[bestbits] Letter to Pres. Rousseff, was, Re: [governance] Dilma Rousseff's speech at UN

Carolina carolina.rossini at gmail.com
Wed Sep 25 15:28:11 EDT 2013 

I did not say was a mistake. I said we are trying to understand what happened 

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 25, 2013, at 2:35 PM, Eduardo Bertoni <eberto2 at palermo.edu> wrote:

> 
> 
>> Well...if Itamaraty made the mistake of confusing a word in the statement of the President (as Carolina said) this will be the first time I see the brazilian diplomacy making this kind of mistake. But at the end anybody can make mistakes, right?
>> 
>> Anyway, on the same line of what I said yesterday, suggesting to be cautious with any statement, I support what Anja, Valeria and others said in this exchange of opinions.  
>> 
>> Eduardo Bertoni 
>> 
>> Sent from a mobile device.  Apologies for typos or brevity.
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 25, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Carolina <carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I agree. I talked to friends in the gov and it seems that she used multilateral meaning multistakeholder 
>>> But I also agree this needs to be clarified in an official note and maybe even ask a official note back from Itamaraty
>>> But this can also be a shot on our own foot if comes back as actual "multilateral"... In which case maybe we should not call attention to it?
>>> I would think that us Brazilians in the list need to talk with folks in the gov to clarify all that before a very loud action....
>>> Anyway, just trying to brainstorm what is better.
>>> I also would prefer up point the very positive parts of her speech which are VERY helpful for the Marco Civil discussion
>>> I am afraid to have the good distracted by the bad.... 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone 
>>> 
>>> On Sep 25, 2013, at 12:02 PM, "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Rousseff sees "multilateral" as "among nations", not "among
>>>> governments". But I do understand the term in the international
>>>> diplomatic scene takes a meaning opposed to what civil society defends
>>>> and each government has its own particular interpretation -- BTW, as do
>>>> different civil society "tribes".
>>>> 
>>>> My IMHO advice: let us not be black-and-white on this. Let us think of
>>>> the ways in which we can build bridges. Rousseff has opened a wonderful
>>>> window of opportunity, let us not just dismiss it because there is that
>>>> "12-letter word" in her statement.
>>>> 
>>>> fraternal regards
>>>> 
>>>> --c.a.
>>>> 
>>>> On 09/25/2013 12:37 PM, Anja Kovacs wrote:
>>>>> I agree with Anne that the speech was clever in many ways, but am also a
>>>>> little worried about how the continuous references to multilateralism will
>>>>> be read in our own domestic context, where the importance of these
>>>>> statements from a Brazilian perspective is not necessarily fully
>>>>> appreciated or understood in its nuances. The whole debate about whether a
>>>>> reformed Internet governance should take a multilateral or multistakeholder
>>>>> route *is* gaining momentum at the moment, and if we as international civil
>>>>> society are going to make a comment on the Brazilian president's speech, I
>>>>> do think we have to comment on her remarks on this issue as well - or our
>>>>> own stance on the question of multistakeholderism might be misunderstood in
>>>>> our own countries.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Isn't there a way in which we can do so without undermining the Brazilian
>>>>> national agenda (or even better, by supporting that agenda)? If so, I'll be
>>>>> very happy to support a letter but if this is not noted at all, it might be
>>>>> difficult for us to do so, as silence could be read as implicit approval.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks and best,
>>>>> Anja
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 25 September 2013 20:33, Anne Jellema <anne at webfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I support Anriette's suggestion and I hope the international letter could
>>>>>> help Brazilian colleagues to secure a meeting with Rousseff's advisors in
>>>>>> the near future to better understand her position and lobby on the best
>>>>>> ways for Brazil to show international leadership in this area.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As I read Joana and Carlos's remarks, I was remembering that on other
>>>>>> global issues (such as trade justice and climate change), Brazil has often
>>>>>> managed to punch well above its weight diplomatically by positioning itself
>>>>>> very strategically as a bridge-builder between "South" and "North" blocs
>>>>>> (to caricature them very crudely).  Reading her speech, and the clever way
>>>>>> it managed to pick up on key demands and buzzwords from both sides of the
>>>>>> internet governance divide, I did wonder whether Brazil is once again
>>>>>> angling to set itself up as the player that can broker pragmatic
>>>>>> compromises between competing ideologies. If so, I think that's probably
>>>>>> good news, especially given that the PT in power has usually been
>>>>>> relatively open to working with civil society.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> Anne
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Dear all
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I would like to propose that we do a letter from civil society commending
>>>>>>> her on her speech. We could mention our support and wishes for the Marco
>>>>>>> Civil, and, if we want, the multi-lateral vs. multi-stakeholder question.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Anriette
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 25/09/2013 15:41, Gene Kimmelman wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Having been in these situations in the U.S., I fully understand the need
>>>>>>> to accept and fully embrace progress; I do not want to interfere in what
>>>>>>> our Brazilian friends are fully capable of handling, other than to say I
>>>>>>> fully support the sentiment expressed by Joana and Carlos!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Joana Varon <joana at varonferraz.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I totally support Carlos Afonso's view.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> One step at the time.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> What matters now is that Dilma has clearly mentioned the CGI.br
>>>>>>>> principles, including the support for net neutrality. It means a LOT for
>>>>>>>> our national scenario and for years of fight to try to pass Marco Civil.
>>>>>>>> Meaning it wont be easy for telcos to take down net neutrality provisions
>>>>>>>> from the draft bill.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Even better, this all has happened right after she opened a channel of
>>>>>>>> communication/consulation with CGI.br. That's THE dynamics for internet
>>>>>>>> public policies we dreamed about in Brazil. The issue on using the word
>>>>>>>> "multilateral" shall NOT be used to loose the focus on this major
>>>>>>>> achievement.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> It is indeed an issue of concern. But it's not actually something new.
>>>>>>>> It has been highlighted in several opportunities in the Brazilian positions
>>>>>>>> at ITU, held by Anatel, our regulatory agency.  For instance, in our
>>>>>>>> previous opinion on the role of States. Nevertheless, positions from our
>>>>>>>> Ministry of Foreign Affairs towards multistakeholderism are very clear and
>>>>>>>> positive. And now CGI.br has the door open with the president to correct
>>>>>>>> explain all the important debate of multistakeholder approach on IG. So we
>>>>>>>> have opportunities to correct this schizophrenic aspect and there is hope.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So, please, people, let's be positive and understand that having the
>>>>>>>> President referring to these principles - an to Internet Policies - in the
>>>>>>>> UNGA is not a minor thing. I had the lucky to be in a panel at the Council
>>>>>>>> of Europe a few minutes after she delivered the speech and managed to
>>>>>>>> incorporate some of her quotes in my presentation. The public got really
>>>>>>>> impressed.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> all the best
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> joana
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Joana Varon Ferraz
>>>>>>>> @joana_varon
>>>>>>>> PGP 0x016B8E73
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Dear people,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I am not sure we will go too far (although philosophers can really be
>>>>>>>>> far-fetched in this exercise) in doing an exegesis of her discourse. Let
>>>>>>>>> us see how the practice goes. The signs are good: she entered the room
>>>>>>>>> to talk to us CGI.br folk with our 10 Principles in hand and the first
>>>>>>>>> thing she told us was she agreed with them.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> She also mentioned the Marco Civil as proposed by the rapporteur (result
>>>>>>>>> of a 4-year public dialogue) is the one she agrees with (which is the
>>>>>>>>> one CGI.br formally supported), and was going to fight for it, although
>>>>>>>>> recognizing that as bill of law transiting through Congress it might
>>>>>>>>> suffer modifications which she might veto but Congress could reverse and
>>>>>>>>> so on -- in summary, normal practice in a democratic State. The big
>>>>>>>>> challenge now is the process in Congress, where the transnational telcos
>>>>>>>>> and big media have enormous power.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> frt rgds
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --c.a.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 09/24/2013 09:58 PM, Diego Rafael Canabarro wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> the Steering Committee principle reads as "Internet governance must be
>>>>>>>>>> exercised in a transparent, multilateral and democratic manner, with
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> participation of the various sectors of society, thereby preserving
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> encouraging its character as a collective creation."
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Her wording for the UNGA says: "Open, multilateral and democratic
>>>>>>>>>> governance, carried out with transparency by stimulating collective
>>>>>>>>>> creativity and the participation of society, Governments and the
>>>>>>>>> private
>>>>>>>>>> sector."
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> My reading of that is that: (1) it does not repeat the idea that
>>>>>>>>> Internet
>>>>>>>>>> governance as a collective creation and (2) the first one defines
>>>>>>>>> Internet
>>>>>>>>>> governance as something "with the participation of the various
>>>>>>>>> sectors of
>>>>>>>>>> society", and the second only mentions it should be carried out with
>>>>>>>>>> stimuli for "the participation of society, governments and the private
>>>>>>>>>> sector."
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Can you see my point?
>>>>>>>>>> Em português o trem funciona do mesmo jeito.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Carolina Rossini <
>>>>>>>>>> carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Via Renata Avila, segue discurso da Dilma na UN.
>>>>>>>>>>> Coming from Renata Avila, see attached Dilma draft speech at UN.
>>>>>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> *Carolina Rossini*
>>>>>>>>>>> *Project Director, Latin America Resource Center*
>>>>>>>>>>> Open Technology Institute
>>>>>>>>>>> *New America Foundation*
>>>>>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>>>>>> http://carolinarossini.net/
>>>>>>>>>>> + 1 6176979389 <%2B%201%206176979389>
>>>>>>>>>>> *carolina.rossini at gmail.com*
>>>>>>>>>>> skype: carolrossini
>>>>>>>>>>> @carolinarossini
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>>>>>>  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
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>>>>  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
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>>>  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
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>>>>>>> executive director, association for progressive communicationswww.apc.org
>>>>>>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>>>>>>> south africa
>>>>>>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Anne Jellema
>>>>>> Chief Executive Officer
>>>>>> Cape Town, RSA
>>>>>> mob (ZA) +27 61 036 9652
>>>>>> tel (ZA) +27 21 788 4585
>>>>>> tel (US) +1 202 684 6885
>>>>>> Skype anne.jellema
>>>>>> @afjellema
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> World Wide Web Foundation | 1889 F Street NW, Washington DC, 20006, USA |
>>>>>> www.webfoundation.org | Twitter: @webfoundation
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>

More information about the Bestbits mailing list