Internet Could Face ‘Grave Threat’ at WSIS, Lawmaker Says

With the State Dept. WSIS advisory committee meeting tomorrow (Thurs.), Sen. Coleman (R-Minn.) floated a resolution as a unified way for legislators to comment. “There is no rational justification for politicizing Internet governance within a U.N. framework. Nor is there a rational basis for the anti-U.S. resentment driving the proposal,” Coleman said: “Privatization, not politicization, is the Internet governance regime that must be fostered and protected.”

The Internet is “likely to face a grave threat” at WSIS and if policymakers fail to act appropriately the U.S. risks forfeiting the “freedom and enterprise fostered by this informational marvel,” he said. The country could wind up sacrificing access to information, privacy and protection of intellectual property and that’s not a risk he’s prepared to take, Coleman said.

Coleman’s resolution supports the 4 governance principles defined June 30 by the Bush Administration: (1) Preserving the security and stability of the Internet domain name and addressing system (DNS). (2) Recognizing govts. legitimate interest in managing their own country code top-level domains (TLDs). (3) Support for ICANN as the appropriate technical manager for DNS. (4) Participation in continuing dialogue on Internet governance, with continued support for market-based approaches and private sector leadership to guide the Web’s evolution.

The measure addresses the possibility that if Internet governance moves from the U.S. to the U.N. or another body, the U.S. no longer would have more control over data flow than nations that block access to information, stifle political dissent and maintain outmoded communications structures. “Many aspects of running the Internet have profound implications for competition and trade, democratization and free expression,” Coleman said: “We cannot stand idly by as some governments seek to make the Internet an instrument of censorship and political suppression.” The resolution urges the Bush Administration to oppose any proposal deviating from the core principles.

Coleman said he intended to push for a hearing before the WSIS meeting to explore implications of politicized Internet governance. The lawmaker previously highlighted the need to protect the Internet from the U.N. in a Senate speech in July. Coleman said he planned to ask his Senate Foreign Relations Committee colleagues to adopt extensive changes stemming from his 19-month Senate Investigations Subcommittee probe into the U.N. Oil-for-Food Program. Coleman, a critic of the U.N.’s lack of progress, wants Congress to help restore U.N. credibility and efficacy through greater openness, accountability and oversight. “It is irresponsible to expand the U.N.’s portfolio before it undertakes sweeping, overdue reform,” Coleman said: “If the U.N. was unable to properly administer the Oil-for-Food Program, I am afraid what the Internet would look like under U.N. control.”

Meanwhile, Rep. Goodlatte (R-Va.) met Tues. with EU Commission Pres. Jose Manuel Barosso. The Congressional Internet Caucus co-chairman raised concerns over an apparent EU endorsement of the U.N.’s bid for Internet governance. Others in attendance were Sens. Bennett (R- Utah), Roberts (R-Kan.) and Smith (R-Ore.), plus House Judiciary Chmn. Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and Reps. Brady (R- Tex.), English (R-Pa.), Kolbe (R-Ariz.), Levin (D-Mich.), Mica (R-Fla.) and Oxley (R-Ohio). Goodlatte planned to introduce a House resolution similar to Coleman’s later in the day, a spokeswoman told us.

“Until recently, the EU had not endorsed such proposals, and it is appalling that the EU would move in this direction,” Goodlatte said: “The EU should realize that the United States protects the Internet through freedom. The U.S. is uniquely positioned in the world to protect the fundamental principles of free press and free speech, upon which the Internet has thrived.” The more govts. are entangled in governance, the more red tape and “overly burdensome regulations that huge bureaucratic agencies bring” will increase, he said. Barosso, was to meet with Pres. Bush, Secy. of State Condoleezza Rice and other top Administration officials.

Coleman and Goodlatte aren’t alone in their resolution-slinging. Goodlatte’s Caucus Co-Chmn. Boucher (D-Va.) told Washington Internet Daily U.S. Internet governance is working and he and Rep. Doolittle (R-Cal.) may introduce a resolution soon. “The Internet is functioning very effectively through the current system for root server control and top level domain name assignments,” Boucher said: “One cannot argue with the success of the current system as the Internet expands globally by orders of magnitude.” ICANN also operates solidly but the group could benefit from more structured avenues for critics to express concerns over how TLDs are assigned, he said. Boucher said it’s not an argument to change ICANN’s board structure, which is international, but said he wonders if a formal way of making ICANN more accessible could be worked into its structure.

State Dept. international communications & information coordinator David Gross said he’s “always very gratified when we get strong expressions of support on the Hill.” The unified message on Internet governance being sent to the Administration from both sides of the aisle is “particularly heartwarming,” he told us. A joint letter from House lawmakers sent Oct. 5 to Gross and NTIA Dir. Michael Gallagher also showed support for preserving the U.S. lead in managing the Web. Endorsements by lawmakers and Internet industry players add teeth to international talks, he said. “In our discussions with Europeans and others, we point out the fact that the U.S. is really quite united on this issue,” Gross said: “The Hill, the president, the Administration and others in industry all seem to be of one mind here. It’s a very important signal for the rest of the world.”