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

[Carolina Rossini]

I just want to take the opportunity share with you
http://oti.newamerica.net/blogposts/2013/internet_and_statecraft_brazil_and_the_future_of_internet_governance-93553

And let you know that Everton Lucero (
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/everton-lucero/0/448/920) will be here
representing Brazil at IGF and (Brazilians hope) moving forward :-)

C



On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:45 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:

> Perhaps of interest
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
> *Subject: **Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [governance] RE: [bestbits] Rousseff &
> Chehade: Brazil will host world event on Internet governance in 2014*
> *Date: *October 19, 2013 9:36:14 AM GMT+08:00
> *To: *Milton L Mueller <mueller at SYR.EDU>
> *Cc: *NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>
> Hi Milton
>
> On Oct 19, 2013, at 1:09 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>
> Therefore, I do not agree with more ambitious agendas - or at least, the
> more ambitious issues might be discussed, but only if we are able to
> develop and apply a workable solution to the more immediate and simpler
> problem (ICANN)
>
>
> There's two problems with this.  First, Dilma wants to talk about a
> broader agenda, and many other governments have said the same for years in
> different ways.  Second, Fadi and the coalition he's coordinating with
> wants to talk about a broader agenda.  Both sides have made that clear
> recently, and are unlikely to be persuaded to the contrary ex ante by blogs
> etc.  Maybe if efforts to discuss the broader issues——the holes in the gov
> architecture that CS has been noting since 2003—hit a road block they'll
> collapse back to something narrowly focused on ICANN, but I wouldn't
> presume it a this point.
>
> We're all in blue skies guessing land as to where this will go, and absent
> clear info a number of folks have been projecting their preferred
> narratives onto the space.  So I will too.  I start from the assumption we
> should listen to what the powers that be have been saying for quite some
> time.  And what I've heard for quite some time now, is
>
> 1. A change in the AoC that removes or alters the USG roles to be at best
> a 'first among equals' in some sense, with greater encouragement to the GAC
> to step up.  This has been US policy, so its adoption is not quite "the
> world turns its back on USG" and so.  Question of timing and
> dynamics—Snowden revelations obviously accelerated things in a wild card
> way that was not envisioned or desired.
>
> 2. A parallel change to the USG role in the IANA contract cutting ICANN
> looser and spinning toward GAC oversight.
>
> 3.  Consideration of some sort of new multistakeholder process for
> orphaned issues etc.  This could prove the hardest, as one assumes G77 and
> China will still want a UN basis, which wouldn't be congenial to I-orgs et
> al.
>
> The first two pieces are easy enough to imagine, although they will be
> difficult for the USG to sell domestically.  Obama hardly needs the Tea
> Party and libertarian/conservative think tanks running around
> hyperventilating about him being the "man who gave away the Internet" at
> this moment, especially before the mid-term elections.  And there'd have to
> be a lot of hand holding viz. Versign and other contracted parties, major
> corporate users, US agencies, and nervous allies, to assure them nothing's
> seriously changed re: stability and security.
>
> The third one's anyone's guess.  No new IGOs has been the mantra.  CSTD is
> obviously too feeble to be of any use.  So something else that can pass
> muster with governments—?  And obviously, there can't be ICANN mission
> creep here, although there will probably be Fadi creep…ICANN will have to
> be a supportive partner in some manner.  I'd have preferred appending a
> working group mechanism to the IGF to strengthen its' role, but a lot of
> people remain fixed on preserving its pristine status as a dialogue space
> full stop given the no-membership problem etc.
>
> There's also talk, e.g. Dilma, about some new multilateral overlay on
> certain issues.  That too would run into standard UN divisions unless it's
> a pretty generic statement of principles.  This could make Wolfgang's Focus
> Session on Principles, as well as the first FC led by Brazil, particularly
> interesting.
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>



-- 
*Carolina Rossini*
*Project Director, Latin America Resource Center*
Open Technology Institute
*New America Foundation*
//
http://carolinarossini.net/
+ 1 6176979389
*carolina.rossini at gmail.com*
skype: carolrossini
@carolinarossini
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131018/318131a3/attachment.htm>