[governance] On WSIS+10 (was Re: Why?)
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Thu May 21 08:50:17 EDT 2015
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 11:57 PM, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
> Michael,
>
> I am not sure I see what you mean below by "working to undermine and
> diminish the significance of the WSIS+10"?
>
> What surely could undermine the WSIS+10 process is that it will most
> likely be less open to non-state actors - and civil society in
> particular - than the WSIS itself 10 years ago. Unless things have
> changed, and according to the excellent summary by APC
> <https://www.apc.org/en/news/everything-you-need-know-about-wsis10-review>:
>
> /the review is going to be "a two-day high-level meeting of the
> General Assembly". The document will be prepared by "an
> intergovernmental negotiation process, which will include
> preparatory meetings, resulting in an intergovernmentally agreed
> outcome document, for adoption at the high-level meeting of the
> General Assembly"./
>
/Bertrand
What Michael says above relates to how we reached the state of affair
described in the cited section/ from APC's summary.
I am sure you know how we reached the situation whereby
"
/the review is going to be "a two-day high-level meeting of the
General Assembly". The document will be prepared by "an
intergovernmental negotiation process, which will include
preparatory meetings, resulting in an intergovernmentally agreed
outcome document, for adoption at the high-level meeting of the
General Assembly". "
/
/Over many months last year, and the year before, G 77 sought a full
fledged WSIS plus 10 summit on the same style as the original WSIS, the
extended preparatory meetings and all.... Developed countries, under the
customary US leadership, simply refused. Some m/ajor NGOs that otherwise
follow this process closely were either silent or actually supporting
the developed country position in this stand off, and to that extent
opposing the position of a full fledged WSIS summit, original WSIS style
(which would have then taken place in Geneva, with multistakeholder
participation at least at the same level as was in the original WSIS).
When this was happening, I raised the issue a few times on these list
but got no response. It is really strange in the circumstances to now
rue that this has happened.
It is a fact that the more authoritarian countries among the G 77 also
preferred it to move to New York, with much less multi stakeholder
participation than what would have happened in Geneva, even though they
wanted it to be summit level meeting. /*However, G 77 as a group was
ready to do it fully original WSIS style*/, with the leadership for this
position taken by the more democratic developing countries. However,
this position found no support from civil society and tech groups (ISOC)
who otherwise were closely following the process, and there were in fact
positions articulated that expressed some kinds of 'fear' about a
possible full-fledged summit, with these positions largely aligning with
developed country positions.
That is what brought us were we are. Lets not escape the responsibility.
Further, as I said in my earlier email, the CEO of ICANN - an
organisation on whose board both you and Wolfgang sit - openly touted
Net Mundial Initiative as something needed to stop governments from
doing what they would in default (of NMI) do through the WSIS and its
preparatory process. With this kind of sentiment, publicly expressed, it
is clear what ICANN and others of the dominant IG cohort think of the
WSIS process....
Quoting Fadi on why Net Mundial is needed -
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/12/im_begging_you_to_join_netmundial_initiative_gets_desperate/?page=2
"We need to make sure that next June (referring to the start of WSIS
prep process) we don't have delegation after delegation going to UNGA
[the United Nations General Assembly] saying there are no solutions to
these issues.
And then now to express regret about the health of the WSIS process !?
>
> For sure, modalities for consultation of relevant WSIS stakeholders
> are supposed to be put in place, but there is a big question mark in
> that regard at the moment, isn't it?
>
> In that context, maybe the motto should be: the real WSIS+10 is the
> IGF 2015. Why don't we make it so?
Yes, that kind of sentiment is and was precisely the problem which led
to where we stand today. But then lets not try to have our cake and eat
it too ...
parminder
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
> "/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/")
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com
> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Wolfgang, I must say that I find your statement below exceedingly
> odd in
> that you seem to have ignored the manner in which a number of the
> leading
> "civil society" organizations have been working alongside their
> USG and UKG
> (and other) allies to undermine and diminish the significance of
> the WSIS
> +10 process.
>
> M
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
> <mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org>
> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
> <mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org>] On Behalf Of
> "Kleinwächter,
> Wolfgang"
> Sent: May 19, 2015 3:01 PM
> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>; parminder; David Cake
> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>; BestBitsList;
> Forum at Justnetcoalition. Org
> Subject: [governance] Why?
>
> Sorry for intervening: It is really a pitty that the discussion on
> this list
> is occupied by hairsplitting, "I told you but you do not listen"
> and "I am
> right and you are wrong". Why this civil society network, which
> once played
> an important role in policy development in the WSIS process, is
> unable to
> look forward where the real challenges are with the forthcoming
> WSIS 10+
> processes and concentrate on substance and how to reach rough
> consensus? Why
> people do not respect anymore what Jon Postel has told us a
> quarter of a
> century ago in his robustness princple: "Be conservative in what
> you send,
> be liberal in what you accept". Why they do not remember the
> language of the
> CS WSIS Geneva Declaration from 2003?
>
> The Bali split (2013) has obviously long shadows and old warriors have
> overtaken the discussion.
>
> My hope is that the WSIS 10++ perspective will encourage a new
> generation of
> younger civil society people who feel more committed to the
> substance of
> real civil society activities and do not waste the limited
> resources and
> energies for infighting. And do not forget: The WGIG proposal for a
> multistakeholder approach in Internet Governance (2005) was a
> compromise
> between "governmental leadership" (China) and private sector
> leadership
> (USA)and it opened the door for civil society to become an
> inclusive part of
> the process. This was a boig achievement of that time and an
> opportunity. It
> is now up to the next generation of civil society activists to
> build on this
> oppportunity. It would be a big shame if this would be destroyed.
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150521/888e0cc9/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