Monday, December 8, 2003
previous entry | main | next entry | TrackBack (0)
An update on the Internet and the UN
Last week I red-flagged the upcoming World Summit on the Information Society and developing country efforts to have greater UN involvement (in the form of the International Telecommunications Union) in Internet governance. The United States, European Union, and Japan all opposed this move -- out of normative fears that it would enhance the ability of states to regulate content, and positive fears that such a switch would dilute their influence in ICANN.
Looks like the status quo will be preserved for the near-future -- meaning that ICANN still runs key parts of the Internet and states like China and Saudi Arabia can still regulate content to their heart's content. Here's the Reuters story on it. The Register has some good behind-the-scenes stuff:
The Washington Times suggests the clear faultlines when these issues re-emerge:
China, Brazil, South Africa. Hmmm... These countries also played a pivotal role in derailing world trade talks at Cancun three months ago.
In all the talk about transatlantic tensions -- in the blogosphere and the mediasphere -- methinks that analysts have overlooked a deeper division that may emerge in future negotiations on the global political economy: the developed and developing world.
More on this in a few days.posted by Dan on 12.08.03 at 11:58 AM
"methinks that analysts have overlooked a deeper division that may emerge in future negotiations on the global political economy: the developed and developing world."
Um, methinks from reading the account that it's the U.S. and the developing world, with the rest of the developed world brokering "compromises". I actually don't know whether that's a good thing or a bad thing.posted by: Al on 12.08.03 at 11:58 AM [permalink]
“methinks that analysts have overlooked a deeper division that may emerge in future negotiations on the global political economy: the developed and developing world.”
Nope, that’s not quite the reality of the situation. This deeper division actually revolves around those who wish to emulate American values---and those who prefer to wallow in self pity and envy of our earned preeminence.posted by: David Thomson on 12.08.03 at 11:58 AM [permalink]
I do think Daniel Drezner is on to something. Countries like China, India, Brazil are asserting themselves in the international arena. They are fastly developing (at least China and India do) and want to translate this new economic power into political power. Golman Sachs is talking about the Bric's (brazil, india, china, russia) taking over European countries, Japan and maybe the U.S. as economic powerhouses before 2050. Although one has to be very carefull with this kind of predictions (especially for Brazil and Russia, i guess) it is another indication that the world dynamics is shifting away from Europe and the U.S. and to new fast developing countries. And i don't believe that it will be the U.S. alone against the developing world. It is in Europe, not the U.S. were policians try hard to prevent letting immigrants from those countries in. It is in Europe, not the U.S. where outsourcing/offshoring to India is seen as a threat (Americans see this - mostly - as an oppurtunity - rightly so: see a recent study from the McKinsey Global Institute). Yes, the U.S is very busy with China bashing, but a lot of American businesses are reacting agaist this - see Stephen Roach, who writes for a business-audience). And while Business Week called for seeing a developing India as an opportunity, Europe is starting with India-bashing: it filed a complaint against protectionists measures from India (maybe rightly so - but it's the kettle...)posted by: Ivan Janssens on 12.08.03 at 11:58 AM [permalink]
Post a Comment: