[governance] Result of IGF negotiation - one observation

[Milton L Mueller]

OK, thanks, Izumi. This is very revealing. The fact that it comes from a Western government (not too hard to guess which ones it could have come from) reveals the dichotomy that goes all the way back to WSIS. I think it imperative that civil society rise above that dichotomy and play a constructively critical role in the future of the igf.

I hope Katitza recovers and when she does I would like to hear more about why she is returning from that meeting with negative feelings. 

--MM

> -----Original Message-----
> From: izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Izumi AIZU
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 2:04 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Mawaki Chango
> Subject: Re: [governance] Result of IGF negotiation - one observation
> 
> Milton and all,
> 
> The text I intrduced in the email is NOT our statement at all.
> 
> It was an exert from a private email from a government folk who has
> been involved in the UN GA negotiations and given his permission I
> sent to the list for purely informational reference only, not giving
> any position of mine or ours.
> 
> Sorry for the confusion and hope this clarifies the question.
> 
> Izumi just arrived at Tokyo airport
> 
> 2010/11/25, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>:
> > Thanks Izumi for the reporting...
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
> 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?
> >>
> >
> >
> > Agreed.
> > Why? Isn't this how all constitutional moments eventually start an
> > ossification career towards a new set of vested interests?
> > This is a constant challenge. However it is a bit unsettling if we are
> to
> > reject calls for improvements only on the simple basis that they are
> asking
> > for improvements, and not because we do not agree that the substance
> of what
> > they are asking brings actual improvement.
> >
> > mc.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> --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
> >>
> >
> 
> 
> --
>                         >> Izumi Aizu <<
> 
>           Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
> 
>            Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
>                                   Japan
>                                  * * * * *
>            << Writing the Future of the History >>
>                                 www.anr.org
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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