[governance] RE: [bestbits] Rousseff & Chehade: Brazil will host world event on Internet governance in 2014

Rafik Dammak rafik.dammak at gmail.com
Fri Oct 11 11:30:19 EDT 2013 

Hi Parminder,

sorry I was not asking about the draft letter but more what I understood
from your proposal is that we move quickly  and spend time shorter than
usual even if there are concerns . I want to be sure if I got you message
correctly.
I am still cautious with hurrying to write letter , I am still not
convinced and I want to highlight that any action we take, will have impact
soon or later and can backfire.   I don't think that you would disagree
with more strategical approach.

Best,

Rafik

2013/10/11 parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>

>  It is here
>
> http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/Brazil2014
>
> Just a word of caution - we dont want to make this an ominbus document of
> demands. At this stage we need a clear, crisp and strong letter, of a few
> sentences, that Brazilian President or some top guy would actually read,
> and not get confusing messages. I am not saying we should not say whatever
> we definitively want to say - but be clear and short, that is all.
>
> parminder
>
>
>  On Friday 11 October 2013 11:15 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>
> Hi Parminder,
>
>  sorry I am not really getting the proposal you are developing here? can
> you please clarify?
>
>
>   Rafik
>
>
> 2013/10/11 parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>
>>
>> Since as argued below, in our judgement, time is strategically of
>> essense, some of us would keep working on a posible text over today and try
>> to present something to IGC and BB by the end of the day.... We do very
>> much hope IGC and BB can sign on it by consensus, but it doesnt happen we
>> would open it to organisations and people who want to sign it (sorry, this
>> is a practice I normally do not like so much, but I dont think it is ok
>> that we can produce a statement to critique a UN process is just no time,
>> with all kind of ambiguous languages, and on such an important - potential
>> game changer - initiative  from a developing country, a paralysis seems to
>> be setting in)...
>>
>> parminder
>>
>>
>>   On Friday 11 October 2013 11:02 AM, parminder wrote:
>>
>> Well let then that be as it has to be... "There is *a tide* in the *affairs
>> of men*. Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune"...
>>
>> Leadership doesnt come searching for you, you have to seize it....
>> President Rousseff was made, what would have perhaps been, somewhat a
>> regular kind of offer. She seized it with both her hands, even announced
>> the like month etc.. That is what gave it such a sudden high prominence,
>> and people are celebrating Rousseff, and somewhere, if it plays its cards
>> well, Brazil have now got an edge.... which it can use to further its
>> interest...
>>
>> Civil society also is supposed to be representing some interests - real
>> interests of real people, who are most marginalised, and we have to take
>> our own responsibility seriously . We cannot be eternally paralysed, which
>> hurts these interests. If there are real differences of views, well, that
>> counts.... But a permanent simple wait-and-watch attitude would do us no
>> good...
>>
>> Lets analyse what we have here.... Or what risks we run and what gains we
>> can make...  And others must also contribute what they think are risks or
>> advantages.... merely saying we are not sure yet, tells talk more, do face
>> to face and all,,,, Such stuff I think, just my own view, is not the
>> appropriate response.
>>
>> ICANN, either on its own or tech community's behalf tries to cosy up to
>> the Brazilians (perhaps in anticipation of the new proposal for
>> democratising global IG that Rousseff said Brazil will soon present - BTW,
>> the day of the annual discussion on WSIS and IG issues in the UN GA is 22nd
>> Oct, but whatever...) . It proposes a real dialogue to see what needs to be
>> changed about the global governance of the Internet. Rousseff immediately
>> seizes the initiative, and even declares a possible timeline, just like
>> that, off-hand.... That is leadership material. That is all that has
>> happened, and that is all anyone knows has happened. There is nothing
>> hidden that civil society may suddenly become complicit to if they support
>> this proposal.
>>
>> In supporting it, we would only be saying -
>> (1) yes, we agree that 'a real dialogue' on what needs to change in
>> global governance of the Internet should take place with some urgency,
>> (2) such a dialogue should take place in an open and not  a hidden
>> manner,
>> (3) it is certainly encouraging that the initiative comes from one of the
>> key developing nations - the main votaries of a 'real change' - and ICANN
>> or the technical community - seen as the main symbol and defender of status
>> quo,and that
>> (4) we want civil society to be equally there in the middle of all
>> action, as the dialogue shapes and takes place...
>>
>> Nothing more and nothing less. (If anything sinister about the proposed
>> meeting surfaces at any later time we can as publicly withdraw our support,
>> saying this is  not at all what we bargained for)
>>
>> So either people here agree to the above, and we can write a statement,
>> or they dont... This is the time to do the statement, when people are still
>> wondering what kind of initiative it really is, and with what implications.
>> Throw in our hat - and well, kind of make this thing somewhat trilateral
>> from its current bi-lateral status (Brazil - ICANN tech community) We may
>> not succeed, but we must try. .... In a few weeks, the initiative would
>> already be too solidified in fact, or in people's mind for civil society
>> support to have this kind of impact....
>>
>> Parminder
>>
>>
>> On Friday 11 October 2013 05:56 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
>>
>>  I agree with Deborah – lets wait till a bit more information emerges.
>> We can draft a letter which is more meaningful when we have a better idea
>> of the scope, objectives, possible outcomes, likely attendees, and possible
>> processes for the conference. It’s quite likely more information will
>> emerge in the next week or so, therefore I think we should discuss at Bali
>> and before then try to find out a little more.
>>
>> Ian Peter
>>
>>  *From:* Deborah Brown <deborah at accessnow.org>
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 11, 2013 10:35 AM
>> *To:* Nnenna Nwakanma <nnenna75 at gmail.com>
>> *Cc:* mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>
>> *Subject:* Re: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Rousseff & Chehade: Brazil
>> will host world event on Internet governance in 2014
>>
>>  Dear all,
>>
>> I see the advantage of engaging early on this, but I'm a bit concerned
>> that we are rushing unnecessarily to finalize a letter before many of us
>> travel and are otherwise overstretched. I wonder if it might make more
>> sense to continue this discussion online and take advantage of the
>> in-person meetings in Bali, for those of us attending, to develop a CS
>> agenda. Also, as others have pointed out, we know so little about the
>> initiative at this point.
>>
>> The draft text (available here: http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/Brazil2014)
>> does not seem to capture the cautious optimism that a number of people have
>> expressed. I also have concerns about providing our "strongest endorsement"
>> of the Marco Civil process, when that process is not yet complete. Of
>> course the text of the letter could change dramatically in just a few hours
>> ;)
>>
>> I find Nnenna's approach to be sound, but it does imply a follow on
>> communication with more concrete proposals. I wonder if it might be more
>> effective to streamline our communication to the Brazilian president and
>> head of ICANN.
>>
>> To sum up, I see clear advantages to both "striking while the iron is
>> hot" and a more cautious approach. But given the factors I mentioned above,
>> I would support taking some extra time if we need it. In any case, I'm
>> looking forward to hearing others' ideas and continuing the discussion
>> around this important development.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Deborah
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Nnenna Nwakanma <nnenna75 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>>   Dear all
>>>
>>>
>>>    1. I do believe that if any support there is, from the civil
>>>    society, it is support for an IDEA that "appears" more open and inclusive
>>>    that the current IGF
>>>    2. So I am cautious about writing a letter that may be in any way
>>>    understood as  "Civil Society lauds Dilma and ICANN's push".
>>>    3. A short letter informing that global Civil Society that are
>>>    working on, concerned about and/or interested in IG and Internet issues
>>>    intend to play key roles in the summit.
>>>    4. I believe we should communicate key values we plan to pursue in
>>>    the summit
>>>    5. Underline the central idea of multistakeholder participation
>>>    6. Say that we are beginnning discussions about the diverse roles
>>>    that CS can play and that some time in Bali will be dedicated to the issue
>>>    during the BB meeting in Bali.
>>>
>>>
>>>  If we recall, workshop 127 in Bali will be discussing the MS Selection
>>> processes, and I do hope, personally that we can use that opportunity to
>>> sharpen the focus.  A reminder of the WS is on
>>> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/wks2013/workshop_2013_status_list_view.php?xpsltipq_je=127
>>>
>>>  I am traveling in unconnected rural areas but will be back online and
>>> I'm happy to contribute language if any text begins to surface.  In case I
>>> do not, here are my ideas:
>>>
>>>    1. Say what exactly it is the global CS is supporting, which is the
>>>    idea, and not the institutions
>>>    2. Make a clear statement on our willingness to engage
>>>    3. Recall that our engagement is based on the Multistakeholder
>>>    principle
>>>    4. Inform that discussions have started and are ongoing
>>>    5. Say we will be coming up with ore concrete engagement proposals
>>>    6. Requesto have fundamental info, if available, to help us scope
>>>    the idea itself.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nnenna
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Joana Varon <joana at varonferraz.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>>   Dear people,
>>>>
>>>>  For the level of information I have (which is basically: Brazil and
>>>> ICANN have proposed to host a Summit on Internet after April -
>>>> coincidentally or right after the meeting on Sharm el Sheik and before the
>>>> presidential elections period), I don't feel comfortable about writing a
>>>> letter congratulating for something I dont really know what it is.
>>>>
>>>>  But I do truly support Anja's suggestion to start working on our
>>>> agenda online and, with a potential to be much richer, during our several
>>>> meetings in Bali. (what do we want from all this besides participating in
>>>> the Summit??)
>>>>
>>>>  In the meanwhile, I rather take breath to understand and discuss this
>>>> with the Brazilian government and Brazilian colleagues from civil society
>>>> or other sectors. And see what is the final draft of Marco Civil that the
>>>> government will bring to our table very soon (if it truly endorses all the
>>>> principles she has mentioned at the UNGA).
>>>>
>>>>  I'm sorry if it's a bit of a skeptic or over cautious position, but I
>>>> really need more inputs to see the big picture.
>>>>
>>>> All the best
>>>>
>>>> joana
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 2:59 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> M
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net
>>>>> [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Carlos A.
>>>>> Afonso
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 10:12 AM
>>>>> To: McTim
>>>>> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein; Lee W McKnight;
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>> Dammak; Joana Varon; &lt,bestbits at lists.bestbits.net&gt,; NCSG List
>>>>> Subject: Re: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Rousseff & Chehade: Brazil
>>>>> will
>>>>> host world event on Internet governance in 2014
>>>>>
>>>>>  Dear compa McT,
>>>>>
>>>>> You being a rigorous techie, maybe you will not change your logical
>>>>> view...
>>>>> :) And I understand there is a lot of people in all sectors who feel
>>>>> disturbed by the emerging presence of Brazil and its concrete
>>>>> proposals to
>>>>> finally move on.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the very beginning Fadi describes the motivation -- Rousseff's
>>>>> statement
>>>>> at the UN, her clear adherence to the basic principles most of civil
>>>>> society
>>>>> defends (which she has repeated several times in her radio program and
>>>>> her
>>>>> twitter @dilmabr), and her proposal to build a planetary framework of
>>>>> rights. This did not come out of the blue, from a meeting of IP
>>>>> addressers
>>>>> in a wonderful city called Montevideo. Do you think Fadi just dropped
>>>>> by the
>>>>> presidential door in Brasilia, knocked and entered to sell that
>>>>> proposal? :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, it is relevant to understand that this is not a proposal for
>>>>> yet
>>>>> another Icann meeting, or a reedition of the UN chatting space called
>>>>> IGF,
>>>>> as both Dilma and Fadi made it very clear. It is a major achievement
>>>>> that
>>>>> that motivation brought Icann to colead this effort jointly with BR.
>>>>>
>>>>> All the more so because, as you know, there are strong sectors within
>>>>> the
>>>>> government who would love to bring the root-zone to the purview of the
>>>>> ITU,
>>>>> who hate Icann, who do not like the pluriparticipative model of
>>>>> governance
>>>>> we defend, and who are basically associated with the transnational
>>>>> telecom
>>>>> oligopoly which controls the main networks in BR.
>>>>> Dilma is courageously up against a huge wall here, to defend those
>>>>> principles, and receiving Fadi and emerging from the meeting with thar
>>>>> proposal was a major political milestone for her in those internal
>>>>> disputes
>>>>> as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> [] fraterno
>>>>>
>>>>> --c.a.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/10/2013 10:14 AM, McTim wrote:
>>>>> > At 55 seconds in, Fadi says:
>>>>> > "Her Excellency President Rousseff has accepted our invitation that
>>>>> we
>>>>> > hold next year a Global Summit"
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Seem fairly clear to me.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >> McT, maybe you should watch the video a few times more... :)
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> --c.a.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On 10/10/2013 09:57 AM, McTim wrote:
>>>>> >>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:50 PM, michael gurstein <
>>>>> gurstein at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>>> Why so pessimistic and cynical everyone.. I may be wrong but this
>>>>> >>>> isn't just about ICANN, although hats off to Fadi for getting this
>>>>>  >>>> going and putting that into play.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> I'm not pessimistic or cynical.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> But I would be extremely surprised if the Pres. of Brazil is going
>>>>> >>>> to invite the world to Rio in April next year to discuss names and
>>>>> >>>> numbers. Rather my reading is that she is by-passing the quite
>>>>> >>>> evident log-jam at the ITU, the frivolities of the IGF, the now
>>>>> >>>> discredited "Internet Freedom" crusade and the status quo which it
>>>>>  >>>> was intended to cast into concrete errr. (non) rules and regs.
>>>>>  >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> It appears to me, after watching the video again several times that
>>>>> >>> it is ICANN (and I assume the rest of the Montevideoans) that are
>>>>> >>> spearheading this.  In other words the idea of the Summit comes
>>>>> from
>>>>> >>> the T&A folks, not Brasilia.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Joana Varon Ferraz
>>>> @joana_varon
>>>> PGP 0x016B8E73
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>  Deborah Brown
>> Senior Policy Analyst
>> Access | accessnow.org
>> rightscon.org
>>
>>  @deblebrown
>> PGP 0x5EB4727D
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131012/b99138ec/attachment.htm>

More information about the Bestbits mailing list