World summit agrees on status quo for internet governance
Regional-USA, Politics, 11/17/2005

The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), meeting in Tunis, Tunisia, has reached an agreement on future governance of the Internet, turning back proposals to establish some form of international body to oversee and regulate the Internet.

"It is a document that I think everyone can be very, very proud of," said Ambassador David Gross, US coordinator for international communications and information, and the principle voice expressing US opposition to the proposals, which emerged in September in a preliminary negotiation.

At a press briefing held in Tunisia November 16 after the negotiations had ended, Gross said, "It reaffirms the importance of technology and particularly the Internet to the world.... It focuses and refocuses and reaffirms the importance of the free flow of information, reaffirms the importance of technology in facilitating that and for the positive economic, social and political developments that can occur from that."

Gross and the US negotiating team advocated the maintenance of the current system. Internet governance is restricted to a multinational body based in California, maintaining the technical standards, which allow traffic to flow throughout the global communications network.

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information Michael Gallagher said US negotiators and their allies convinced other nations that the current system is the best way to ensure innovation and creativity on the Internet.

"The Internet itself is not controlled by any single government; it is not controlled by any single person," Gallagher said at the Tunis briefing. "It is a manifestation of the creativity and the genius of the world spirit."

Following is the Press Conference conducted by Ambassador David Gross, Deputy Assistant Secretary and US Coordinator for International Communications and Information Policy in the Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, Assistant Secretary Michael Gallagher, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information, and Ambassador William Hudson, US Ambassador to Tunisia:

AMBASSADOR GROSS: Good morning and welcome. Thank you for joining us. I'll just make a couple of very brief remarks and we can open up for question/answer because I understand that we only have an opportunity to be here until about eleven thirty. If there's anything remaining afterwards, of course we'll be made available to talk with you as well afterwards.

As I think you all know, last night there was an agreement reached on the Ð what is referred to as the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society. I believe that now that has been now adopted by the Summit. It is a document that I think everyone can be very, very proud of. We are thrilled with the document. It does everything we hoped it would do and more. It reaffirms the importance of technology and particularly the Internet to the world. It preserves the unique role of the United States Government in assuring the reliability and stability of the Internet. It took no action with regard to existing institutions including ICANN and others. It created no new International Organizations. It created a forum that will take place periodically - that we think is quite positive for a number of reasons, not the least of which it provides an opportunity for private sector leadership, civil society leadership and engaging in a dialogue on the importance of technology and some of the changes going on and opportunities with regard to things such internet governance. We are also very pleased that the definition of the internet governance was an appropriate one, one that focuses not so much on some of the technical aspects but rather focuses on the broad range of issues including spam, cyber crime, security related issues and the like. And also very, very importantly, it focuses and refocuses and reaffirms the importance of the free flow of information, reaffirms the importance of technology for facilitating that and for the positive economic, social and political developments that can occur from that. Mike, do you have a couple of opening comments?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: Yes, first David I just want to congratulate you and also acknowledge your leadership. It's been an honor to work with you around the world and our efforts are very, very much in that spirit. Also, David is exactly right, the document is a great success for the private sector. The document is a great success for the future of the Internet. The Internet lives to innovate another day as the result of our combined efforts here. The private sector now has the opportunity - the framework has been laid amongst a number of countries in the developing world to go forward and develop the environment within their countries to bring what we have out here on display into their countries. That challenge to the developing world is now to make sure that they have the infrastructure and the rules and the legal processes and the market systems to attract the investment of the technologies that you see on display here at the World Summit. And that is very much a message of optimism. It is very much a message of opportunity that we share with the world. So I look forward to answering questions.

QUESTION: Does the agreement...(inaudible), does the agreement change anything? Does it change the status quo at all? I mean the United States...(inaudible) --- Is there anything the United States is giving up here?

AMBASSADOR GROSS: Nothing. Nothing. Nothing.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: Nothing.

QUESTION: What's changed? Is there anything changed then?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: Others are going to have the opportunity to enjoy the benefits that the United States has experienced with the Internet. The leadership of the strength and stability of the DNS and the strong embracing of market principles and freedom of expression from the United States are now more deeply ingrained...(inaudible) to step further into the world marketplace as the result of the Summit.

AMBASSADOR GROSS: Mike's got it of course exactly right. There are no changes. There was the creation of a forum that will be an opportunity for civil society and the private sector to engage with governments on an equal footing in ways that are very unusual, particularly in the UN family. And, that we hope will be a springboard for a lot of progress to be made with regard to implementations of the sorts of things that were discussed both in the Geneva phase and also here in the Tunis phase documents. And, of course, the UN system and all other international bodies are now called on to have ICT and the use of technologies at the core of their mandates and by that I mean, basically the use of technology to help in development, the free flow of information, and those other benefits.

QUESTION: At the start of this process, there were real concerns about the United States and the US industry - that this would lead to the creation of a new intergovernmental body setting out rules and regulations on the management of the Internet. That didn't happen. I was wondering what you think accounts for the change in attitude amongst some of the leading developing countries who were pushing for this - who in the end agreed to the type of outcome you were looking for.

AMBASSADOR GROSS: I think there are a whole host of factors that played an important role. Since the Geneva phase in December 2003 when this issue started to ripen, we spent a tremendous amount of effort engaging in very substantive dialogue with other governments, with private sector, with civil society to explain the importance of the way in which the Internet is organized, the stability and reliability that comes from the way in which that is organized and to talk about the types of things that we can work on together to improve things. And I think what we saw over the past couple days and ultimately last night was a recognition about the extraordinary developments that have occurred, the stability, the reliability that comes from it, that no one wanted to shake, the extraordinarily good work that has been done by the private sector and by the US government to make this possible. And then look forward to things that we can work on that really are substantive to bring benefits to people. So I think it was a recognition of the extraordinary positive aspects of the current state of affairs, and hopefully that will translate into positive things in the future.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: If I can just add. I think that there are two things in addition to what David just mentioned. One is clarity. In June, the Bush administration enunciated four very clear principles that are going to govern decision-making in this space for the foreseeable future. The clarity and the strength of that position provided an opportunity to work through the world environment. It's been tested by this process and come out with a great sense of momentum. So I would say clarity. The second, and this is much more for David who can complete the list, is a sense of teamwork. The United States was very much working together with a group of other countries who are very supportive of the principles and of our concepts, our embracing of the private sector, our embracing of the concepts of freedom of expression, and I will leave it to David to list them. But they were a large number and they were very, very effective.

AMBASSADOR GROSS: Just a follow-up...just briefly to that. The four principles which Mike refers to and which are publicly available of course on the Internet of course - if you compare that list to the document that was agreed to last night, you will find that they are in complete harmony. And particularly from our perspective, the concept of the forum and forums Ð it is not exclusive. Rather the document calls for many organizations to have this sort of dialogue Ð is exactly the sort of thing we were looking for, together with no change with regard to some of the technical aspects of what the US government has done and will continue to do.

QUESTION: You are talking about how this agreement helped to entrench the US approach, the role of the private sector, strengthening freedom of speech. Can you draw a line for me between what has happened here and the overall aim of this conference, which is to help bridge the digital divide? How do these two things that you are mentioning play a role in that overall aim?

AMBASSADOR GROSS: There are a number of fundamental ways. I will start off and then Mike, I know, will have some comments on this as well. The key to the digital opportunities that this document refers to is really engraining the use of technology for economic development, first, and those benefits are very clear and are reaffirmed in this document. So the key here is to get countries around the world, but particularly in the developing world, to adopt and ingrain the use of technology to help better their economies, jobs, economic opportunities. And that is particularly important at a heads of state summit here where it is not just technical people talking to other technical people, but where there is a political imperative as well. Then we see the benefits of that then flowing in the social and the political realm and there once again it is important to reaffirm the freedom of expression piece, which again is mentioned in the document and reaffirms what we did in Geneva. The importance of that is that as we move increasingly to knowledge-based economies, that they are then able to engage in the free flow of information that is critically important to take advantage of the types of things that then can benefit their economies, can benefit their people socially, and of course the political benefits that come from that, the freedom aspects associated with that. And we see that time and time again whether it is in the Middle East, in Africa, in the Americas and the like. The line is very clear and the progress that has been made is really nothing short of spectacular. Look at the difference between where we were just at the time of the Geneva Summit in December 2003 and where we are today. It's a completely different world, and a world that is quite significantly better because of it. Mike...

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: I would draw the line for you this way. The core of the four principles come down to two things Ð private sector leadership and innovation and second, security and stability. With the focal point on the private sector being the best source for those terms to be manifested in reality. When we stood for that in a very strong and very clear way with allies, and then it survives this process, it then provides a firm foundation for additional investment in this space. It removes the cloud of the potential for a bureaucratic layer to be between innovation and what the citizens of the world will experience on the Internet. So you remove the risk in that cloud. You incent further investment. Again, it is up to each individual country to create that climate. President Bush tells us that the role of government is not to create wealth. He says the role of government is to create the environment where the entrepreneur can flourish, minds can expand, and technologies reach new frontiers. That is very much the opportunity that lies before the developing world to establish those frameworks within their own country to bring that investment in and build on the benefits that come from broadband and similar technologies being deployed. In the United States, we are very fortunate. We have more Internet users than anyone else in the world, with over 200 million. We have more broadband subscribers than anyone else in the world, with over 40 million broadband subscribers. Nearly half of the world's hotspots are deployed in the United States. Near half of the world's e-commerce occurs in the United States. These are the benefits we want to share with the rest of the world as we move into this 21st century, very digital economy. And that is the line between what we stood for in the principles and the opportunity that lies ahead for the developing world.

QUESTION: We all know that the Internet is an American creation. Is the US ready to cede Internet governance to other partners, like China, Japan or the European Union? Thank you.

AMBASSADOR GROSS: There are probably at least two parts to answering your question. One of the things that was agreed upon by the world community last night and affirmed today is that the term Internet governance is something quite broad. It is very inclusive. Most of what is included in that is something that is already well shared by everybody. It is shared by the private sector; it is shared by civil society; it is shared by governments around the world. It is not and never has been the exclusive province of any one government. Having said that, there are certain things because of the history associated with the Internet that have been done by the United States government. Both this document and otherwise -- as Mike talks about our four principles that the US administration issued earlier this year made clear, and nothing, nothing, nothing has changed associated with it Ð means that the US government will continue to play the role that it has always played and will continue to play with regard to those important but technical aspects associated with Internet governance. Mike.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: I would say that the premise of the question focuses on the word "cede." "Cede" means there is a winner and a loser, a giver and a taker and that is the wrong premise for what happened last night. Instead, the opportunity for the Internet that currently much of the developed world enjoys is now being extended to the developing world. So it is a win-win outcome. It is very much an outcome that is supportive of US core principles, but its extension of those benefits to the rest of the world where the win comes in for others. And it comes down to the notion that the Internet itself is not controlled by any single government; it is not controlled by any single person. It is a manifestation of the creativity and the genius of the world spirit. That's the opportunity that lies ahead. There is not governance in the sense of a director of the Internet. The future lies ahead for all of us to find together. Metcalfe's Law tells us that the value of a network rises by the square of the number of the people that are connected to it. So in the United States, we are quite excited about what the Internet has brought our country. Now we look forward to the square of that benefit going forward with the rest of the world.

QUESTION: Two questions perhaps for Ambassador Gross. There are already forums Ð the OECD, G8 cyber crime, ICANN, and maybe to a lesser extent, ITF that exist to have these discussions. Why do we need another one?

AMBASSADOR GROSS: Well that is a very fundamental question that we asked ourselves as well. And what we found is that having a multiplicity of forums seems to benefit everyone in the following sense. Many of the forums that you refer to are focused on particular issues or particular groups. And as we have traveled around, Mike and I and others, and listened very carefully to people, particularly in the developing world. We have heard a fairly constant view that there was a need to have a place where everyone could come, if they so choose, be open to all Ð developed world, developing world, technical experts, social experts, political experts and others Ð to come and discuss whatever it is that they believe was important to be discussed. It could be technical things, it could be cyber crime, it could be SPAM, it could be very technical aspects of the Internet, and the idea would be to see if there was in fact Ð to look at this from a marketplace perspective Ð to see if there really was that need. We have now created a space for that to occur. We have required that the need for that be reviewed periodically so that it does not just become a permanent place. And I think that we will see the private sector really show a lot of leadership in this area to determine whether or not that need will continue.

QUESTION: Maybe a quick follow-up question. What is to stop this forum from turning into a permanent regulatory-esque infrastructure?

AMBASSADOR GROSS: Very clear language in the agreement that says that it will have no oversight function, that it will be non-operational, and that it will engage only in dialogue. We were very clear and it was unanimously agreed. So we have no concerns that it could morph into something unsavory.

QUESTION: When you say that the US has given up nothing and that things stayed the way they are. And then you tell us that you are trying to include the developing world. What is it that you are telling us? How inclusive is this US position about including the developing world when things stay the same?

AMBASSADOR GROSS: I think that we are talking about two interrelated things. Let me tell you what isn't being opened up and then we can talk about all the rest. What is not being opened up by this document or by anything else is the role that the US government plays uniquely with regard to certain things such as the authorization of the authoritative root zone file, its relationship to ICANN and the sorts of activities that ICANN does that are associated with the existing Memorandum of Understanding and other legal relationships that the US government has in that space. Those are important things, but they are fairly narrow and fairly technical. I don't want to mislead. They are important, and I think that the world now recognizes that is important and it is an important component of the reliability and stability of the Internet. But there is so much more out there. As we talk about dealing with legal and technical issues like SPAM and cyber crime and security-related things, engaging in dialogue about how to promote the use of technology, there is no recipe but there is a lot of best practice and a lot of sharing that can be done, a lot of benefits that can be done. I think as you walk around here you see very much what we are talking about - the benefits, particularly out of Africa. I was struck both in the Geneva Summit in 2003 and I am struck again here about the extraordinary innovation in the use of technology that is occurring in Africa. Africa has the fastest growth rate with regard to wireless services in the world, for example. And the benefits that Secretary General Kofi Annan just spoke about in Africa, and elsewhere, but with particular emphasis frankly in Africa, that people are finding from the use of those technologies. Those are the places, and many others, where we can work together and find better areas.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: If I could just put it again fairly clearly. Now the opportunity to attract investment lies before you. When you create the legal structures, when you create the rule of law, when you have an environment that is hospitable to investment, you will bring the products that you see on display here at the World Summit to your people. And then you have the opportunity to educate your people and then they can use the Internet and these technologies to amplify there unique contribution to the rest of the world and that freedom of expression that would come from them to the world and use these tools to increase their productivity and to better understand one another. So these are tools that lie ahead. It is a very bright future that lies ahead, but it comes from a foundation of strength.

QUESTION: Other countries this morning are going to go back to their ministers and capitals and also claim victory. They are going to point to wording in the declaration and they are going to say "We got what we wanted as well. We have initiated a process to gently ease out the US control." And they are going to point to one thing in particular and say the country code, top level domains -.cn will now become part of China and won't be managed by a non-profit organization in California and a server in Virginia. And your declaration in June pointed in that direction as well. So the question is how might that take place and over what time period and would you agree that with my perspective that this is a step in that direction?

AMBASSADOR GROSS: Let me start off. There is nothing in this document that wasn't already something that was offered and made very clear, as you point out, Ken, in the June 30th declaration. It was very carefully tailored to go no further than what was already available. In fact on that, one of the things, and Mike can speak for himself, that I was struck by was that when we voluntarily made that announcement, again as a result of a long series of discussions over a number of years, we have been struck by the fact that no country has come to talk to us about that, which frankly has surprised us. We thought that many countries might come and try to engage to work on those things. One might suggest that perhaps the issue is not as important and not as sensitive as people once thought was the case. Frankly, one way or the other, it does not bother us. We are very flexible on that, but we were sort of struck by that. So this document doesn't take us any further down any roads that we were not already down. And we will just have to see how that develops. But there is nothing new in this document that wasn't already out there before.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: What I would add on specifically that point is the second principle that we made clear to the world opened that discussion on country code top level domains. In fact, it was part of the position that we offered the world. So we see a positive way forward in that particular example as well. And what I would point you to is paragraph 76. I think that hearkens back to a 1776 and freedom rings for the Internet.

Previous Stories:
  US keeps control of internet, favors innovation over politics   (11/16/2005)
  On eve of UN summit, progress made on global information, tech agreements   (11/16/2005)
  In Tunis, Annan for concrete action to technology access for poor   (11/16/2005)

Please add a link on your webiste pointing to ArabicNews.com and bookmark ArabicNews.com & subscribe to our daily email news bulletin.

Search