<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Verdana">Some of you may have<a
href="http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2015-06-23/news/63746235_1_icann-gom-special-arrangement">
read reports on India's new turn</a> with regard to global IG,
towards </font><font face="Verdana">focussing on </font><font
face="Verdana">bilateral cooperation with the US. (Brazil too
seems to be doing a similar thing.) It would certainly have a
significant bearing on its how much energy it may correspondingly
invest in UN based forums or possibilities, though the exact
impact may be difficult to judge at this stage.<br>
<br>
</font><font face="Verdana">As perhaps can be expected, I have
written criticising this new turn as coming from lack of
appreciation of the issues at stake. Please see below.<br>
<br>
</font><font face="Verdana"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://thewire.in/2015/07/06/why-is-india-a-follower-in-cyberspace-when-it-can-lead/">http://thewire.in/2015/07/06/why-is-india-a-follower-in-cyberspace-when-it-can-lead/</a><br>
</font><br>
<font face="Verdana">Here are some voices from Indian civil society
that see this new turn in a rather positive light. In fact I wrote
partly in response to these two articles and quote them.<br>
</font><font face="Verdana"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2015-06-23/news/63746235_1_icann-gom-special-arrangement"><font
face="Verdana"><br>
</font></a><font face="Verdana"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://thewire.in/2015/06/22/indias-new-multistakeholder-line-could-be-a-gamechanger-in-global-cyberpolitics/">http://thewire.in/2015/06/22/indias-new-multistakeholder-line-could-be-a-gamechanger-in-global-cyberpolitics/</a><br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://thewire.in/2015/06/24/the-i-in-the-internet-must-also-stand-for-india/">http://thewire.in/2015/06/24/the-i-in-the-internet-must-also-stand-for-india/</a></font><br>
<br>
</font><font face="Verdana"><br>
As the real geo-economic </font><font face="Verdana">contours </font><font
face="Verdana">of global Internet power become clearer, countries
like India and Brazil will have to again change their tack, but
they would have lost a lot of momentum. Very unfortunate for all
developing countries, because without these leaders there is not
much to be expected on global Internet governance for developing
countries as a group. <br>
<br>
Among developing countries, China is the only one that is
comfortably placed and knows what it is doing. This is due to its
unique political and as well as economic control over its own
Internet. China currently does not see great value in seeking
strong global IG regimes, because it is anyway able to get all
that it wants. Plus, in absence of strong global IG regimes, it is
the Chinese domestic IG model that becomes </font><font
face="Verdana"> increasingly more </font><font face="Verdana">appealing
to developing countries and China can help them with it, in the
process drawing various kinds of advantages. There are news of a
recent South Africa and China agreement which may go towards some
such direction. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
</font>
</body>
</html>