<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hello Advisors. Here is a really good article explaining what is
at stake in the current WSIS and Global Digital Compact exercises.
Skipping to the end, the author , a veteran in internet policy
analysis (bio at the end) concludes:</p>
<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 1.5em 0px; color: rgb(84,
84, 84); font-family: Raleway, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;
font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;
font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start;
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
word-spacing: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;"><i>What
is key to consider is that the multistakeholder model is
important not because of the transformative results it has
produced. In fact, it has not managed to do that. The importance
of the multistakeholder model should otherwise be calculated.
The model has been key in legitimizing multi-actor participation
without requiring permission from governments; this is crucial
as an increasing number of states try to silence opposing voices
and create echo chambers in order to justify their
inward-looking digital strategies. Another way to think about
the multistakeholder model is through transparency; the model
has proven capable to shed light on the actions taken by
different actors and how they may conflict with the Internet’s
established norms and principles. </i></p>
<i> </i>
<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 1.5em 0px; color: rgb(84,
84, 84); font-family: Raleway, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;
font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;
font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start;
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
word-spacing: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;"><i>The
Internet community has fought long and hard for its right to be
part of the conversation on the future of the Internet, and to
hold governments accountable for actions that are against its
openness, global reach and interoperability. If we don’t pay
attention, these crucial qualities may disappear on a whim.</i></p>
<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 1.5em 0px; color: rgb(84,
84, 84); font-family: Raleway, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;
font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;
font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start;
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
word-spacing: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;">Best
wishes for the coming long weekend and Happy Easter to all those
who celebrate this annual spring ritual<br>
</p>
<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 1.5em 0px; color: rgb(84,
84, 84); font-family: Raleway, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;
font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;
font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start;
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
word-spacing: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;">Marita<br>
</p>
<p></p>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><b>The UN Wants More Say Over the
Future of the Internet. That’s Not Necessarily A Good Thing</b>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>
<p><a
href="https://techpolicy.press/the-un-wants-more-say-over-the-future-of-the-internet-thats-not-necessarily-a-good-thing/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://techpolicy.press/the-un-wants-more-say-over-the-future-of-the-internet-thats-not-necessarily-a-good-thing/</a></p>
<p>Published March 27, 2023<br>
</p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">As
if Internet governance discussions were not already
convoluted, the United Nations has recently<span> </span><a
href="https://www.un.org/techenvoy/global-digital-compact"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">launched</a><span> </span>a
process that attempts to place the UN at the heart
of Internet governance discussions. While it may
seem like a good thing that the nearly 80-year old
intergovernmental organization is concerned about
the future of the Internet, its initiative raises
critical questions for the future of
multistakeholder collaboration.</p>
<h2>The Merits of Decentralization</h2>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">In
George Orwell’s allegorical novel,<span> </span><em
style="box-sizing:border-box">Animal Farm</em>,
the animals conspire to seize control of the farm,
establishing ‘animalist’ rules to prevent oppressive
behavior by humans. They succeed in their endeavor,
until the pig, Napoleon, decides to change the final
rule: “All animals are equal, but some are more
equal than others,” he commands. In its simplicity,
Orwell’s message is compelling: all power can
ultimately be abused.</p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">If
there is one system that, by design, can resist such
an abuse of power is the Internet. The original
promise of the Internet was meant to reflect a
structure where power would be dispersed, making
room for more democratic and fair participation. A
decentralized technology, the Internet was supposed
to negate any center of control and reject any
attempt at concentrating power. And, for the most
part, this design choice ensured an open technology,
where voluntary participation and open standards
would be core to the way it would eventually evolve.
Over the years, however, experience has shown that
the Internet’s decentralized architecture is not a
panacea: as the Internet’s ecosystem evolved and
innovation led to new systems and applications, the
market appeared to demand a certain degree of
concentration. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">Power
concentration, while perhaps necessary to perform
certain functions, such as reduced costs and fast
decision-making, has the tendency to corrupt and
ossify, undermining the benefits of decentralized,
collective wisdom. Over the past 25 years or so,
global Internet adoption has allowed certain
companies to benefit greatly from network effects;
as more users joined their systems, the value of
these companies increased exponentially while it was
harder for users to switch to competing services.
Network effects would end up discouraging users from
exiting certain services, resulting in high barriers
for new entrants; Ben Thompson refers to this as the
”<a
href="https://stratechery.com/2015/aggregation-theory/"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">aggregation
theory</a>.” </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">It
is for this reason that the early decision to adopt
an inclusive, multistakeholder model of governance
for the Internet has been fundamental for its
evolution and growth. Emerging out of the two phases
of the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS),
in 2003 in Geneva and, then, in 2005 in Tunis, the
idea was that the future of the Internet should be
tied to a collaborative approach that would allow a
multitude of stakeholders to shape its future. In
this respect, the “Tunis Agenda for the Information
Society”<span> </span><a
href="https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">acknowledged</a><span> </span>that
“Internet governance is the development and
application by governments, the private sector and
civil society, in their respective roles, of shared
principles, norms, rules, decision-making
procedures, and programs that shape the evolution
and use of the Internet.” And, for almost two
decades, multistakeholder governance has sustained
the Internet through some key milestones, including
the<span> </span><a
href="https://ntia.gov/other-publication/fact-sheet-iana-stewardship-transition-explained"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">transition</a><span> </span>of
the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) from
the US government to the wider Internet community in
2016.</p>
<h2
id="m_5786798536260463033m_-8831136728371617023h-enter-the-un-s-common-agenda"
style="box-sizing:border-box;font-family:"Playfair
Display",serif;font-size:1.3125em;line-height:1.143;margin:0px;padding:0px;font-weight:400;color:rgb(43,43,43);font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">Enter
the UN’s “Common Agenda”</h2>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">After
almost twenty years of multistakeholder governance,
however, this inclusive model might be hanging in a
balance. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">In
2021, António Guterres, the United Nations Secretary
General, released a<span> </span><a
href="https://www.un.org/en/content/common-agenda-report/assets/pdf/Common_Agenda_Report_English.pdf"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">report</a><span> </span>on
“Our Common Agenda.” Declaring that the world is at
“an inflection point,” he pointed at two options: “a
breakdown or a breakthrough.” The global COVID19
pandemic, the effects of climate change, conflicts
within and between states, poverty, discrimination
and violence, increasing negative levels of trust
and solidarity, all indicate that we are running
against time. In this regard, the United Nations is
hoping through “a common agenda” to “accelerate the
implementation of existing agreements, including the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)” and
reintroduce a renewed globalized and cohesive
international order. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">The<span> </span><a
href="https://www.un.org/en/content/common-agenda-report/assets/pdf/Common_Agenda_Report_English.pdf"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">vision</a><span> </span>promoted
by the Secretary General is premised upon a “more
networked and inclusive multilateral system,
anchored within the United Nations.” It spans across
twelve commitments, amongst which there is the
improvement of digital cooperation. For this to be
achieved, the proposal centers around a “Global
Digital Compact,” which would cover topical issues,
including connectivity, Internet fragmentation, data
protection, human rights, content moderation, and
the regulation of artificial intelligence. The
choice of these themes does not seem accidental
considering they occupy the digital agendas of most
countries around the world. Depending on how we
respond to them, they could determine the future of
the Internet as an open, inclusive and global
network of networks. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">In
the meantime, the timing of this initiative is
compelling, with<span> </span><a
href="https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/pandemic-adds-momentum-deglobalization-trend"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">deglobalization</a><span> </span>creating
seismic geopolitical shifts and national Internet
regulation reaching an all-time high. The Internet
is gradually becoming less global and less open. On
paper, therefore, the Secretary General’s initiative
has the potential to bring states together and help
them shape a better future for the Internet. In
practice, however, the “Global Digital Compact” may
constitute the beginning of the end for the
Internet’s collaborative, multistakeholder model. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">The
hope is that the United Nations can play a role
similar to the one it played nearly twenty years ago
when the<span> </span><a
href="https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">World
Summit on Information Society</a><span> </span>process
legitimized the creation of a wide community of
actors to resolve issues pertinent to the
information society. In 2005, despite some<span> </span><a
href="https://www.apc.org/sites/default/files/DigitalSolidarities_0.pdf"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">resistance</a>,
states managed to find a way to get to a place of
consensus regarding the multistakeholder model. The
hope is that, twenty years later, governments will
find a way to get to that place once again. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">This
is easier said than done, as the reality of today is
nowhere near the reality of the early 2000s. In
today’s political realm, protectionism and
industrial policy are consuming the way states
approach foreign relations. The division amongst
otherwise allied countries is growing wider,
creating the conditions for competing and, often,
conflicting policies that do little to advance the
open Internet. If the United States and the European
Union cannot find an effective solution for<span> </span><a
href="https://www.wired.co.uk/article/biden-eu-us-data-privacy-executive-order"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">cross
border data flows</a>, what are the chances for
less aligned countries like India or Brazil?
Moreover,<span> </span><a
href="https://www.reuters.com/technology/china-leads-us-global-competition-key-emerging-technology-study-says-2023-03-02/"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">China</a><span> </span>has
become more competitive and now influences the way
technology is deployed internationally. In 2005,
China was a country that was majorly consuming
technology, supplied by the west; today, it is a
noteworthy competitor, a<span> </span><a
href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23738871.2020.1805482"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">leader</a><span> </span>in
standards’ development and a major<span> </span><a
href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/08/china-is-exporting-surveillance-tech-like-facial-recognition-globally.html"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">exporter</a><span> </span>of
technology globally. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">Even
if we disregard these concerns as ephemeral and
believe that the global order is going through a
phase of existential crisis, the fact that the
Secretary General aims to channel Internet policy
issues through the UN’s multilateral system is
alarming. When looking at the issues the “Global
Digital Compact” will seek to address, one cannot
help but wonder whether the ultimate goal is to
create a centralized system where the UN sits at the
top. For example, the point about connecting all
people to the Internet, including schools, is pretty
much what the ITU’s and UNICEF’s<span> </span><a
href="https://giga.global/about-us/"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">GIGA</a><span> </span>project
aims to do. Similarly, the item on introducing
“accountability criteria for discrimination and
misleading content” happens to be the issue that
UNESCO is seeking to address through its “<a
href="https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000384031.locale=en"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Guidelines
for regulating digital platforms</a>”. Both the<span> </span><a
href="https://www.itu.int/en/action/ai/Pages/default.aspx"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">ITU</a><span> </span>and<span> </span><a
href="https://en.unesco.org/artificial-intelligence"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">UNESCO</a><span> </span>are
having separate tracks around artificial
intelligence; and, the UN already has a data
protection and privacy<span> </span><a
href="https://www.unglobalpulse.org/policy/un-privacy-policy-group/"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">group</a>.
It feels like the mechanisms and organs are in place
for Internet governance to move substantively under
the auspices of the UN’s multilateral system.</p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">Despite
any verbal<span> </span><a
href="https://www.itu.int/hub/2022/10/establishing-the-global-digital-compact-qa-with-amandeep-singh-gill/"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">assurance</a><span> </span>that
the “Global Digital Compact” is meant to be
inclusive, placing Internet governance under the UN
is a big gamble. The multistakeholder model is
already under pressure and scrutiny and it will not
survive any attempt at undermining it. In a
statement, delivered at the First Informal
Consultation with Member States on the Global
Digital Compact, Cuba, on behalf of the G77 and
China group,<span> </span><a
href="https://www.g77.org/statement/getstatement.php?id=230130"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">said</a>:
“While we acknowledge the relevance of stakeholder
inputs in this process, the Group strongly
emphasizes that this should remain a Member State
driven process throughout and should respect States’
ownership over their own development pathways.” At
the same time, in 2025 WSIS is up for review and
stock will be taken on whether it has managed to
deliver on its promise. The IGF, WSIS’ main outcome,
will be scrutinized. Nothing, and no one, can
guarantee that consensus will be reached regarding
its future. And, the fact that Russia, a strong<span> </span><a
href="https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/governing-cyberspace-state-control-vs-multistakeholder-model"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">adversary</a><span> </span>of
the multistakeholder model, is pitting to host the
IGF that year may be seen as the ironic epilogue of
the multistakeholder chapter.</p>
<h2>The Road Ahead</h2>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">With
this in mind, here is what is in front of us. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">On
the one hand, the Digital Compact could, in theory,
be seen as an attempt to re-energize a community
that, for some time, has been sitting comfortably in
the fuzziness of multistakeholderism. The term, in
itself, has been used (and abused) so much that it
has become empty of substance. At the same time, the
Internet Governance Forum (IGF),
multistakeholderism’s quintessential body, has
suffered from fatigue, complacency and a lack of
vision. There is an opportunity for the Internet
community to come together and rethink what the
model means and what they want out of it. For this
to happen, however, the UN must not only commit but
further ensure that the modalities around the way
the Digital Compact will be negotiated adhere to an
inclusive, collaborative framework. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">On
the other hand, there is a probable scenario where,
gradually, the UN takes over Internet governance;
should this happen, the fate of the Internet is
pretty much sealed. In this scenario, we should
anticipate an environment with limited participation
for civil society, the Internet’s engineering
community, academia and businesses, lack of checks
and balances, bureaucracy and long negotiations.
Think of the recent historic<span> </span><a
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/05/high-seas-treaty-agreement-to-protect-international-waters-finally-reached-at-un"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">deal</a><span> </span>to
protect international waters, which has taken two
decades in the making, and you start to get the
picture. Only, unlike oceans that are generally
static, the Internet cannot sit around for two
decades as states negotiate a framework for its
future. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">What
is key to consider is that the multistakeholder
model is important not because of the transformative
results it has produced. In fact, it has not managed
to do that. The importance of the multistakeholder
model should otherwise be calculated. The model has
been key in legitimizing multi-actor participation
without requiring permission from governments; this
is crucial as an increasing number of states try to
silence opposing voices and create echo chambers in
order to justify their inward-looking digital
strategies. Another way to think about the
multistakeholder model is through transparency; the
model has proven capable to shed light on the
actions taken by different actors and how they may
conflict with the Internet’s established norms and
principles. </p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:1.5em
0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">The
Internet community has fought long and hard for its
right to be part of the conversation on the future
of the Internet, and to hold governments accountable
for actions that are against its openness, global
reach and interoperability. If we don’t pay
attention, these crucial qualities may disappear on
a whim.</p>
<div style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px solid
rgb(255,255,255);width:737.271px;clear:both;display:block;overflow:hidden;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:0px;padding:0px;color:rgb(84,84,84);font-family:Raleway,sans-serif;font-size:17px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">
<div style="box-sizing:border-box;padding:20px">
<div
style="box-sizing:border-box;float:left;padding:0px
20px 20px"><a
href="https://techpolicy.press/author/konstantinos-komaitis/"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:underline"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><img
alt="Konstantinos Komaitis"
src="https://techpolicy.press/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/1623256330138.jpeg"
style="box-sizing:border-box;max-width:100px;height:100px!important;border:none;width:100px!important;border-radius:50%"
moz-do-not-send="true" width="100"
height="100"></a></div>
<div
style="box-sizing:border-box;font-size:18px;line-height:25px;margin:20px
0px 0px 20px;display:block"><a
href="https://techpolicy.press/author/konstantinos-komaitis/"
rel="author"
style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(43,43,43);text-decoration:none"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="box-sizing:border-box">Konstantinos
Komaitis</span></a></div>
<div
style="box-sizing:border-box;display:block;margin:5px
20px;color:rgb(2,2,2)!important;font-size:14px!important;line-height:21px!important">
<div style="box-sizing:border-box">
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:5px 0px
12px;color:rgb(2,2,2)!important;font-size:14px!important;line-height:21px!important">Konstantinos
Komaitis is a veteran of developing and
analyzing Internet policy to ensure an open
and global Internet. Konstantinos has spent
almost ten years in active policy
development and strategy as a Senior
Director at the Internet society. Before
that, he spent 7 years as a senior lecturer
at the university of Strathclyde, Glasgow,
UK, where he researched and taught Internet
policy. Konstantinos is a public speaker
having talked at many events around the
world, including a TedX talk, and a writer
having written for various outlets including
Brookings, Slate, TechDirt, and EuroActive.
He holds two Master degrees and a doctorate
and he is the author of a book on domain
name regulation. He co-hosts the “Internet
of Humans Podcast”. He is currently a
non-resident fellow and a senior researcher
at the Lisbon Council.</p>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:5px 0px
12px;color:rgb(2,2,2)!important;font-size:14px!important;line-height:21px!important"><br>
</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<pre cols="72">
</pre>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>