[governance] thread on ITU as potential locus for IG work

[David Allen]

Revisiting the thread on ITU as potential locus for IG work:

Bill's and Wolfgang's pointers to the German text raise the question 
whether IGF is, in the end, the locus for IG work.

As a simple calculus, it seems likely that empowering either of the 
existing protagonists (in this case the ITU) to take on the IG work, 
itself, will have a clear effect.  It would extend the stalemate - 
the struggle between two sides so on display through WSIS.  That 
would deny opportunity for the hard-won potential that IGF brings. 
Rather than create the possibility for necessary insights, through 
hard work in a neutral forum, and from that a way forward - if we 
re-embody the struggle, the stalemate will simply march on, already 
at least a decade underway.

Philippe's report from the Reform consultation can be read, I think, 
to see those sides-in-conflict still quite engaged, for example.

This puts, of course, significant onus on us to do a good job with 
IGF.  Beyond that, the German text also points to the support and 
research that the ITU might provide IGF.  My own judgment sees that 
as significant.  It does get to a fulcrum:  money and budget.

As already detailed a couple times on the plenary list, the ITU took 
a serious hit to its budget just a few years ago - a nine percent 
reduction is the number that comes to my mind.  Some of the research 
work at the ITU is already done with remarkably abstemious sums, and 
the results are not uncommonly cited around the world.  To my mind, 
we should be so pleased at such a resource for IGF.

If the governments are intent on this course of action, it can happen 
only if they supply the budget.  Instead of further budget 
reductions, as hinted in Philippe's report of the consultation (I 
haven't looked at the budget document itself, nor do I know even the 
general budget structure), prior cuts need to be restored and then 
supplemented generously.  If miracles are already the order of the 
day from ITU research efforts, executed with remarkably small 
budgets, we - and the governments - can ask them to take on real 
additional work only with adequate funds.

Yes, there would be some questions about neutrality of ITU findings. 
But they already deal with that question, in current work. 
Especially, ITU research support would presumably be in partnership 
with research capabilities from CS, now suggested for instance by 
Jean-Louis Fullsack on the plenary list to be a Voluntary Corps.  We 
already see more than one such set of work from CS.

Bye-the-bye, the budget question may also reflect indirectly on CS 
participation in ITU affairs.  With sufficient budget from 
governments and PS (perhaps including some reform of the financial 
support model), an ITU that does not feel pressed budgetarily can see 
its way to make more flexible arrangements, such as for 
participation.  That does not deal with another factor, though, 
commitment of newcomers to the mission.

In the end, budget is one of the measures of concrete support for WSIS goals.

As to the upcoming SG election, by all reports that is an intricate 
affair, one that the brave handicap.

David
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance