Net Gains

November 17, 2005
Wall Street Journal
Original Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113218137734199419.html?mod=opinion&ojcontent=otep

The surest sign that the United Nations reached a reasonable agreement on Internet governance at its summit in Tunis came yesterday when Robert Mugabe denounced plans to keep the current U.S.-based technical management of the 'Net in place. If the likes of Zimbabwe's tyrant are against it, the rest of the world clearly should be for it.
The upshot of the so-called Tunis Agenda is that the everyday Internet user will see almost no change in how cyberspace works. That's quite an accomplishment on the part of American negotiators and allies such as Canada and Australia. Many observers had feared that this meeting would end up giving birth to an intergovernmental body that would clog the 'Net with regulation and bureaucracy.
It's true that the agreement does call for the U.N. to establish an Internet Governance Forum next year. Importantly, however, it further says that this forum would have no oversight function and would not replace existing arrangements, mechanisms, institutions or organizations. This phrase clearly refers to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or Icann, the California-based nonprofit company that administers the Domain Name System.
In the debate leading up to the Tunis summit, Icann became a synonym for perceived U.S. control of the Internet -- even though its functions are purely technical and include a host of non-American workers and managers. Underscoring the recognition that tinkering with a system that has performed, in the words of none other than Kofi Annan, fairly and admirably, the Tunis Agenda states that the new forum would have no involvement in day-to-day or technical operations of the Internet. To cheers from business representatives, the document also solidifies the private sector's role as a leading driver of Internet management and innovation.
So what will this new forum actually do? As little as possible, one would hope. It would be most useful as a means of coordinating efforts to address such cyber crimes as email fraud (also known as phishing) and cyber annoyances like spam.
Beyond that, it's difficult to see how the forum differs significantly from Icann's existing Governmental Advisory Committee other than operating under the U.N.'s auspices. In this, some participants -- notably, the European Union -- are inclined to see the birth of an entity that will evolve into Icann's successor. Others, led by the U.S., are confident that a forum envisioned in Tunis as lightweight and decentralized will remain so. Businesses and other parties interested in a red-tape-free Internet must be vigilant to prevent the scenario preferred by the Europeans from becoming reality.
Contrary to the claims of dictators like Mr. Mugabe, these principles are vital to economic development in poor nations. As U.S. Assistant Commerce Secretary Michael Gallagher pointed out, once developing nations adopt such legal reforms as stronger property rights private investment and the resulting economic growth will follow. Mr. Gallagher cited Chile, Egypt and Senegal as examples of countries that have benefited from removing obstacles to foreign direct investment in technology.
The digital divide is nothing more than the age-old gap between well-governed countries that value personal and economic liberty, and those that suffer under oppressive regimes. A new forum with strong powers could have closed the divide only by abridging free expression in the liberal democracies. The American representatives in Tunis should be congratulated for denying the new forum such powers and blocking the efforts of repressive states to enlist the United Nations in their efforts to suppress public discourse.