The United Nations Strives To Run the Internet
Jul 19th, 2005
Harold Furchtgott-Roth
When it comes to the Internet, many American businesses lobby the federal government intensively on issues ranging from taxes to security to intellectual property. It turns out that some people believe these and other issues should be resolved by the United Nations. 

Decades ago, scientists and engineers working for the American government developed the concept and physical reality of the Internet. In the early 1990s, the Internet entered the public and commercial realm not because the United Nations or any other entity developed a parallel system, but because the U.S. government permitted its commercial development.

A lesser government would have kept complete control of the Internet. A less generous government would not have opened its network architecture or naming conventions. A less trusting government would have monitored all traffic. A less morally confident government would have insisted on continuous recognition.

The technology of the Internet would have developed without our government, but more slowly, less predictably, and with less universal availability. Our government's opening of the Internet was not merely magnanimous: It was taken without self-conscious calculation of any national benefit or harm.

Today, the Internet links networks that span the globe in every conceivable manner. It thrives because of - not despite - the fact that no international body dictates its every feature. Our government and others negotiate rules and enforcement for the Internet to protect consumers and businesses from unlawful activities. These negotiations have worked well without centralized U.N. regulation.

The United Nations, of course, did not invent the Internet, but it has anointed itself as worthy of planning a new international governance of the Internet. Last week, the secretary-general of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, released the Report of the Working Group on Internet Governance. The WGIG consists of 40 individuals from both government and private institutions. The U.N. selected governmental officials from China, Cuba, Iran, and other countries. Although a few Americans are on the WGIG, our government, which developed the Internet, did not rate a seat at the table.

The WGIG report was written in the plebian setting of the Chateau de Bossey in Switzerland. The report lists a litany of problems with the Internet, all of which can apparently be handled by a global multi-stakeholder forum to address Internet-related public policy issues. Moreover, in a transparent reference to the American government, which was not a participant in the group, it says, No single Government should have a pre-eminent role in relation to international Internet governance. The U.N. report modestly concludes, The [Internet governance] forum should preferably be linked to the United Nations.

The most disturbing aspect of the United Nations is not so much its petty personal corruptions or even its bureaucratic inefficiencies. Many if not most national governments around the world have differing degrees of corruption and inefficiency. But the United Nations uniquely seeks to displace national governmental authority with its own brand of undisciplined authority.

The United Nations is nothing if not ambitious. It seeks a role in the governance of issues ranging from telecommunications infrastructure and interconnection to intellectual property management (apparently, the United Nations is not persuaded that intellectual property protection is a good idea), from consumer protection to the appropriate protection of privacy, personal data, and other human rights. There is little related to the Internet that the United Nations does not seek to regulate.

The United Nations cannot succeed on its own. But that it boldly publishes the WGIG Report supporting a greater U.N. role in Internet regulation is a step that it would not have taken even a few years ago.

The Internet has thrived without U.N. governance. Of course, the Internet could be improved in many ways, particularly the enforcement of legal rights. The United Nations in its report does not see a role for itself merely in promoting enforcement; rather, it sees its role as greater governance of the Internet.

Businesses and consumer groups lobby Congress and the administration daily to adjust regulations affecting various issues related to the Internet. Perhaps they should also lobby for a stronger American voice at the United Nations. The administration's nominee for ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, sits in limbo before the Senate while Mr. Annan moves forward with his efforts to place the Internet under U.N. governance.

Copyright © 2005; Furchtgott - Roth Economic Enterprises. All rights reserved