[governance] [Internet Policy] The Wuzhen Initiative & Fadi

David Allen David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu
Mon Dec 21 16:08:35 EST 2015 

Dear Nick,

Michael;s question, pretty clearly, was to the _reporting_, in the blog post, of the meetings.  Yes, I was in New York; since I was party also to all those statements, the same question occurs to me as well ...


On Dec 21, 2015, at 3:31 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at consensus.pro> wrote:

> Dear Michael,
> 
> The WSIS+10 documents very definitely includes that concept, as did dozens of the speeches made by countries at the conference itself endorsing the outcome document.
> 
>> On 21 Dec 2015, at 21:28, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for this most interesting and useful document Wolfgang.
>> 
>> However, I read it and even reread it looking for any reference to
>> "democracy" as a principle for Internet Governance (if only aspirational),
>> perhaps in tandem with "human rights" which the events (and you) seem to
>> have covered quite effectively.
>> 
>> Was the notion of democratic governance never discussed in any of these
>> three events and if not, surely you as a scholar in the area of Global
>> Governance might be expected to note this as an absence worthy of comment.
>> 
>> Tks,
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: InternetPolicy [mailto:internetpolicy-bounces at elists.isoc.org] On
>> Behalf Of "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
>> Sent: December 21, 2015 11:07 AM
>> To: Frank, Carl <CFrank at wileyrein.com>; Nick Ashton-Hart
>> <nashton at consensus.pro>
>> Cc: internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org
>> Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] The Wuzhen Initiative & Fadi
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> FYI, here is hiw I see Wuzhen:
>> http://www.circleid.com/members/5851/
>> 
>> Wolfgang
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: InternetPolicy im Auftrag von Frank, Carl
>> Gesendet: Mo 21.12.2015 09:09
>> An: Nick Ashton-Hart
>> Cc: internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org
>> Betreff: Re: [Internet Policy] The Wuzhen Initiative & Fadi
>> 
>> Nick:  +1
>> 
>> Carl R. Frank
>> 1776 K St NW
>> Washington DC 20006
>> USA
>> O + 1 202 719-7269
>> F +  1 202 719-7049
>> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 21, 2015, at 3:04 AM, Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at consensus.pro>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear Paul,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for your time in replying.
>>> 
>>> Let me start by saying that I understand the various caveats that you
>> outline below related to the language in the document associated with the
>> conference.
>>> 
>>> Secondly, it is your view that it is false to suggest that agreeing to be
>> involved in the outcome process of Wuzhen has no connection to the language
>> the hosts have proposed for the initiative. Of course it is your prerogative
>> to do that, but I simply don't believe that's true: that language is clearly
>> stated as being proposed as the underpinnings of the initiative itself.
>> Those of you who participate in it MAY be able to change it over the course
>> of time, but we have to accept that the starting place is what is stated in
>> the text, very clearly.
>>> 
>>> If you are agreeing to be a part of a process which has a proposed
>> foundation, which is the case for Fadi here (and the others presumably) then
>> the reality is that you can expect the outside world to see you as
>> identified with that process, and the process identified with the starting
>> language.
>>> 
>>> Let me be clear. The language in that document - and in specific the lack
>> of the term 'multistakeholder' - is exactly what countries like China,
>> Russia, and others (you can fill in the blanks) were pushing very hard for
>> in the WSIS negotiations. It was an extreme effort into the early hours to
>> keep that language out and end up with the balanced paragraphs we have now..
>> The language on state sovereignty in the Wuzhen document is also in the same
>> category: a very heavy lift by a lot of people to prevent that really
>> harmful construction from remaining in the WSIS outcome.
>>> 
>>> Fadi - and anyone else who chose to be a part of the outcome process of
>> Wuzhen - could have chosen to say that they would be a part of a process
>> which would come up with a document with the elements in the declaration.
>> However, instead, they climbed aboard the Wuzhen process despite it starting
>> from a terrible, terrible place.
>>> 
>>> I'm sorry, I respect the hell out of you Paul, but on this whole business
>> we must agree to disagree. I believe it is entirely reasonable for the
>> initiative to be associated with a document whose language is clearly
>> intended by the hosts for that association to be made. I also believe that
>> it was entirely inappropriate for Fadi to fly directly from New York to
>> Wuzhen and so visibly be connected with an initiative that is itself so
>> connected to such toxic language. He is extremely well-aware of how toxic
>> the language in that text is and of what it took to keep it out of WSIS as
>> Veni was on delegation to the negotiations, as was I. Saying that he'll be
>> involved only in his personal capacity when he was clearly invited to speak
>> at Wuzhen solely because he's ICANN CEO only makes the situation worse.
>>> 
>>> Finally, I find it hard to believe that the timing of the Wuzhen summit
>> was accidental in entirely overlapping with WSIS+10 in New York, given that
>> Wuzhen was organised after the WSIS+10 dates were announced. I find it
>> simply impossible to believe that the fact that the language presented in
>> the Wuzhen outcome accidentally contained the very same toxic linguistic
>> constructions that we have all fought so hard to get away from for a decade
>> or longer.
>>> 
>>> I think everyone here understands what China's view of open networks, and
>> all that goes along with it, really is: it isn't as if they're not pretty
>> open about it. If you believe that you can help to change their view by
>> participating in Wuzhen, that's great! Engagement is important. However,
>> lets all do it with our eyes open as to what that government's current
>> motivations really are - and it isn't a multistakeholder, human-rights and
>> people-centred Internet. Its an Orwellian one.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 21 Dec 2015, at 03:18, Paul Wilson <pwilson at apnic.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> With respect Nick, this is a serious misunderstanding and
>> misrepresentation of what happened.
>>>> 
>>>> The "Wuzhen initiative" is a statement by the WIC Secretariat, and not an
>> outcome of the conference in any way.  It was not presented to the
>> conference, or even announced during the conference; it was released
>> afterwards.  And I don't think anyone is claiming otherwise, except
>> mistakenly or with malice.
>>>> 
>>>> The "High-level Advisory Committee" (HAC) did not produce the document.
>> We were called to a meeting where the document was presented to us, and we
>> gave our advice.  The result of that discussion was positive: ensuring that
>> the document was not presented as a result of the conference, or as any kind
>> of "declaration" (which was on the cards initially), but rather as an
>> initiative of the Secretariat.
>>>> 
>>>> There was limited discussion with the HAC on the content of the
>> document..  Of a few contributions in the time available, I made a strong
>> but unsuccessful case that the "multistakeholder" should replace
>> "multilateral" in the 5th clause;  the counterargument was that the words
>> used came from WSIS and are therefore acceptable, while at the same time the
>> document does recognise the full range of stakeholders.    (To be clear: the
>> WSIS+10 documentation was not available at the time of this discussion; but
>> we do now have a good precedent to bring in the WSIS+10 result at the next
>> opportunity.)
>>>> 
>>>> Finally, it's completely false, and quite outrageous frankly, to claim
>> that Fadi endorsed any language in the WIC meeting; when as I said the
>> document was not even released until after the meeting.  As for claims of
>> abuse and personal benefits, those are unjustified and completely unfair.
>>>> 
>>>> This is not a good time to be subscribing to rumours and spinning up
>> false stories, so I hope we can return to a rational discussion of Wuzhen
>> and put it in a proper perspective.
>>>> 
>>>> Paul.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 20 Dec 2015, at 18:28, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Dear Joly, and others,
>>>>> 
>>>>> From my perspective, Fadi went from the WSIS+10 Summit - where
>> negotiators spent three nights until 0300 fighting to ensure
>> multistakeholderism wasn't downgraded - to Wuzhen and endorsed the exact
>> language we all fought so hard to get rid of in front of hundreds of
>> millions of Chinese.
>>>>> 
>>>>> What he did is frankly shameful and undermines what so many  of us in
>> the WSIS process have fought so hard for. The idea that he's doing this in
>> his personal capacity is risible; he'd never have been offered a speaking
>> slot in that capacity, only as ICANN's CEO.
>>>>> 
>>>>> What he did is an abuse of his position and as far as I can tell
>> entirely to benefit himself. It certainly doesn't benefit the Internet he
>> claims to care so much about.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 20 Dec 2015, at 00:12, Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Was there mention of anything approaching multistakeholderism? What
>> issues were to the fore?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> j
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 6:04 PM, TH Schee <schee at fertta.com
>> <mailto:schee at fertta.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> The initiative has been particularly powerful in China with regard to
>> introducing of the whole idea around internet governance, given the Summit
>> has been broadcasted all over CCTVs last week. The Wuzhen Initiative has
>> effectively serve as the cornerstone of understanding for, say, if not a
>> billion, hundreds of millions of people.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com
>> <mailto:joly at punkcast.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/12/18/ex_icann_ceo_will_work_with_china/
>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/12/18/ex_icann_ceo_will_work_with_china/>
>>>>>> The official outline for the Wuzhen Initiative - designed by the
>> High-Level Advisory Committee (HAC) that Chehade now co-chairs - appears
>> harmless enough but contains what internet governance experts will
>> immediately recognize as troubling efforts to legitimize online censorship.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The second point of five guiding principles is "Fostering cultural
>> diversity in the cyberspace." The fourth is "Ensuring peace and security in
>> cyberspace," and the last is "Improving the global Internet governance."
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The document <http://www.wuzhenwic.org/2015-12/18/c_48241.htm> notes
>> the "importance of respect for nations' sovereignty in cyberspace" and
>> specifically fails to use the term "multi-stakeholder" in the context of
>> internet governance, instead opting for the loaded term "multilateral,"
>> which is code for putting governments in overall control.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 <tel:218%20565%209365> Skype:punkcast
>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
>>>>>> please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
>>>>>> https://portal.isoc.org/ <https://portal.isoc.org/>
>>>>>> Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> TH Schee | M: +1-646-820-0002 <tel:%2B1-646-820-0002> | @scheeinfo
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
>>>>>> please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
>>>>>> https://portal.isoc.org/
>>>>>> Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
>>>>> please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
>>>>> https://portal.isoc.org/
>>>>> Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.
>>>> 
>>>> ________________________________________________________________________
>>>> Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                        dg at apnic.net
>>>> http://www.apnic.net                                            @apnicdg
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
>>> please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
>>> https://portal.isoc.org/
>>> Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
>> please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
>> https://portal.isoc.org/
>> Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.
>> 
> 


-------------- 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