AW: AW: [governance] Enhanced cooperation

[Milton Mueller]

>Jeanette:
>Why disturbing the funeral? Enhanced cooperation seems such a dead 
>horse...
 
Then let the relevant governments openly declare so.

Enhanced cooperation (ec) is potentially far more significant than the
IGF, if the truth be told. IGF is very much at risk of becoming nothing
more than a diversionary tactic that obligates governments to do nothing
while co-opting hundreds of civil society activists who like going to
meetings and feeling "included."

If the real politics of IG -- who rules the root, who exercises
political oversight and how, the terms of trade in internet services,
censorship, IPR, etc. -- are to be changed at all, ec represents one
possible avenue. It should not be ignored. Even if it does only mean a
slightly reformed GAC, that would be a concrete change (and one fraught
with negative as well as positive potential. (Here I can't help
wondering what would happen if all the activists who went to IGF also --
or instead -- went to an ICANN meeting and got involved.

EC could also mean more than GAC reform, if it led to some formal
negotiations about the role of nation-states in IG. 

And how is it that we in civil society who profess to be so committed
to multi-stakeholder participation are willing to sit back and let govts
assert that the ec process can proceed without us, and without any
transparency as to what it is or even whether it is happening? It makes
no sense to me. 
  

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance