[Chapter-delegates] Call with Chapters in advance of the ITU Plenipotentiary 2018 (18 Oct, 10:00 and 20:00 UTC)

Tue Nov 6 15:50:47 PST 2018

The view from Mogadishu Interspersed...

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 10:09 PM Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> wrote:

> Dear Alejandro,
>
>
>
> I agree with much of what you say, but, as usual, the devil is in the
> details, please see embedded comments below.
>
>
>
> Thanks and best,
>
> Richard
>
>
I too agree with most of the issues covered here... BUT yes, the devil is
indeed in the details.

>
>
> *From:* Alejandro Pisanty [mailto:apisanty at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* lundi, 5. novembre 2018 21:42
> *To:* Dave Burstein
> *Cc:* Nadira Alaraj; Richard Hill; ISOC Chapter Delegates
> *Subject:* Re: [Chapter-delegates] Call with Chapters in advance of the
> ITU Plenipotentiary 2018 (18 Oct, 10:00 and 20:00 UTC)
>
>
>
> Dave,
>
>
>
> the concerns of Internet users in developing countries are not better
> served by their governments' participation in the ITU.
>
>
>
> >RH: I think that that depends on the country. In my experience, many of
> the representatives of developing countries are well informed and are
> trying to do the best for their citizens.
>
>
>

I attended  WCIT 2012 here in Dubai
https://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Pages/default.aspx, wearing a different hat.
You r both right. And the issue is not limited to ITU, but in many of the
UN agencies. Hence, my WIP project to write, " UN - the failure of noble
idea". Some countries are doing fine and many are struggling, just reflect
on the African countries' process in the current ITU elections. In
Mogadishu, the government decided to run the .so ccTLD, and the the first
thing that happened was all universities lost their domains, and now must
pay for their domain, etc. and many other politically motivated moves
towards the use of what many thought was community rather than government
resources.

> Many of the resolutions under discussion cement the power of repressive
> and user-unfriendly governments, both in-country and internationally.
>
>
>
> >RH: I think that you mean that some of the proposals might have such
> effects. But I don’t think that such proposals will be accepted.
>

Agree... that is the beauty of the ITU processes, BUT then the ITU can
produce any resolution it wants, at the end of the day it cannot enforce,
although RH can elaborate this. Since he helped me understand that
community members can attend ITU event, even PP-18... a fact many do not
know, and hence the false claim the ITU events are closed to the public.

>
>
> A big, solid block of countries that negotiates endlessly - literally till
> the light of the next morning - has a model of deep collusion between telco
> and government, be it that the telco is government-owned, or owned by a
> prince who is a cousin of the country's ruler, or that the government
> actively supports a mostly monopolistic telco.
>
>
>
> >RH: Yes, but there is an equally big, solid, block of countries that also
> negotiates endlessly to prevent such proposals from being adopted. And, in
> my experience, there is considerable collusion between big companies
> (including the Internet giants) and governments in developed countries also.
>
>
>

I think in general, governments manage the local teleco rules, except
perhaps Somalia which due to 2 decades of chaos, the private sector
literally manages this sector, although the government recently enacted a
telecom law and formed regulatory authority.

> Others in the list of unfriendlies are countries with strong citizen
> surveillance, at least one of them with a system such that you may lose
> your right to board a train if your social-networking behavior is
> considered improper; countries that jail or kill or maim journalists,
> bloggers, and activists. *They* don't want anybody's interference in their
> internal issues any more than the country you mention; and they want the
> same freedom to meddle in others'.
>
>
>
> >RH: True, but let’s not forget that several Western countries practice
> mass surveillance, not just their own citizens, but of the entire world.
> And that at least one such country has been found to have violated the
> European Convention on Human Rights.
>
>
>

This is complex issue and I live in Mogadishu, so will agree with both your
comments... and leave it at that.

That's what the ITU does for them.
>
>
>
> >RH: Can you please explain exactly what ITU decision/resolution you are
> referring to? And please recall that there are ITU
> decisions/recommendations that have facilitated, and continue to
> facilitate, the development of the Internet, in particular the 1988 ITRs
> (which ended monopoly pricing for international leased lines and thus
> opened the way for private networks such as the Internet), X-509
> certificates (which are used in HTTPS), compression standards such as MPEG,
>  end-user access standards such as xDSL, and the use of harmonized
> unlicensed spectrum for WiFi.
>
>
>

I was in Melbourne in 1988, at Monash university but after RH's comment
above I read what he mentioned and I must thank him for the references and
scholarly input.

> The way the votes are garnered is not insignificant either; one of these
> countries makes huge investments in infrastructure in a continent, then has
> 70% of that continent's votes; any surprise there? (of course the candidate
> may come from a developing country; it may further the telecommunications
> agenda but NOT the Internet agenda.)
>
>
>
> >RH:  I’m sure that you noticed that the US candidate won the election for
> Director of BDT, and the UK candidate won the election for Deputy
> Secretary-General, so vote influencing works both ways.
>
>
>

See my comment re the African delegation above. Perhaps the ITU can in
diplomatic way educate its members about the intricacy of the voting
process to save time and effort for some of the members, where governments
change very often.. The issue here is, while the ITU can afford to organise
3 week PP meeting, it is also costly for many developing countries and
hence any aspect of the meeting that can be shortened will help.

> SNIP
>
>
>
> having the Red Cross, the International Astronomical Union, and ISOC
> seated in the back row with no electricity.
>
>
>
> RH: Zaire, Zimbabwe, etc. are also in the back row, and Switzerland is
> pretty far back. But all seats have microphones and headphones, and there
> are big screens, so sitting in the back is not a big issue. At present
> there is electricity in all rows. I have heard that, at the beginning,
> electricity was missing in the back rows of one of the big rooms, but that
> was a mistake and it has been corrected.
>
>
>
> SNIP
>
>
>
Since the ITU does not provide insights into the devlopments during the
> conference,
>
>
>
> >RH: the big meetings are audiocast and captioned, and archived, see:
>
>
>
>   https://www.itu.int/web/pp-18/en/page/202-webcast-and-captioning
>
>
>
> we are better served by following the Twitter feed of Samantha G.
> Dickinson, https//twitter.com/sgdickinson - read just a few entries to
> see madness and anomy ooze out.
>
>
>
> >RH: I have long been impressed by the breadth of your vocabulary, but I
> don’t think that anomy is the right terms here, given these definitions:
>
>
>
> https://www.dictionary.com/browse/anomy
>
>
>
> https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/anomy
>
>
>
> >RH: What I see is hypocrisy on all sides. I will cite here only one
> example: the countries that most vociferously call for Internet governance
> discussions to take place only in multi-stakeholder forums and that say
> that treaty-level provisions are not needed, are the very same countries
> that have agreed and/or are proposing treaty-level provisions in WTO and in
> free trade negotiations, which are the least open and the least transparent
> processes that I know of. See:
>
>
>
> http://www.apig.ch/Inconsistencies.pdf
>
>
I agree with RH on this issue. The last WTO meeting could have been
better.... BUT this is wider issue with UN agencies. I listened to the
speech of UPU Director at this pp event. BUT then I asked myself why is the
UPU not supporting the what3word solution that will ensure mail to be
delivered to anyone on planet earth within 3 metres (what3words.com) or
help to solve the developing countries problem in receiving remittance from
developed countries, when they lost access to banks, due to the greedy
banks' de-risking policies. The UPU financial system can be used to remit
money, etc. So there are many issues with UN agencies... BUT at this stage
this is the best possible option available, so let us keep on working on it
to improve it.. rather than demolish it as someone we all know wants to
do...

>
>
>
>
> SNIP .  .
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>

-- 
Regards,
Mohamed Ibrahim
founder, Somali isoc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20181107/7f5435c2/attachment.htm>