[governance] Internetistan, or the Bit Boat... a new approach to Internet governance!

Suresh Ramasubramanian suresh at hserus.net
Tue Dec 18 10:30:48 EST 2012 

It is currently a rather petty fight of the sort that is playing out in the UN across the board. Hardly confined to cyber anything at all.  So, a quasi Cold War probably, with maybe far less James bonds than elderly diplomats in dark suits.

--srs (iPad)

On 18-Dec-2012, at 20:55, Avri Doria  <avri at Ella.com> wrote:

> But, if it really is a digital cold war, saying that it isn't, can be just as self defeating. 
> 
> Let's analyze before deciding which it is. 
> 
> Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I anticipate a great journalistic attraction for the meme "a Digital Cold
>> War".
>> 
>> It is an abusive oversimplification and worse, it presents a big risk of a
>> self-fulfilling prophecy if people begin to think in that framework. The
>> "us vs them" behavior on both sides, the "with us or against us", the cyber
>> arms race, the fight between radical approaches, both caricatured to the
>> extreme, unfortunately prevent a more balanced, cautious, and respectful
>> approach that enables joint management of the new commons, rather than
>> attempts to carve out territories in cyberspace.
>> 
>> Some thinking is needed to find better formulations. And citizens'
>> interests in all regions need to be the starting point. Civil society has a
>> responsibility in there. Let's avoid being held hostage to the extreme
>> views from both sides.
>> 
>> B.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Kettemann, Matthias (
>> matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at) <matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at> wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear Parminder, ****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> The right of states to have no other state interfere with their access to
>>> the Internet is, in my view, not conditional upon an international treaty
>>> but rather, as I’ve argued in the mail you quoted from, in the process of
>>> crystallizing into a customary norm. Treaties can be evidence of such a
>>> crystallization, but they are not necessary for the process. Not signing a
>>> treaty than contains many different provisions cannot be used as an
>>> argument against any one single norm’s customary character. Further
>>> evidence, such as clear statements by states evidencing opinio iuris, is
>>> needed. ****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> The dynamics in Dubai illustrate that we are now at a point where two
>>> different conceptions of the normative order applicable to the Internet
>>> clash. Simple dichotomies (freedom vs. control, private sector-orientation
>>> vs. sovereignity-orientation) are more misleading than helpful. ****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> The danger I see lies rather in what the Economist termed a potential
>>> “digital Cold War”. History tells us that the last Cold War didn’t lead to
>>> decades of cooperative law-making on the international plane, but rather
>>> conflict, divisions and standstill. ****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> Yet at the height of the Cold War leaders agreed, within the framework of
>>> the CSCE, on the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 which laid down essential
>>> commitments regarding political and military cooperation and human rights
>>> issues, including the Helsinki Decalogue, the “Declaration on [10]
>>> Principles Guiding Relations between Participating States” (
>>> http://www.osce.org/mc/39501?download=true). ****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> So what do we need now: We need a Helsinki Decalogue for the Internet that
>>> can guide relation between all stakeholders in the Internet. If Russia and
>>> the US were able to agree in 1975 on the prohibition of the use of force,
>>> non-intervention, respect for human rights and fulfillment in good faith of
>>> obligations under international law, they should be able to agree, in near
>>> future, on Internet Governance principles reflecting these international
>>> legal principles.****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> The Declaration by the Committee of Ministers on Internet governance
>>> principles (https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1835773) provides a first
>>> template; and the IRP’s 0 Rights and Principles (http://irpcharter.org)
>>> exemplify a human rights-oriented approach. ****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> It’s there that we should look, rather than to feel sorry that Dubai
>>> didn’t work out.****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> Kind regards****
>>> 
>>> Matthias****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> --****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> Dr Matthias C. Kettemann, LLM (Harvard)****
>>> 
>>> Institute of International Law and International Relations****
>>> 
>>> University of Graz, Austria****
>>> 
>>> T | +43 316 380 6711 ****
>>> 
>>> E | matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at****
>>> 
>>> Blog <http://internationallawandtheinternet.blogspot.com> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/#%21/MCKettemann>|
>>> Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/matthias.kettemann> | Google+<https://plus.google.com/u/0/116310540881122884114/posts>
>>> ****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> *Von:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:
>>> governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *Im Auftrag von *parminder
>>> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 18. Dezember 2012 15:17
>>> *An:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Bertrand de la Chapelle
>>> *Betreff:* Re: [governance] Internetistan, or the Bit Boat... a new
>>> approach to Internet governance!****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dear Bertrand/ Others
>>> 
>>> ****
>>> 
>>> On Wednesday 12 December 2012 01:43 AM, bdelachapelle at gmail.com wrote:****
>>> 
>>> Dear Matthias,****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>>> 
>>> I agree with your thesis. ****
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Which I understand, to quote Matthias' email, is about****
>>> 
>>> "...crystallization of the application of the international customary law
>>> norm of non-interference to other states' Internet access. Indeed, the
>>> stability and functionality of the Internet can by now be clearly
>>> considered to lie in the common interest. As such, it is protected by
>>> international law. States that violate this common obligation engage their
>>> international responsibility."****
>>> 
>>> Now what have you all to say about the US and its allies walking out of
>>> the WCIT on the point of refusing to sign on preambular language that
>>> simply  "recognize(s) the right of access of Member States to international
>>> telecommunication services".
>>> 
>>> This point above seems central to all the discussions here on what is
>>> being called as 'a new approach to Internet governance'.
>>> 
>>> Wonder, why the US is able to get away with such monstrosities, and civil
>>> society choses to look the other way when they happen. Nay, people have in
>>> fact been defending US's position of not signing the above text on this
>>> list and other CS forums..... One wonders what is happening!!!
>>> 
>>> parminder
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ****
>>> 
>>> ** **
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> ____________________
>> Bertrand de La Chapelle
>> Internet & Jurisdiction Project Director, International Diplomatic Academy (
>> www.internetjurisdiction.net)
>> Member, ICANN Board of Directors
>> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>> 
>> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
>> Exupéry
>> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>    governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>> 
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>    http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>    http://www.igcaucus.org/
>> 
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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

More information about the Governance mailing list