[governance] Result of IGF negotiation - one observation

[katitza]

Hi Milton,

I met with a few permanent mission reps, and those govs. who have been negotiating the resolution from different groups/allies, and I've got the impression that those two extremes positions (too good/too bad) where the thoughts of one gov. groups, or the other one. 

I've got the same impression from some permanent mission reps in geneva, who are very active on the WSIS follow up, but no in IGF, and some of them have similar impressions as described by izumi.   

My impression, at the end of the CSTD meeting is  that there is a better understanding, between some of the few govs present in the meeting, that many of the  IGF people do like the IGF, but we  want to see further improvements.  
 
The IGF has been successful, and based on those experience we should build upon it to make further improvement. During the meeting I keep reminding myself that we should  keep in the records what we have achieved (including remote participation - which is also essential for future messages/ recommendations), and we should keep pushing for making further improvement.

Note 1: we need to remember that G77 has different diverse voices, and civil society might have some govs. reps there that we can talk with, as well as we can deal with some  developed countries! I think we can pla a good role on this. Of course as long as we know who are the reps govs. In each country, and that we can approach them. 

Katitza on my way back home, and with very negative thoughts on the overall discussion/meetings. I have been with fever and flu during the meeting, and with less energy than usual. 

Sent via BlackBerry 

-----Original Message-----
From: "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 21:07:51 
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Milton L Mueller<mueller at syr.edu>
Reply-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org,"Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
Cc: Izumi AIZU<iza at anr.org>
Subject: Re: [governance] Result of IGF negotiation - one observation

Good points, Milton!

--c.a.

On 11/24/2010 08:59 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> Izumi
> I have a bit of trouble understanding your statements in this section:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> However, in negotiations of this nature, while our key objectives were
>> secured, we could not win on every point. In particular, it is
>> regrettable that the text does not do more to talk up the successes of
>> the IGF to balance the negative thread of "acknowledging the calls for
>> improvements" (though happily diluted from "many calls" in the original
>> text),
>
> Is it your position that the IGF is an unqualified success that needs no improvement?
> That is certainly not my position, or even the position of the many people within this caucus that I know and talk to.
>
>> "recogniz(ing) the need for further discussion on the improvement
>> of its working methods" and "consideration of IGF
>> improvements....particular(ly) improving the preparation process
>> modalities and the work and the functioning of the Secretariat". These
>> several references to improvements in the text could for those with no
>> direct experience of the IGF give the erroneous impression of something
>> needing major change or even that the IGF is inherently flawed which is
>> clearly not the case.
>
> I do not understand the need for such a defensive approach to the IGF.
> The idea that any criticism or drive for improvement means that it is inherently flawed seems to reproduce the kind of polarization we saw when ICANN was challenged during the WSIS process. There were those who believed - quite erroneously, it turned out -  that one must either defend it uncritically, or else one was supporting the ITU and a "UN takeover of the Internet." Those are false dichotomies and I see the same pattern being recreated here. Why?
>
> --MM
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================
____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t