[CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
Sat Jan 2 14:41:30 UTC 2016 

Hi Milton & Eberhard,

the rationale for providing a link to the article in the Huffington Post by the former president of the European Commission was to enable the participants in the discussion under this thread "Follow up from the WIC in Wuzhen" to look beyond the narrow horizon on the controversial question how to advise best (or not advice) the organizers of the next Wuzhen conference (WIC III) in fall 2016.

It is always useful to broaden your mind and to take into consideration other perspectives. My reading of Romano Prodis and David Gossets article is that they list a number of real cyberspace facts of the second half of the 2010s (which are different from the cyberspace facts of 2000) and try to find a place for Europe. BTW, it was under Prodi´s presidency (and Mr. Likkanen was the EU Commissioner for the Internet) when the EU adopted the "Lisbon Strategy" in 2000 which envisaged that Europe becomes the most innovative Internet region in the world until 2010. By remembering the (failed) Lisbon strategy I just want to signal that I do not agree with everything Mr. Prodi, who was also a prime minister of Italy, and Mr. Gosset propose. But it is worth to take their ideas and approaches into consideration. Facts are facts and wishful thinking is not a good advice neither for policy makers nor for business leaders. And it is also not good for civil society.

If you want to know my personal position, I have outlined this in my recent article in Circleid.com where I cover also the Wuzhen conference. I always supported the open, free, secure and unfragemented Internet based on a multistakeholder governance model - the "One World - One Internet" concept - as you know.
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20151221_igf_wsis_10_wic_three_world_conferences_for_one_internet/

A key part of this article is the discussion of the concept of "sovereignty" (a key issue in Wuzhen) where I differentiate between "absolute sovereignty" (unilateralism), "collaborative sovereignty" (multilateralism) and "shared sovereignty" (multistakeholderism).  My fear is that - regardless of the lip service in favour of multistakehoderism by a growing number of governments and by the WSIS 10+ Outcome Document - we will see in 2016ff. more "unilateralism" by the big powers. In my article I remember the "Vienna Congress" from 1815. One of the follow up of this Vienna summit - known as the Carlsbad Decrees from 1819 - showed what happened if "absolute sovereignty" prevails.

Insofar, Jack Ma´s proposal for a "differentiated" Internet Governance mechanism is an interesting input. It could be used as another inspiration to innovate Internet policy development and decision making, as requested by Kofi Annan more than 10 years ago. The work of the CCWG-ACCT could write Internet history if the group would be able to agree on an enhanced system of power sharing both on PDP and decision making within ICANN. This could become an important step forward to add concrete procedures to the still vague defined concept of "multistakeholderism" and pave the way for an enhanced understanding of "shared responsibilities" and "shared sovereignty in the information age.

Wolfgang



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org im Auftrag von Dr Eberhard W Lisse
Gesendet: Fr 01.01.2016 22:02
An: CCWG Accountability
Cc: Lisse Eberhard
Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China
 
Can you please explain the significance and context to us lesser mortals?

el

-- 
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

> On 1 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
> 
> FYI
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-gosset/digital-china-and-its-imp_b_8854374.html
> 
> 
> 
> Wolfgang
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org im Auftrag von Christopher Wilkinson
> Gesendet: Do 31.12.2015 20:54
> An: Accountability Cross Community
> Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China
> 
> +1    CW
> 
>> On 31 Dec 2015, at 11:26, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl> wrote:
>> 
>> And that, in my opinion, would be the perfect final say on this issue.
>> 
>> Thanks, Sivasubramanian
>> 
>> 
>> Roelof Meijer
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 30-12-15 18:11, "accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on
>> behalf of Sivasubramanian M"
>> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on behalf of
>> isolatedn at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> What is being blown out of proportion here? What did Fadi do? What do
>>> those who criticize think was his rationale for doing what he did?
>>> 
>>> In dealing with a country as large as China, it is wise to defer
>>> differences and emphasize points on which there are agreements. It
>>> requires such an approach to open the door for dialogue, otherwise
>>> decades would pass before we see China or Russia eye to eye.
>>> 
>>> There is a reaction, almost as if orchestrated, that seems to magnify
>>> something perceived to have been done by Fadi Chehade exceeding his
>>> brief, wrongly portrayed as self serving involvement, in complete
>>> disregard for every thing that he did during his term in ICANN's best
>>> interest. If the rationale is unspoken, is it to be misunderstood, so
>>> much so that the Community should forget everything he did for ICANN
>>> and harp on the absence of his vocal opposition to parts of the
>>> Chinese statement and his willingness to serve a committee, which
>>> might in reality turn out to be for the good of the multistakeholder
>>> governance?
>>> 
>>> When someone in a highly responsible position comes under such a
>>> severe attack, often the cause for attack is not what is apparent.
>>> 
>>> I observed from a distance that he wanted to bring about certain wider
>>> changes which would alter the existing order in several ways (other
>>> participants in various roles might know better), appeared to enjoy a
>>> certain degree of freedom to initiate and execute programs in his own
>>> style, for a year or two. He talked about values, he talked about
>>> various imbalances, he showed respect for good people in the Board, he
>>> reached out to the world by taking the initiative to organize an IGF
>>> like multistakeholder event with Government participation which was a
>>> successful event, and went on to further this good work by seeking to
>>> involve the larger Business Community in the intended follow up as the
>>> NetMundial Initiative. He improved participation in GAC, reached out
>>> to Russia and China. There is more that he probably wanted to do. It
>>> was meaningful leadership.
>>> 
>>> I recollect that, at the At-Large summit in London, he said "It is
>>> time for the interests to move out of ICANN, and for the community to
>>> come in". Sometime later, in Istanbul, he sought to introduce the
>>> concept of ICANN "Townhall" meetings but arrived at the first meeting
>>> severely discouraged (or so I thought). It appeared that he was
>>> challenged for including certain public iana/accountability comments
>>> in staff summary. Shortly afterwards, he was challenged in his
>>> initiative to appoint External Advisors on ICANN Accountability, was
>>> criticized on the process he was to adopt, and the process went
>>> through some changes as a result; he was challenged in many other ways
>>> whilst performing his role to its fullest actualization. The highest
>>> of the orchestrated opposition was to the progress of NetMundial.
>>> 
>>> All these, for different reasons, threatened an existing order. Any
>>> reform that has been brought about (by the Board and Fadi's team
>>> together) is not even close to being even half done, because and only
>>> because, the pressure against change must have been overwhelming.
>>> 
>>> Must have been severely stressful. A case of a CEO not empowered
>>> enough to survive an overwhelmingly powerful community.
>>> 
>>> Sivasubramanian M
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg at isoc-cr.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Thank you Milton!
>>>> 
>>>> Very good article from my perspective, but still it is difficult to
>>>> define
>>>> how and at what level it is best to engage with your main (internet)
>>>> equipment supplier.....
>>>> 
>>>> Have a nice "rutsch" into the new year.
>>>> 
>>>> Carlos
>>>> 
>>>>> On Dec 30, 2015 5:49 AM, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Here¹s my view of ICANN and Fadi¹s support for the Chinese Wuzhen
>>>>> Internet
>>>>> Conference. (Spoiler: it¹s not about Fadi)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/12/29/the-chinese-netmundial-init
>>>>> iative/
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>>> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
>>>>> Carlos Raul
>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 10:35 AM
>>>>> To: Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl>
>>>>> Cc: Accountability Cross Community
>>>>> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in
>>>>> China
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> @Roelof +1 on the last comment. Having somebody as bright as Fadi but
>>>>> choking his efforts to follow up on the IMHO GREAT results of the Net
>>>>> Mundial meeting in Brazil, has been the main explanation to me on why
>>>>> he is
>>>>> leaving.
>>>>> 
>>>>> For those critical of his entrepreneurship they may consider NOT hiring
>>>>> private sector CEOs in the future, but "secretary general" type of
>>>>> management that just follow up orders.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Happy holidays
>>>>> 
>>>>> Carlos Raul
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Dec 28, 2015 9:05 AM, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Might be the reason why someone like Fadi is actually NOT working for
>>>>> you...
>>>>> 
>>>>> And no, I do not agree at all that this is a "great example of lack of
>>>>> accountability"
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Roelof Meijer
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 26-12-15 13:19, "accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on
>>>>> behalf of Nigel Roberts"
>>>>> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>>>> on behalf of nigel at channelisles.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If Fadi worked for me, then his leaving date would just have been
>>>>>> brought forward dramatically, and he would have, as we say in the UK,
>>>>>> found a number of pressing reasons to spend more time with the family.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> But the Board don't collectively have the cojones to do that.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That's not really a criticism of the institution or the current
>>>>> members
>>>>>> of it, just a recognition of how much power that the Board of
>>>>>> non-profits (don't) have over their General Manager (as I saw over 20
>>>>>> years ago as a board member of the Radio Society of Great Britain,
>>>>> which
>>>>>> despite being an office I could trace back in history to a certain Sr.
>>>>>> Marconi, had exactly the same level of power(lessness) than the ICANN
>>>>>> Board has, in some aspects).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Indeed, were I an ICANN Board member I might take that view -- in that
>>>>>> the damage to the organisation from further inflaming the situation
>>>>>> might be greater than just crossing my fingers and waiting for the
>>>>>> problem to go away naturally in the Spring.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> However, it's a great example of lack of accountability, wouldn't you
>>>>>> agree?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 25/12/15 15:33, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
>>>>>>> We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come
>>>>> from,
>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>> public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi
>>>>> is)
>>>>>>> who
>>>>>>> did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal.
>>>>> While
>>>>>>> acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity --
>>>>> none
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> all.  At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so
>>>>> stringent
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable
>>>>> test) so
>>>>>>> clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role
>>>>> with
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> private role was virtually non-existent.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this
>>>>> story:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-
>>>>>>> rev
>>>>>>> ena
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c
>>>>>>> 5-1
>>>>>>> 1e5
>>>>>>> -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html.  A minor Federal official wrote "The
>>>>>>> Revenant" before he joined the government.  Now, the book is a major
>>>>>>> movie
>>>>>>> just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio.  In the normal
>>>>> course
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be
>>>>>>> doing
>>>>>>> publicity for the film.  Here, the author cannot -- because he is a
>>>>>>> Deputy
>>>>>>> Trade Representative of the US.  Now, I don't know about you, but
>>>>> for
>>>>>>> me the
>>>>>>> likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the
>>>>> USTR
>>>>>>> office and draw an inference of official US government approval is
>>>>>>> vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a
>>>>> place
>>>>>>> where
>>>>>>> the officials private life could diverge from his public
>>>>>>> responsibility.
>>>>>>> But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of
>>>>>>> impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for
>>>>> his
>>>>>>> movie.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is
>>>>>>> clearly
>>>>>>> much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his
>>>>> new
>>>>>>> "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN --
>>>>> which
>>>>>>> is of
>>>>>>> course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted.
>>>>>>> Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably
>>>>>>> tone
>>>>>>> deaf.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your
>>>>>>> public
>>>>>>> position works both ways.  We worry not only about the new "private"
>>>>>>> connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to
>>>>>>> benefit
>>>>>>> his future private actions rather than the public interest.  It
>>>>> isn't
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) --
>>>>> it
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made
>>>>>>> while
>>>>>>> the public official was still working for the public that raises the
>>>>>>> questions.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Paul Rosenzweig
>>>>>>> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
>>>>>>> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
>>>>>>> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
>>>>>>> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
>>>>>>> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
>>>>>>> Link to my PGP Key
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel at channelisles.net]
>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM
>>>>>>> To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet
>>>>> Conference in
>>>>>>> China
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO?  I
>>>>> have
>>>>>>>> never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an
>>>>> issue
>>>>>>> over.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> avri
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of
>>>>> cross-cultural
>>>>>>> judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected
>>>>>>> better
>>>>>>> from Mr Chehade' in that department
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from
>>>>> recent
>>>>>>> previous CEOs.  Certainly not from Paul.  In fact not even from Rod,
>>>>>>> who
>>>>>>>  despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways
>>>>>>> was, in
>>>>>>> many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In China, relationships matter.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Appearance matters. A lot.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the
>>>>>>> discussion with the relevant actors inside China.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a
>>>>>>> cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of
>>>>> 'wiggle-room'
>>>>>>> for peccadilloes).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't
>>>>>>> see the
>>>>>>> problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I
>>>>>>> personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet
>>>>>>> once
>>>>>>> again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'.  A CEO can
>>>>> never
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard
>>>>> box.
>>>>>>> (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO,
>>>>> though.
>>>>>>> Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his
>>>>>>> resignation,
>>>>>>> choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in
>>>>> another
>>>>>>> revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently
>>>>>>> completely
>>>>>>> different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive
>>>>> statements of
>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>> and their backers.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to
>>>>> organisations
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> operate in the same sphere.  Why, in the name of accountabaility,
>>>>> does
>>>>>>> ICANN
>>>>>>> still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible
>>>>>>> optics of
>>>>>>> Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hardly at all.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more
>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>> 'what', or even 'why'.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> '
>>>>>>>> And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Likewise.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Sivasubramanian M
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list