AW: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] CSTD session Tuesday 18 July
Wolfgang Kleinwächter
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
Fri Jul 21 09:27:36 BST 2006
Jean Louis:
By the way Wolfgang, could you precise what you call "20th century diplomacy" and "21th century diplomacy" ? I believe that in this curious (it is a euphemism) meeting there were no pilots on board and most of the embarked passengers were amnesic ! Where was the ITU SG, the designated big chief of WSIS+ ?
Wolfgang:
To make it simple: Diplomacy of the 20th century is a purely intergovernmental model (rooted in the Paece of Westphalia and the Vienna Congress system and further developed in the League of Nations and United Nations). It means, that the system of international relations is de facto a system of intergovernmental relations with the government as the only subjct under international law.
Diplomacy of the 21st century - at least in my understanding - recognizes the fact, that there are now also non-governmental actors participating in international relations which are part of the global policy development processes. This leads to a powershft, a redistribution of power and unavoidable to a power struggle (as we have seen now again in Geneva). Governments are fighting for keeping their monopol position in making international politics (which makes sense in some areas but becomes more and more inefficent in other areas).
The answer to this challenge is multistakeholderism. But so far, nobody knows what MS is in practice. Thatswhy a ECOSOC/CSTD sub-group on the issue could bebe helpful if the group is constituted - like WGIG - on a multistakeholder basis.
best
w
________________________________
Von: Jean-Louis FULLSACK [mailto:jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr]
Gesendet: Fr 21.07.2006 00:12
An: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Betreff: Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] CSTD session Tuesday 18 July
Thanks and best
Jean-louis Fullsack
> Message du 19/07/06 12:24
> De : "Wolfgang Kleinwächter"
> A : plenary at wsis-cs.org
> Copie à :
> Objet : AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] CSTD session Tuesday 18 July
>
> [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for specific people]
>
> Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to access automatic translation of this message!
> _______________________________________
>
> Thanks Francis for the detailed report. It helps a lot to udnerstand the zig-zag.
>
> As I said in an earlier Mial, one has to see it - regardless of the frustrating details - as a progress that the "conservative NY/UN based ECOSOC/CSTD" (which is still thinking in terms of 20th century diplomacy) has started this debate. But it will need tim that ECOSOC/UN will move foreward towards a 21st century diplomacy. Progress can be counted in milimeters only, but if we keep the pressure high (and demonstrate our constructive approach, knowledgable skills and innovative capacity) things can look different in 2015 than now.
>
> Happy to see that my proposal to establish a sub-group for multistakeholderism has been put on the table. If it is rejected this year, it should come back next year.
>
> Best wishes
>
> wolfgang
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: Dr. Francis MUGUET [mailto:muguet at mdpi.org]
> Gesendet: Mi 19.07.2006 05:08
> An: plenary at wsis-cs.org
> Betreff: [WSIS CS-Plenary] CSTD session Tuesday 18 July
>
>
>
> Hello
>
> This Tuesday session was most disappointing.
> Its began with the surprising appearance of Achani who
> came to communicate the delegates its "worry" of
> seing so many paragraphs still in brackets, and the
> slow progress of the negotiations.
> We were then expecting Karklins to give CS the floor,
> as its happenned yesterday and as promised
> ( unless the promise was made only for one day ... ;-( ! ),
> but there was no such sign from the chair, and
> so the "intergovernemental" negotiation began.
>
> Karklins went directly to the paragraphs on reporting
> OP11bis, OP12 hoping to get an quick agreeement on those
> seemingly easy ones.
> Unfortunatly it was not case, as the G77/South African delegate
> begun to ask questions to which Renate knew all the answers !
> This person did not seem to be well informed as a career
> diplomat should be ( alh the more he reminded Karklins later,
> that he chaired an ECOSOC session once... )
> Khan ( Global Alliance ) who happened to be on table row
> with Karklins was even asked to provide explanations.
> This bogged down the ebate, while the two proposals
> that I was making concerning a direct report for the
> sake of collecting information ( not for as sign of
> being under the control of ) from specialized agencies,
> and direct report contributions to CSTD by other stakeholders
> were left aside.
> Since CS was kept silent, despite some calm and
> dignified handlings of the "Société Civile" official plastic signs,
> there was no way to underline those two issues.
>
>
> ( This report is from the top of my head, as I am just
> arriving in Paris, from Geneva,
> so the chronology might not be 100% accurate,
> my remembrance is good only to some aspects,
> while the rest got fuzzy )
>
> Then we went to OP3
> again word smithing ( responsiblity, mechanisms )
> and to OP4
> The G77/ZA delegate went to discuss about his proposition
> of having the word "monitor".
> Canada, stauchnly opposed.
&g ; G77/ZA stood firm in a deadlock.
> The EU proposed "examin"
> Then G77/ZA proposed "oversee" but It was
> claimed that "oversee" was the task of ECOSOC,
> not of one its functional commission operating
> at "a lower level'.
> There was a deadlock, and then the apex of the
> grotesque was slow..ly reached.
> The discussion degenerated. At loss, trying to help
> ( and possibly to show the vanity of this semantic discussion )
> some delegates from South American countries began to
> raise the question of how the verb "monitor" could be translated
> in spanish, and could only be be translated as "control",
> and quoting the Royal dictionnary, claim the verb
> did not exist, but only the name. The delegate from Spain
> ( who never spoke ever since and probably never will speak ever again,
> since in the EU ) said the Spanish language could vary from country to
> country and the verb could exist...
> The outh American delegates did request the translators to intervene
> in the discussion, but they were not allowed by the chair to give their
> opinions...
> At that moment, Karklins, for once loosing his reserve,
> made an informal statement saying
> that no matter what the exact terms be chosen, it would
> not change anything in the way the bureaucracy would handle things.
> Meanwhile I handled a note to one of the secretary to be passed to
> the chair asking when the CS statement was scheduled. No answer.
> Then we went mostly to OP4 c) and the hell was raised again
> about the question if the list of stakeholders would appear there or
> elsewhere, and what should the list should comprise.
> In my written language proposal, I suggested that the digital solidarity
> fund should
> be at least mentionned.
> ( nothing concerning financial ressources to bridge the digital divide
> is ever mentionned in this text so fa ... ) .
>
> Then G77/ZA asked what was the meaning of
> "multistakeholders groups and platforms". At that point,Karklins decided
> to ask CS (Renate ) if no state objected ( none did ).
> Renate was then allowed to provide some explanations that satisfied
> seemingly G77/ZA.
> Then at about 17H30, we went into OP10.
> This time Karklins did again give CS the right to make some
> observations. I was able to speak, quoting briefly, my written proposal
> that CS should be given the same flexibility as the Private sector, in
> order
> to allow CS entity, new to the WSIS, but not eligible to the ECOSOC
> status,
> to have the possiblity of being invited,
> then I proposed very briefly three addtional paragraphs one about
> Think Tanks and another one about a much needed fund to help
> CS people ( in particular from developing countries )
> to participate to ECOSOC sessions, and the last one
> on the need of a multi-stakeholder advisory group to embody
> the mutli-stakeholder approach.
> In fact, I had ready a written proposal, a "CS non paper"
> that describes the function of a _
> Sub-Commission for multi-stakeholder approach_
> This CS non paper was drafted by a helping hand in the staff of an
> international organization that wish to remain anonymous.
> Alhtough I had barely the time to read it, and just very sligthly
> modified, I found the content as an excellent rationnale for
> a language proposal that I elaborated by using almost the
> same language as for the WGIG creation.
> ( see attached rtf and openoffice format ).
> CONGO (Philippe, Renate) read it also quickly, as well as
> a DAPSI representative (can't remmeber his name,
> he is a friend of Pape Diouf ).
>
> --> Side remarks : Comments and improvements would be most helpful.
> The content could be used also a stand alone CS non pape
> that could be written by the CSB.
> It is clear the CONGO must not present itself only with
> its mandate with ECOSOC, but as the liaison officer of
> the CSB, because otherwise we are stuck to ECOSOC
> rules, while we want to get out of them.
> If the situation does not improve tomorrow,
> the CSB shoud write a strong statement to Achani,
> ( and/or possibly to G77 )
>
> Renate intervened again latter on, convincingly
> on the necessity to have all CS included.
> EU intervened to include mention of WSIS rules which is
> a major advance. I am no longer
> sure but it seems to me that Australia and US also supported.
> Anyway the US mentionned that the states were not bound,
> for the reformed CSTD, to ECOSOC rules and were
> "sovereign" (exact words ) to adopt whatever rules they saw fit,
> like WSIS rules.
> Then the session ended.
> Karklins announced the schedules of morning meetingS of regional
> groups to prepare the next session on Wednesday afternnon
> ( it seems now that negotiation is going last, at least,
> until Friday ) and somehow he mentionned observers,
> and this was an occasion for the ZA/G77 delegate to launch
> a pique, with his strong voice "G77 meetings have very strict rules
> on observers" ( meaning there are none... :-( ! ).
> Since I had to catch a train to go back to Paris, I had litle time
> for late afternoon lobbying, except I came to see the US
> delegate, somewhat surprised by their positive attitude today.
> Concerning the _Sub-Commission for multi-stakeholder approach_,
> he said that the US would not oppose it
> ( the argument of partially mirroring the MAG
> in the IGF process seems to get traction ).
> I could not stay any longer in Geneva, I planned to stay until
> last Friday and I extended until Tuesday night,
> I some other urgent matters to deal with in P ris, including
> a contribution to the recourse before the constitutionnal council
> against the bad and ugly Copyright law in France was very narrowly
> adopted by the French parliament, but this is yer another story that
> is going to be reported soon.
>
> I hope more CS people could come, at least those in Geneva
> that are accredited to ECOSOC.
> I hope Jean-Louis in Strasbourg ( 4 hours ride ) from Geneva
> could come as he said on his post to the plenary,
> and could come under the banner of whatever CS entity
> in ECOSOC consultative status
> that could be kind enough to adopt his NGO on a provisionnal basis
> as an umbrella organization, to allow him to speak.
>
> May be, we should seriously, investigate the possibility
> of an umbrella organization with ECOSOC status.?
>
> Let us keep hope... but we need more actions than prayers,
> altough we may need both...
>
> All th best
>
> Francis
>
> PS. Sorry for typos, at this wee hour.
>
>
> --
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D
>
> MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
> Associate Publisher
> http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net
> muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net
>
> ENSTA Paris, France
> KNIS lab. Director
> "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS)
> muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet
>
> World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
> Civil Society Working Groups
> Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair
> Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
> Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web
>
> UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org
> WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
>
More information about the Plenary
mailing list