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

Kabani kabani.asif at gmail.com
Wed Dec 19 08:31:26 EST 2012 

Dear Mr. Bertrnad,

I agree with you 100%, Kindly also guide on this, as you I have came back
to Pakistan, and we this digital war on daily bases on Internet. Guide us
the solutions.

Avri Point I disagree.

Regards


On 18 December 2012 21:20, Bertrand de La Chapelle
<bdelachapelle at gmail.com>wrote:

> Avri,
>
> I see your point. Let me rephrase somewhat to explain what I meant:
>
> - the current meme is going like: "this is a Digital Cold War", and the
> natural follow-up is: "Whose side are you on?" (remember Matt Bianco's<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BU4H87kjl90>song? :-), forcing people into a sterile black-and-white alternative
>
> - my formulation would be: "how can we prevent this from becoming a
> Digital Cold War", and this leads to: "how do we manage commons"? and "how
> to handle shared responsibilities".
>
> I believe this is more likely to lead to constructive solutions.
>
> I know the human brain likes simple dichotomies. It has even been an
> evolutionary survival competence. But tens of millions of dead people
> throughout history show what it can lead to in complex societies when it
> gets out of control. I consciously and voluntarily try not to fall in that
> trap in the case of Internet governance. And now is a moment to be aware of
> this, as we assess the outcome of WCIT and its consequences for future
> debates.
>
> We (the people of the world) have the power to frame description of
> situations and objectives in a way that helps solve issues. If we do not do
> it consciously, we become all prisoners of the power of words, hostages of
> the most radical among us and lose control of our collective destiny.
>
> My two cents.
>
> B.
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 4:25 PM, 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.comwrote:****
>> >>
>> >> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
*Follow me @*
<https://www.facebook.com/kabani.asif>
<https://twitter.com/Kabaniasif><http://www.linkedin.com/in/kabani><http://www.youtube.com/user/asifkabani>

* **Before you print think about the** **ENVIRONMENT*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121219/445e143f/attachment.htm>
-------------- 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