Recap -- Fighting for Internet Freedom: Dubai and Beyond
Three House Committees held a joint hearing* to review the ramifications of a treaty signed by 89 nations at the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT). House Commerce Committee staff described the action as “likely the start, not the end, of efforts to subject the Internet to international regulation.” The hearing examined what happened at the conference, what implications the treaty has for the Internet and the economic and social freedoms it fosters, and what steps can be taken to redouble international support for the multi-stakeholder model in which non-governmental institutions recommend best practices with input from the public and private sector. The hearing also examined legislation making it the policy of the United States to promote a global Internet free from government control.
House Republicans and Democrats spoke with one voice about the threats to global Internet freedom coming out WCIT. Legislator after legislator took to the microphone to praise the U.S.'s stand against the Internet language and ask what could be done to repel future attempts at government encroachment into Internet policy, which everyone agreed would continue. One answer stressed the importance of giving developing companies more support in the form of money, education and infrastructure so they do not turn to authoritarian regimes like Russia and China for help.
Ambassador David Gross, who was a member of the U.S. WCIT delegation, made a pitch for continued engagement with the ITU. While he was in total agreement that the language in the treaty made it unacceptable, he said remained extraordinarily important, both in terms of spectrum policy and as a way to do outreach to the developing world.
Dr. Bitange Ndemo, who led the Kenyan delegation to the Dubai conference, stood with the U.S. in opposing Internet-related language that made it impossible for the U.S. delegation to sign on to the treaty. Dr Ndemo said many of the countries that did sign on had been coerced.
Federal Communications Commission member Robert McDowell testified that the US should intensify efforts to prevent governments from exerting control over the Internet after a United Nations conference increased countries’ ability to regulate Web traffic. Supporters of international control of the Internet are “patient and persistent incrementalists who will never relent until their ends are achieved,” he said. "In short, the U.S. experienced a rude awakening regarding the stark reality of the situation," he said. "[W]hen push comes to shove, even countries that purport to cherish Internet freedom are willing to surrender. Our experience in Dubai is a chilling foreshadow of how international Internet regulatory policy could expand at an accelerating pace."
The takeaway from the hearing was that there were continued threats that required constant vigilance, and that one way to win hearts and minds would be to help the developing world. That would include not only infrastructure, said Sally Shipman Wentworth of The Internet Society, but also education, so that homegrown engineers would understand the stakes for their countries. There were also some suggestions that governments and private industry might help pave the way to conferences for countries that could not afford the price of admission to an Internet dialog that was important for them to be a part of. Not doing so, they suggested, could send them to authoritarian regimes for help.
* The three House committees participating were: the House Communications and Technology Subcommittee, the Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade and the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations.