[WSIS CS-Plenary] Notes from US State Dept WSIS Briefing of April 19th

[Frannie Wellings]

Hi all,

Yesterday the US Department of State held a public briefing on WSIS.  My 
notes are below.

Best,

Frannie

***
Frannie Wellings
Free Press
http://freepress.net



---------------------------------------------

US International Telecommunication Advisory Committee Information 
Meeting on the WSIS
National Academy of Science Building
Washington, DC
April 19, 2005


Ambassador David Gross:

Digital Solidarity Fund
Ambassador Gross said that the Digital Solidarity Fund exists and they 
must now deal with it - he stated that he'd worked to get the word 
"voluntary" inserted into multiple places in the text.  He continued to 
overemphasize their preference for a fund of a voluntary nature.  He 
stated, "As a proud member of the Bush Administration, my position is 
predictable - there should be no international taxation.  All funding 
should be voluntary."

WGIG
Gross encouraged industry, NGO's and academia to provide input to the 
WGIG.  He said the State Department is not interested in negotiating 
multiple times in multiple venues and would not be responding much 
more.  He's concerned that the positions of the US community (which I 
took to mean industry) would not be articulated if everyone assumed 
others were submitting positions.  He explained that the report would be 
issued on July 18th and that there would be a 1 month comment period.  
The State Dept is going to issue a notice soliciting comments to be 
filed through the WGIG when the comment period opens.  Open issues from 
the WGIG report will be dealt with at prepcom III.

Gross is concerned by the Council of the European Union's submission to 
the WGIG consultation.  He said the EU statement calls for a new model 
of governance for the core resources of the Internet, building on 
existing organizations, founded on a multilateral basis taking into 
account the public policy interests of governments.  The State 
Department is concerned that the European Union position substantially 
differs from the US, which prefers that the private sector leads.  
(Below, I've copied the European Union statement from the April 18th 
transcript for reference.)

Political Chapeau
The State Dept is concerned by the efforts to create and shape the 
Political Chapeau.  They felt that the Declaration of Principles and the 
Plan of Action were good and they say their concern is over the 
possibility of inconsistencies between the Political Chapeau and the 
older documents.  Ambassador Gross said he's been traveling a lot 
recently having bilateral discussions regarding the Chapeau to explain 
his point of view (which I took to mean lobby).


----------------

Sally Shipman:

Basic Overview of Documents
Prepcom I - Idea for Political Chapeau and Operational Part
Prepcom II - Draft Political Chapeau: compilation of proposals by 
governments in Prepcom II. The debate will take place in Prepcom III.  
The Operational Part has four chapters: 1) Implementation [US on page 
15], 2) Financing [mostly stable text], 3) Internet Governance [blank 
until after WGIG report/comment/debate], 4) The path ahead [will debate 
at Prepcom III].

Organization of Prepcom III
There will be two subcommittees: 1) Internet Governance and 2) 
Everything else

WGIG Report
She encouraged everyone to submit comments on the WGIG report - deadline 
is August 15th.

--------------

Questions

Patrice Lyons, Corporation for National Research Initiatives (CNRI)
Q: Patrice is concerned with the approach she sees in the latest WGIG 
documents that assume a fixation in the Internet, particularly what she 
sees as too much emphasis on the end-to-end principle.  She thinks this 
could prevent the Internet from evolving.
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross agrees.

Mike Nelson, IBM and Internet Society
Q: He thinks the report on financing is a good product, but was shelved, 
and he thinks the early papers of the WGIG were good, but were also 
shelved and ignored in the development of the cluster papers.  He thinks 
the cluster papers are not very good and finds them frustrating. 
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross encourages him to submit his statement so it 
is recorded.

Q: Mike asks what they know about the number of Heads of State going to 
Tunis.  He says many will be in NY in September for the Millennium 
Summit and he thinks the action might take place there. 
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross says that the Tunisians are saying many more 
Heads of State will participate, though he doesn't know if this is true. 
Gross adds that Heads of State are unlikely  to discuss tech issues in a 
fluid discussion at the Millennium Summit.

Audience member question
Q: In terms of Internet Governance, what is the best and worse case 
scenario in your opinion?  Ambassador Gross answers that this ought to 
be a positive experience. It's a job for all of us to focus it on 
stability, flexibility, robustness. He's struck by the comments of the 
EU, that to him it suggests a preference for an outcome with more 
governmental control than the US had articulated. 
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross says that the State Department doesn't want 
to maintain the status quo, but wants to build on the successes.  The 
best case scenario, he says, is that everyone agrees with the State 
Department.

Paula (Internet Society?)
Q: What will happen to the UN ICT Task Force and the Global Alliance 
proposal? 
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross describes the proposal put forward by the 
Secretary of the UN ICT Task Force for the Global Alliance and the 
history of the TF. He said there's been a robust discussion about the 
Global Alliance proposal as a follow up organization. Some have said 
there's no need and others would like the UN ICT Task Force to continue 
under this different name. There are questions about how it would fit 
and relate to existing organizations and what would be the value added?  
The US has said that the task force ought not to be the vehicle 
post-wsis, that traditional mechanisms/existing organizations are better 
suited.


---------------------

European Union Statement at the
OPEN CONSULTATIONS OF THE THIRD MEETING OF THE WORKING GROUP ON INTERNET 
GOVERNANCE
18 APRIL 2005 [morning session]
http://www.wgig.org/April-scriptmorning.html

Note: The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken 
during the morning session of the WGIG open Consultations held 18 April 
in Geneva, Switzerland. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases 
it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or 
transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the 
proceedings at the session, but should not be treated as an 
authoritative record.

 >>Chairman Desai: Luxembourg.
 >>Luxembourg: thank you, chair. I speak on behalf of the presidency on 
the council of the European Union.
The E.U. would like to thank the WGIG for its ongoing work on key issues 
related to the stable and secure functioning of the internet.
Among these, the question of internationalization of the management of 
the internet's core resources; namely the domain names systems, ip 
addresses, and the root server system, appears as one of the main issues 
in this debate.
The E.U. believes that a new cooperation is needed in order to confer 
the WSIS principles regarding the crucial role of all actors within 
internet governance. Including governance, the private sector, civil 
society, and international organizations.
We think that the existing internet governance mechanisms should be 
founded on a more solid, democratic, transparent, and multilateral 
basis, with a stronger emphasis on the public policy interests of all 
governments.
This new model should be based on the following principles.
It should not replace existing mechanism or institutions, but should 
build on the existing structures of internet governance, with a special 
emphasis on the complementarity between all the actors in this process. 
Governments, and, recognizing the importance of national 
responsibilities and roles. Second the new public/private cooperation 
model, should contribute to the sustainable stability and robustness of 
the internet by addressing appropriately public policy issues related to 
key elements of internet governance.
The E.U. believes that governments do have a specific mission and 
responsibility vis-a-vis their citizens and their role within this new 
corporation model should be mainly focused on issues of public policy 
excluding any involvement in the day-to-day operations.
Furthermore, the E.U. strongly reaffirms its attachment to the 
architectural principles of the internet including interoperability, 
openness and the end-to-end principle.
We therefore support the WGIG in its paper on the root zone file and the 
root zone management when it states proposals for improvements need to 
consider in general the existing system has functioned properly from the 
technical point of view for more than two decades and that adjustments 
were needed first for technical and political reasons have to be made in 
a proper and adequate way related to the functioning, stability, 
security and further development of the internet. End of quote.
This is why we encourage the WGIG to present balanced options for a true 
internationalization of the management of the internet's core resources 
in its final report.
While this statement is limited to the issue of internationalization, 
the E.U. reiterates the importance it attaches to the stability, 
dependability and robustness of the internet, including spam and network 
security.
Thank you, Chairman.





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050420/f6ab3e11/attachment.htm