led by the US, and including a very big
section of IG CS, who want to sideline if not fully abandon UN with
respect to any role in global IG. Lets please not distort history.<br>
<br>
Not only active efforts were made by the so called global IG
multistakeholderists, including civil society players, to downplay
WSIS plus 10, and that still continues, formations like the
NetMundial initiative, as also the London process (whose latest
meeting took place in The Hague) are all part of the plot to take
global Internet governance and policy out of the UN to captured
spaces. After having fully contributed to developing that situation,
how convenient now to rue the truncated NY based WSIS plus 10! Any
thing and every thing goes as long as it can contribute to a well
orchestrated dominant discourse which basically simply supports the
US led global IG status quo. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:554534CD.9060708@zedat.fu-berlin.de"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Which is a shame for those who've been around in 2002-2005, but shows
how the governments are claiming more control, as predicted by
Goldsmith/Wu back then..
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">It would be great if somebody could start also a drafting process for
a CS Statement for WSIS 10+ in New York. Such an Independent document
should take the Geneva Declarationm from 2003 as a starting point and
check what has been achieved and what not and what remains to be
done.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">And what new issues have appeared in the last 10 years...
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">One could formulate some new objectives and pout this into an
Independent document called "A Civil Society WSIS 2025 Agenda".
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Would be nice, yes.
Best, Ralf
</pre>
<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>