[bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities

[Katim S. Touray]

Hi Suresh,

I just posted a response to your comments on my CircleID article.  Here's
the link to my response:
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_12_and_multi_stakeholderism/#9232

Thanks, and have a great weekend!

Katim


On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:26 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
<suresh at hserus.net>wrote:

> Katim S. Touray [23/01/13 02:29 +0000]:
>
>  As promised a few days ago, here's the link to my CircleID article on
>> WCIT-12 and multi-stakeholderism:
>> http://www.circleid.com/posts/**20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_**
>> 12_and_multi_stakeholderism/<http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_12_and_multi_stakeholderism/>
>>
>
> Thanks. There are a few issues here I would differ with.
>
> Some of the problem here doesn't involve the fact that governments have a
> role in internet governance - it involves an objection to the ITU allowing
> scope creep into its mandate, to cover issues that more countries than just
> the USA (so hardly "exceptionalism" or "unilateralism") have differed with.
>
> As for Africa and its lack of participation in internet governance
> structures, part of it has to do with capacity building for government,
> industry and civil society stakeholders, while monopoly and competition
> policy issues some due to geography, given africa's landlocked nature and
> difficult terrain that makes slow and expensive satellite connectivity a
> necessity, some due to government monopolies on the Internet and telecom,
> while others can be laid to the door of various other factors, such as a
> lack of stable government, cutting off the Internet to prevent opponents
> from organizing themselves using it (as in Syria, and before that in
> Qaddafi's Libya ..).
> I am afraid this can't all be blamed on US exceptionalism, and while there
> is a substantial amount of aid in material, capacity building etc that can
> be (and is) provided by local and international NGOs who set up ISP
> exchange points, hold training workshops etc, a substantial local effort is
> also needed before you will see the situation improve.
>
> On the DoC / NTIA oversight of ICANN / IANA, it has been mostly hands off,
> only stepping in where there have been cases where DoC appears to feel that
> there are governance issues involved. Or have you seen them try to revoke
> .cu, .sy, .kp just because Cuba, Syria and North Korea are in the state
> department's OFAC blacklist of entities American firms are forbidden to
> trade with?
>
> I'll post the same thing on circleid to kickstart the discussion there.
>
> thanks
> suresh
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130126/a4987e59/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