Why should you care about the next multilateral negotiation process? At one point in 2012 some called this process an Internet “takeover”–but former lead negotiator Ambassador David Gross, now repressing an industry association, sees modest progress.
Here’s what’s at stake. Will the Internet remain a free and open global platform that drives economic opportunity and helps people exercise human rights, including the freedom of expression and assembly? Or will it splinter under the control of various governments, serving as a tool that repressive regimes use to deny citizens these very rights?
via Charles H. Rivkin in HuffPo
Take a look at this background on the Ten-Year Review of the World Summit on the Information Society, that led up to the December 2015 meetings. And you can see more from the dipolomatic trenches via these hashtags: #WSIS10 #digitaldivide #netgov #WSIS
How did the December 2015 meetings end up?
The final document almost completely rejects the multilateral model, which is mentioned once. Instead it repeatedly endorses the more inclusive “multistakeholder” approach to Internet governance proposed by the United States, the European Union and developing nations like Brazil and India. This model promotes a management system based on the consensus of civil society, businesses, academic institutions, engineers and governments.
“To their credit, negotiators fought off the worst proposals, and recognized that our human rights to privacy and expression, and access to information and digital security tools, remain under threat,” Mr. Micek said.
Still, China appears satisfied that the document recognized “a leading role” for governments in cybersecurity matters relating to national security — one of China’s top objectives — and that it refers to the United Nations Charter, which enshrines principles of state sovereignty and nonintervention by the United Nations in domestic affairs.
via Dan Levin, “At U.N., China Tries to Influence Fight Over Internet Contro” NYT