A United Nations-sponsored World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) convenes in Tunis November 16-18 to figure out how to dilute US control of the Internet and spread the benefits of the new technology to more people around the world. But from all accounts summiteers are a long way from agreeing on what to do.

Claude Robinson

At issue is how to balance the commercial interests of investors and the development goals of governments and citizens who want systems to make greater use of the internet to deliver public goods like freedom of expression, education, public health and so on.

The meeting in the Tunisian capital is a follow-up to a similar gathering in Geneva two years ago that was itself the outgrowth of a 2001 United Nations resolution to try to bridge the so-called 'digital divide' between the 'information poor' and the 'information rich' within and between countries.

Some ten thousand politicians, diplomats, business people, technology geeks, academics, civil society and social activists and journalists are expected to gather in the North African city over the next week or so for the summit and related activities.

As usually happens in gatherings of this type, there will be many opportunities on the margins of the summit to clinch business deals and build alliances for and against special interests.

But, at the main event, the going will be tough if the debates in the preparatory process over the past two years and the contradictory positions of key governments are anything to go by.

The principal documents for consideration are the reports of two working groups; one on internet governance and the other on financing of a 'Voluntary Digital Solidarity Fund' that would assist the poor and marginalised communities link up with the wonders of the information and communication age.

Currently, the internet is managed by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) a United States private corporation established in 1998 to, among other things, assign the internet names and addresses that most of us are familiar with.

Everybody agrees that the Internet is a wonderful discovery that continues to transform society, business and even human development.
It is also universally agreed that it must be governed in order to function. At the simplest level, somebody has to assign domain names like www.jamaicaobserver.com and the myriad others we are familiar with.

Who should that somebody be? The 'somebody' for the telephone, the soon-departed-technology that the internet is replacing has been the International Telecommunications Union.

But because the internet was basically a US creation it has been managed by the US-first by individual academics and engineers and then by ICANN.

The working group on internet governance said it "came to the conclusion that some adjustments needed to be made to bring these arrangements more in line with the WSIS criteria of transparency, accountability, multilateralism and the need to address all public policy issues related to Internet governance in a coordinated manner".

The central recommendation is, "No single government should have a pre-eminent role in relation to international Internet governance".
The George W Bush administration wants to keep things they way they are and in a terse statement last June, the US Department of Commerce practically threw down the gauntlet to the rest of the world.
Who Will Control the Internet?

An article in Foreign Affairs, November -December 2005 issue, explains the US position very clearly. The following excerpt from the article is illustrative.

"Foreign governments want control of the Internet transferred from an American NGO to an international institution. Washington has responded with a Monroe Doctrine for our times, setting the stage for further controversy.

"But at the same time, many governments are bothered that such a vital resource exists outside their control and, even worse, that it is under the thumb of an already dominant United States.

Washington's answer to these concerns -- the Commerce Department's four terse paragraphs, released at the end of June, announcing that the United States plans to retain control of the Internet indefinitely -- was intended as a sort of Monroe Doctrine for our times. It was received abroad with just the anger one would expect, setting the stage for further controversy."

The following sample of press comments illustrates the divide between the US and others and the challenge faced by the negotiators in Tunis next week.

Internet Governance Still Burning Issue @ Wsis-05 | Allafrica.com, 27 October 2005

"Following the failure to reach a consensus at the third Preparatory Committee meeting held in Geneva, last month, Internet Governance would still be a burning issue at the second phase of WSIS, just few weeks away."

I Think ICANN | Fast Company, 20 October, 2005
Does the internet belong to America , or to the world? That is the essential question being asked by the UN.

Net power struggle nears climax | BBC News, 11 October 2005

Vital Battle For Internet | Bildt Comments, 11 June, 2005
Without much publicity, a critical battle over the future of the Internet is going on.

Keep the Internet free | International Herald Tribune, 10 October, 2005
Beyond the headlines, a critically important battle for control of the Internet is being played out.

In the struggle for control over the internet United States is pitched not only against old foes China, Iran and Cuba but allies like the European Union. Britain, the current president of the EU submitted a paper to the Summit organisers arguing for change.

In an apparent attempt not to upset his good friend George Bush too much, the paper from the Tony Blair administration favours "building on existing structures" rather than replacing them. Britain would like to see governments involved with "public policy issues" on internet governance but not the day to day management.

From an obscure research project in the 1960s the Internet has developed in the last decade to a widespread commercial infrastructure with more than to one billion Internet users connected in 2004. The commercial stakes are high.

Before leaving for Tunis Friday as head of Jamaica's delegation to WSIS, Information minister Senator Burchell Whiteman said while the governance issue was of great importance he hoped that it would not sideline the summit from the second major agenda item, namely, assistance to developing countries to narrow the digital divide.

Stimulated by the technological dynamism and profitability in the industry and opening up of market, since the early 1990s, the international private sector has quickly become the dominant player in infrastructure investment, and has catalysed rapid growth of the sector in developing countries.

The opening of markets and privatisation of national telecommunications operator has led to an influx of tens of billions of US dollars into the ICT sector across many developing country markets, and has allowed access to fixed and mobile telephones, computers, the Internet, and other technologies.

Jamaica is a prime example of a developing country where private investment (Cable and Wireless, Digicel, MiPhone and others) have led to dramatic expansion of the telecommunications sector, especially in mobile telephony.

Much of that private sector-led investment will continue to drive growth of the internet but with the gaps between the 'well-connected' and the rest widening it is also clear that the Digital Solidarity Fund must become a reality to bring more people and small countries from the margins and into the mainstream of the information age.

If Tunis can create some real support for the Fund and make some progress towards more democratic governance of the internet while maintaining the secure and open architecture of the system then it would have achieved something of real substance. We will see.

Claude Robinson is Senior Fellow in the Research and Policy Group, Mona School of Business at UWI. kcr@cwjamaica.com

The Audacity of Art

Marjorie Whylie to receive Stella Gregory Award

Traditional Thanksgiving offerings at EVITAS