[Chapter-delegates] ITU, ICANN and Internet Governance

[Alejandro Pisanty]

Siva,

thanks for sharing.

Could you find a reference for the Russian position you mention, in order 
to be able to quote it directly in full detail? (no doubt it was as you 
write! it is consistent with previous statements and actions.)

I have read your article and find it useful. I do not think that the 
proposal you make in conclusion is workable. The GAC does not exist as a 
grouping of governments different from the ITU. There are just so many 
governments in the world and it is only one per country ;-).

Many governments do play out different policy agendas in the ICANN GAC, in 
the IGF, and in the ITU. They do so through different units (ministries of 
telecoms, trade, foreign relations, science and technology, etc.) and at 
different levels (often a higher-level official tracks the ITU than the 
Internet-related fora.)

But in the end, Siva, its the same ones all over. That turns your 
description of the solution overly simplistic.

What we can do, and actually are doing in many chapters including yours, 
is an awareness and influence effort, in which we continue to strive for 
our own governments (each of us) to have a broader picture of the global 
Internet agenda and thus pay attention to each forum appropriately.

With time and some luck, we manage for high-ranking officials to see what 
the ill effects of some things like the ITU's resolution 102 (on Internet 
public-policy issues) and others like the cybersecurity work (which you 
correctly describe in all its fake-ness) are. And counteract them by not 
letting the ITU get a heavier hand.

To that we add the central efforts of ISOC HQ and chapter-collaborative 
work with them for deeper and broader analysis and statements than we 
sometimes can produce individually in the chapters and which agree with 
the organizational members too.

So let's take that into action now along the lines of your concerns.

Alejandro Pisanty


.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . .  .  .  .  .  .
      Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico

Tels. +52-(1)-55-5105-6044, +52-(1)-55-5418-3732

* Mi blog/My blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
* LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
* Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614

* Ven a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org.mx, ISOC http://www.isoc.org
*Participa en ICANN, http://www.icann.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .


On Sat, 9 Oct 2010, Sivasubramanian M wrote:

> Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2010 21:41:44 +0530
> From: Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com>
> To: Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
> Subject: [Chapter-delegates] ITU, ICANN and Internet Governance
> 
> Hello
>
> At Guadalajara, Mexico this week, in the policy debate kicked off by the
> ITU, Russian Federation's Minister of Communications proposed that the ITU
> should give itself veto power over ICANN decisions. This proposal by the
> Regional Commonwealth in the field of Communications (RCC) calls for the
> ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) to be scrapped and replaced by
> an ITU group.
>
> I wrote an article about it, on CircleID
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/on_the_need_to_separate_the_telecom_business_agenda_from_government_policy/
>
> May I request your comments on this?
>
> Sivasubramanian M
> http://turiya.co.in
>
> http://www.isocmadras.com
> facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh
> LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6
> Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz
>