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

Sat Oct 12 09:52:18 EDT 2013

Thanks for this excellent analysis, Mawaki,

Just adding a few more points.

Most of such 'really politically meaningful' initiatives like the 
Rousseff-ICANN one, rather the somewhat less than real ones like the 
IGF, look at civil society as a pesky, disruptive group of people, and 
would not dare take them in into the core organising effort in any 
really meaningful way... Brazil has been different in substantial ways, 
both at domestic as well as global levels, and there is an outside 
chance here that civil society, in its real  sense rather just co-opting 
select people, may just get in a foot in the door early. With the 
possibility that civil society could in fact be a real partner, as to 
some extent it is in the Open Government Partnership.... However, unlike 
like open gov movement, global IG is a highly political space, and any 
such opportunity will quickly lost. Be sure that right now many big 
global powers are making fervent calculations about how to respond to 
this sudden development of Dilma-ICANN initiative, and they will set in 
various kinds of strategies - including subversive ones - very soon. The 
canvass therefore is a rapidly shifting one, and if civil society has to 
act, it has to act rapidly - whichever be the directions of its efforts. 
That is all..

parminder

On Saturday 12 October 2013 05:10 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote:
> Anja has a point... and so does Parminder. We wouldn't want this 
> initiative to set in as one of two leaders of two camps, with CS being 
> only reactive (as often) after the details of the initiative are 
> defined, or even after that narrative about the initiative is widely 
> publicized. I have to say I'm a little surprised, for all the energy 
> and time we have spent debating ourselves and against each others over 
> the last too many months, and too many other months before that, and 
> again before, etc. we do not have at this point a compiled list of 
> critical questions, items, issues we think are priorities that need to 
> be addressed as part of international policy for the global internet 
> governance.
>
> Ideally, the existence of such list would have helped address the two 
> perspectives: Put international CS on the map within a couple of days 
> after the news emerged and yet in a way that is even more substantive 
> than the initiative itself in its initial form. Imagine that! Maybe 
> those high-level leaders and their institutions would now be reacting 
> to CS in the process of moving their agenda forward on this.
>
> And I shall add that exactly was the challenge put before us by the 
> Indian Minister we met in Baku. To paraphrase, he basically said and 
> asked: You (CS) know as well as we (Govt.) do that these issues are 
> complex, and there is no simple, one-sided solution. As the challenges 
> of the internet continue to manifest themselves, governments will 
> always try to do what they do best (at least from the standpoint of 
> states), the best way they know. But in the meantime what are you CS 
> proposing? How can you help us do what needs to be done without 
> unwanted collateral damages (wrt the rights of honest people, etc.)? 
> (Or something along those lines.) I know there are individuals among 
> us who have been doing substantive work, including research. But as a 
> whole, we CS enjoy chatters. We always seem to want to have a place at 
> the table before thinking things through. And we put our small money 
> where our mouth is, that is, in chatters. And our energy in 
> contentious useless debates.
>
> Now back to the main point: Could the following be a worthy solution? 
> Send a brief message of support to the initiative but at a lower level 
> than the presidency, in which we would also announce that a letter to 
> the president will follow within the next two weeks or so. The 
> recipient for the Brazilian government should be someone who has 
> enough official credentials to receive such communications on behalf 
> of the government (starting with Mr Daniel Calvacanti possibly all the 
> way to the Minister) while avoiding any official who might be on the 
> opposite side to President Rousseff on this issue in terms of the 
> Brazilian domestic politics (for instance if that were to be the case 
> of the Minister, avoid this letter going there.) Just an idea I'm 
> tossing around... Not sure it really resolves any of the problems 
> underlining the two perspectives mentioned above.
>
> Lastly, to those who want to further entertain the debate about 
> whether these leaders mean what they say, and by the way, what is it 
> that is entailed by what they just said, etc. I'd like to remind you 
> that being strategic is also sometimes to take someone's at his 
> (positive) word and gently push / help him along while keeping your 
> skepticism to yourself. Of course such skepticism will be useful in 
> watching closely the other person's moves and anticipating or getting 
> ready for possible alternate courses of action in case the other 
> person in his actions defaults on his declared intentions. But it 
> shouldn't prevent us from moving forward at first on the basis of an 
> optimistic premise drawn from a probable / justifiable / demonstrable 
> meaning of what they've said. So we don't really need to figure out 
> whether anyone is being naive here or to sit around and wait for 
> anyone to dot the i's and cross the t's in this proposal before we can 
> move on it.
>
> My 2, uh... cedies (Ghana currency, in my other wallet, which I can't 
> use where I am, so there you have it.)
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro 
> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com 
> <mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On Oct 12, 2013, at 4:35 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org
>     <mailto:jeremy at ciroap.org>> wrote:
>
>>     On 12/10/2013, at 1:07 AM, Anja Kovacs <anja at internetdemocracy.in
>>     <mailto:anja at internetdemocracy.in>> wrote:
>>
>>>     Also because we don't have to sit still in the mean time. There
>>>     are other ways in which we can make evident to the Brazilian
>>>     government that  we are interested in working with them on this
>>>     and support this idea, including by communicating with them to
>>>     find out more directly and by seeing whether we can work with
>>>     them on this through the IGF.
>>
>>     Also blogging about it.  Use your own organisational or personal
>>     blog if you have one.  If you don't, CircleID is a good choice.
>>      Otherwise you can actually blog at igcaucus.org
>>     <http://igcaucus.org> itself, or igf-online.net
>>     <http://igf-online.net> or igfwatch.org <http://igfwatch.org>.
>>      This (particularly CircleID) would have more reach than a letter
>>     anyway.
>>
>     Fantastic idea!
>
>>     -- 
>>
>>     *Dr Jeremy Malcolm
>>     Senior Policy Officer
>>     Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers*
>>     Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
>>     Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala
>>     Lumpur, Malaysia
>>     Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599>
>>
>>     Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement
>>     knowledge hub
>>     |http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone
>>
>>     @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org
>>     <http://www.consumersinternational.org/> |
>>     www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
>>     <http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational>
>>
>>     Read our email confidentiality notice
>>     <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
>>     Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>
>>     *WARNING*: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly
>>     recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For
>>     instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.
>>
>>
>
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
>     To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
>     For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>     To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
>     Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131012/f122c90b/attachment.htm>