[lac-discuss-en] Fwd: [governance] EC on IG

[Carlton Samuels]

See, someone else other than me is on to the game plan!

Carlton Samuels


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Willie Currie <wcurrie at apc.org>
Date: Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 4:24 PM
Subject: Re: [governance] EC on IG
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, William Drake
<william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>


Hi Bill

Two other issues also seem pertinent: one is the security argument
underpinning the the EU
argument for external accountability by governments which is an echo
of the 'cybersecurity' agenda in the US:

'Internet usage and penetration is now so high, especially in
developed countries
such as those of the EU, that it has become a critical resource, where
any serious disruption
in service can have potentially catastrophic effects on society and
the economy....Most Internet
users in the EU therefore have a legitimate expectation about the reliability of
‘their Internet’. Users will also inevitably turn to their governments
if there is any major
national disruption to their Internet service, and not to the various
Internet governance
bodies responsible for coordinating resources.'

The USG may well draw the conclusion that the JPA should be extended
if the private sector
submissions to the NTIA inquiry carry the day in combination with the
Congress' anxieties about cybersecurity.

The second is the competition issue where the EU says:

'the self-regulatory approach as practised by ICANN means that
incumbent operators play a potentially inappropriate role (e.g. from
the standpoint of
competition policy) in setting entry conditions for new competitors'.

So it looks like a return to the 'enhanced cooperation' agenda by the
EU on which they
have been silent about since Tunis. Will the USG go with this
approach? I can't see it.
The NTIA inquiry has exposed ICANN's vulnerability regarding
accountability, in a way the
ICANN President's Strategy Committee didn't fully forsee. They seemed
to under-estimate the nature of US politics and the strong negative
reaction of the private sector.

Perhaps USG will surprise us all by looking towards a
multi-stakeholder process to resolving
ICANN's external accountability problem. Can't we come up with a
concrete proposal in this regard?

Willie

William Drake wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> There's a Communications from the EC today that may be of interest.
>
> Internet governance: the next steps
> http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/internet_gov/docs/communication/comm2009_277_fin_en.pdf
>
> Two notable bits:
>
> First, the EC refers to the JPA as if it's ending and that's a done deal.  Whether that's due to private assurance, disregard for the positions of various DC actors, strategic discourse, or whatever, who knows.  In any event, so moving on, it's time to talk about IANA:
>
> "The indication by the US government in 2006 that the current agreement should be the last
> such agreement with ICANN was largely welcomed by the international community
> (including the EU). At the same time, the US government has consistently indicated that it
> will maintain effective control of the coordination of key global naming and addressing
> functions and this is likely to mean that the problem regarding the ‘unilateral oversight’ of
> such resources will remain unresolved."
>
> Second, multistakeholderism is a nice thing that should be "encouraged" in discussion forums like the IGF.  ICANN, in contrast, involves "private-sector leadership," which "must be maintained."  And public policy and ICANN's external accountability are for governments to deal with:
>
> "As regards external accountability, the current arrangements for unilateral oversight in regard to ICANN and IANA need to be replaced with an alternative mechanism to ensure that ICANN has multilateral accountability."
>
> "At the same time, public policies for key global Internet resources (especially those that require global coordination) need to be based on multilateral intergovernmental cooperation."
>
> So unless I'm missing something, the civil society kids are invited to chat and enjoy in the back seat and leave the driving to the adults in the front.  One big happy family, all in our respective roles and responsibilities...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
> PS: The EC also released a communication on the Internet of the things.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
>  Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
> ***********************************************************
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>    governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>    governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
   governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
   governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
   http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance