AW: [governance] RE: WSIS Forum 2011

[Mawaki Chango]

Yeah... no, ITU involvement in WSIS wasn't an accident. WSIS wouldn't have
seen the light of day were it not for the ITU's resolution at the 1998
plenipotentiary conference in Minneapolis (which then led to the related UN
General Assembly's resolution in 2001). And as far as the UN system as a
whole, ITU is the home and the linchpin of the summit, which is not to say
other UN orgs./bodies do not make decisions related to WSIS and its
follow-up in terms of their respective responsibilities. It'd be a little
bit of stretch to think that because IGF is the summit's most substantial
outcome, it exhausts or fulfills the whole of WSIS agenda as per its
intergovernmental origins.

So I agree with Meryem that each one of those arrangements has their
specific goal commanding different strategies. Obviously if ITU wants to see
the WSIS Forum held at UN-HQ it probably not for the excitement of a visit
at "the Big Apple" but more likely because they hope to mobilize UN
resources to achieve something, notwithstanding the price of sacrificing a
bit of CS participation (in quantity).

Let's also not forget that NYC is the single capital where (due to UN) the
largest diplomatic body from across the world is concentrated or converges
(sorry, that's not the case for Geneva as some may want to believe). And
although we're getting used to "multistakeholderism," the UN's GA -- where
those diplomats convene, discuss, negotiate and vote -- is still the
ultimate authoritative body to make decisions before anything of a global
legitimacy (exit, the security council) is enacted in the name of the UN. So
it may also just be that at a critical juncture when important decisions may
have to be made by all or a large section of those diplomats about WSIS, it
is simple pragmatism to secure their participation and a chance for them to
fully understand the issues (now, that may not justify a *permanent*
transfer to NYC, see last paragr. below).

CS can still do two things: i) strategize in order to get its inclusively
prepared quality input through, wherever a relevant meeting takes place
--especially for a crucial one as may be the 2011's WSIS Forum; ii)
continuously voice the need to take special/additional measures to
facilitate visas for a global CS to the meetings.

Propositions could also be made as a compromise between ITU's current choice
and Wolfgang's suggestion: 1. alternate every year between the chosen UN
base and other places around the world; 2. rotate around the world with the
possibility any year to host it back at UN HQ or in other UN capital if the
agenda and schedule of international affairs make the venue potentially
favorable to the Forum's order of business; 3. rotate between UN capitals;
4. etcetera.

Best,
Mawaki

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:31 AM, Meryem Marzouki <meryem at marzouki.info>wrote:

>
> Le 7 sept. 10 à 08:25, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang a écrit :
>
>
>  ICANN is travelling around the world doing outreach, IGF is travelling
>> around the world doing outreach, why the WSIS Forum, which needs outreach,
>> should stay in traditional places?
>>
>
> Because, and this is obvious, they are of a different nature and they have
> different objectives.
>
> - ICANN is a private organization which attendance is mainly corporate
> business organizations, and has the needed money to bring some CS on board
> (seatbelt fastened).
>
> - IGF is still an UFO (institutionally speaking) which raison d'etre is
> heavily relying on CS (and IGOs). Conversely, CS and IGOs find it the unique
> place where they may rise their profile in the IG and related fields.
> Both ICANN and IGF, in order to justify the necessity of their existence
> and unicity, *have* to reach out to (or to organize meetings in, at least)
> different countries [on a side note, who can seriously state that IGF 2009
> has changed anything in Egypt re: IG matters?]
>
> - WSIS Forum is the (recently) institutionalized follow-up to WSIS, which
> was, if I'm not wrong, a UN intergovernmental process led by the ITU (and
> this was by no mean an accident, contrarily to what someone said on this
> list). Since the end of WSIS, well before becoming the "WSIS Forum", it has
> been struggling for its existence and necessity and for taking over the
> other two. Now, what it needs is certainly not to travel around the world,
> but to seat itself as such at the UN headquarters (which is in NYC).
>
> ICANN showing its own well know problems, and considering the fact that
> whether it travels around the world or not, this doesn't change the essence
> of the organization and its decisions, let's talk about IGF and WSIS Forum:
>
> The former is more inclusive, but is toothless, the latter is likely to
> mainstream IG issues and make decisions, but is above all an
> intergovernmental process, in pure UN sense.
> CS may be part of both, but probably not showing the same profile (and
> consequently not the same framing of issues) at each venue. It's not
> necessarily about the height of this profile, but really about its
> orientation (susbtance) and its nature (mainly CSOs or mainly individuals).
>
> In my opinion, there is the strategic choice. Not in counting CS
> participation from different countries at one venue or the other.
>
> As regards IGOs, they can survive (in this field) only at IGF.
>
> Best,
> Meryem
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100911/8e37d72c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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