Ceding the Internet to “Global Governance”

[IPB Corporation]

Last month, President Obama proudly announced at the United Nations
the steps taken under his administration to “embrace a new era of
engagement” in international affairs by correcting the actions of past
administration that might lead people to “question the character and
cause” of America including supporting the Comprehensive Nuclear Test
Ban Treaty, addressing global warming through the U.N., joining the
Human Rights Council, signing the Disabilities Convention, supporting
the Millennium Development Goals, and paying America’s arrears to the
United Nations without asking the organization to implement reforms to
prevent those payments from being misused.

Well, we can add another dubious decision to the list of sacrifices
the Obama Administration has made to alter of international
engagement. Today it was announced that the Obama Administration had
agreed to cede much U.S. control over the non-profit Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) that regulates and
manages the Domain Name System under which Internet Protocol addresses
and registration of top-level domains like .org and .com are assigned.
According to a story in the Guardian:

The deal, part of a contract negotiated with the US department of
commerce, effectively pushes California-based Icann towards a new
status as an international body with greater representation from
companies and governments around the globe.

Icann had previously been operating under the auspices of the American
government, which had control of the net thanks to its initial role in
developing the underlying technologies used for connecting computers
together.

But the fresh focus will give other countries a more prominent role in
determining what takes place online, and even the way in which it
happens – opening the door for a virtual United Nations, where many
officials gather to discuss potential changes to the internet.

Under the previous arrangement, the U.S. government retained veto
power over ICANN’s decisions. Although the U.S. government was very
hands-off with managing ICANN, the relationship helped insulate the
Internet from political influence of states threatened or frustrated
by the freedom of that medium. As discussed in a 2005 Heritage
WebMemo, the United Nations has sought for some time to acquire
authority over ICANN at the behest of a number of countries who wish
to tax or regulate it. As noted in the paper:

For decades, the Internet has developed with a minimum of government
interference. The core governance of the medium has been performed by
non-governmental entities and overseen by the U.S. government, which
has exercised a light regulatory touch. It is no coincidence that the
medium has prospered from this benign neglect, growing from a research
curiosity into a major force in the world economy and an invaluable
venue for the exchange of information….

The result of a UN-controlled and regulated Internet would be that non-
democratic countries that oppose the right to free speech such as
China and grasping, anti-market impulses like those of the European
Union would have a greater voice in guiding the Internet in a
direction away from “freedom, education, and innovation.” If the
Internet cannot be a government-free zone, it should be governed in a
manner that minimizes restrictions rather than imposing international
standards that restrict Internet freedom. Given the stakes, the U.S.
must stand firm and reject efforts to internationalize governance of
the Internet.

Quite simply, the decision of the Obama administration increases the
vulnerability of the Internet to political pressure, censorship, and
strangling regulation and taxation. Welcome to “responsibility and
leadership in the 21st century” under the Obama Administration.