Obama’s Reckless Plan Threatens U.S. Oversight of Internet 

by Roger Aronoff 

Print:   Share: 

The Obama administration is poised to surrender control of certain Internet
functions to non-profit ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers, on October 1. According to Americans for Limited Government’s
senior editor Robert Romano, opposition to this Internet giveaway has united
Republicans
<http://netrightdaily.com/2016/09/stopping-internet-giveaway-helped-unite-tr
ump-cruz-gop/>  such as Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and presidential candidate
Donald Trump. But questions remain as to whether or not the Republicans will
unite sufficiently to insist language is included in a continuing resolution
that will forbid the transfer of control.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) actually stripped out this
language from the continuing resolution, and a vote to end debate
<http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2016/09/senates-disastrous-cr-fail
s-key-vote>  on the current language, which does not fix the ICANN issue,
failed on September 27. This is the latest Obama administration scandal, one
that threatens the integrity of the Internet. President Obama is seeking to
cede oversight of Internet protocols <http://www.iana.org/about>  to a
multinational body, effectively ending unilateral American control over
these functions.

Romano writes that this is the “Last chance to save the free and open
Internet.”

A group of prominent national security professionals have sent a letter
<http://www.aim.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Open-Letter-on-Internet-Secur
ity-92616-1.pdf>  to Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff Joseph Dunford Jr. in opposition to the transfer.
“Of…immediate concern to us…is the prospect that the United States might be
transferring to future adversaries a capability that could facilitate,
particularly in time of conflict, cyberwarfare against us,” they write. “In
the absence of [the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration’s] stewardship, we would be unable to be certain about the
legitimacy of all IP addresses or whether they have been, in some form or
fashion, manipulated, or compromised.”

The transition could affect the status of Internet domain names, including
.mil and .gov. “The Administration has failed to ensure U.S. ownership and
control of .MIL and .GOV in perpetuity,” wrote
<http://docs.techfreedom.org/Coalition_Letter_IANA_8.10.16.pdf>  a coalition
of citizens and non-profits this August. “Both are vital national assets.”
They argue that the Department of Commerce is doing “precisely” what
Congress “forbade.”

One concern is that the transition will make these Internet functions
subject to the desires of oppressive nations such as China and Russia. Yet
the mainstream media are working to cast the change as managerial, and
inconsequential. The Washington Post’s Fact Checker Glenn Kessler recently
gave Senator Cruz three Pinocchios
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/09/21/cruzs-claim-
that-icanns-transition-will-empower-foes-to-censor-the-internet/>  for
saying that the change would “empower countries like Russia, like China,
like Iran to be able to censor speech on the Internet.” This is because,
Kessler writes, “ICANN says it is only a technical administrator that does
not regulate content on the Internet” and this claims “it has power that
does not exist.”

Similarly, The Los Angeles Times editorial board calls
<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-internet-governance-icann-2
0160916-snap-story.html>  Sen. Cruz’s argument “ridiculous.” “The only role
the U.S. government plays today is an administrative one, checking to make
sure that ICANN follows the correct procedures before any changes to the
master list of domains can go into effect,” they write. “That’s hardly the
Internet’s last defense against the tyranny of despots.”

However, the LA Times editorial board may be overlooking other functions of
ICANN. According to
<http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-encryption-key-that-secures-the-web-is
-being-changed-for-the-first-time>  Motherboard, “one of the most important
cryptographic key pairs on the internet” is about to be changed “for the
first time” by none other than ICANN. “This key ensures that when web users
try to visit a website, they get sent to the correct address,” writes Joseph
Cox. “Without it, many internet users could be directed to imposter sites
crafted by hackers, such as phishing websites designed to steal
information.”

According to the Epoch Times, the New York-based newspaper owned and run by
Chinese-Americans opposed to the Communist regime in China, “Already, the
Chinese regime is moving to fill the void left by the U.S. handover—and its
new system for governing the internet goes far beyond the responsibilities
held by ICANN.” They state
<http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2155380-china-is-gaining-control-of-the-glo
bal-internet/>  that “Over the last two years, Chinese leaders have drafted
an authoritarian set of laws that governs every facet of the internet.”

Theresa Payton, writing for
<http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/technology/296840-changing-who-contr
ols-icann-jeopardizes-our-presidential>  The Hill, argues that altering the
U.S.’s relationship with ICANN during an election season is unwise. “When
the calendar hits Sept. 30, a mere 6 weeks before our election, the United
States cannot be assured that if any web site is hacked, the responsible
party will be held accountable,” she writes. “We cannot be sure if a web
site is valid. We cannot be sure if one country is being favored over
another. These are all the things ICANN is responsible for and has worked
perfectly since the Internet was created.” Payton is a former White House
Chief Information Officer and currently the CEO of a cyber security company.

Why make the change now? she asks.

“As a private organization, ICANN is not bound by the First Amendment, which
ICANN’s CEO and President Göran Marby admitted in a recent Senate hearing,”
write
<http://dailysignal.com/2016/09/21/obama-should-not-put-free-speech-at-risk-
on-internet-by-giving-up-us-oversight/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email
&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT1Rrd05UY3hOMk5qWkRNMSIsInQiOiJVS3
J0bDRCVDFoandUejcweHpRRW1KaURUVnpkQ21TKzk0MVJScGNEMjFNTDBUU1V4U093ZEVibjR4K2
YyVjA5ZjhUSnJuek4yTjV4RWpYXC9wK3RKc0xpQ2JxTWVsVVZ6dDFYYUdGbjVsenM9In0%3D>
Sen. Cruz and Representative Sean Duffy (R-WI) for The Daily Signal. “The
First Amendment applies only to the [American] government. So if the
government is out of the picture, the First Amendment is too. And that means
that ICANN would be free to regulate internet speech by restricting which
websites can gain access to the internet based on their speech.”

“It’s important to remember that the devil is always in the details, and
what the administration attempts to spin as a ‘clerical’ function can easily
be used to bludgeon free speech,” they add.

“So why is Obama willing to jeopardize internet freedom?” they ask. “The
administration believes that continued U.S. supervision of the domain name
system will prompt China, Russia, Iran, and other countries that have been
clamoring for more influence in internet governance to fracture the internet
by setting up their own networks, perhaps under United Nations control…By
ending U.S. oversight, the Obama administration will disempower the American
people and empower China, Russia, and Iran, putting those regimes one step
closer to their goal,” which Cruz and Duffy argue is “to control the global
internet infrastructure.”

Brett Schaefer and Paul Rosenzweig for Heritage’s Daily Signal wonder
<http://dailysignal.com/2016/08/16/recent-actions-cast-doubt-on-whether-ican
n-is-ready-for-transition/>  whether ICANN is too corrupt to take on
additional duties. “Earlier this year, ICANN was challenged in U.S. court
<http://www.aim.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/litigation-dca-minute-order-p
laintiff-ex-parte-application-04mar16-en1.pdf>  regarding its failure to
follow proper procedures in awarding the .africa domain name,” they write.
“The dilemma arose from the ICANN board’s attempt to improperly
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-declaration-2-redacted-09
jul15-en.pdf>  appease governments who had objected to the original
delegation.”

Far from “rule by geeks”—who ostensibly have nothing to gain by appeasing
global dictators—Schaefer and Rosenzweig foresee the transition as “rule by
a global monopolistic self-perpetuating elite.”

If the Department of Commerce’s NTIA has successfully overseen the contract
to date, one must ask why the transition is even necessary. This is
especially true if the change is “minor,” as the LA Times editorial board
has asserted. However, this is but another part of President Obama’s
consistent push for multilateral agendas at the expense of American power
and sovereignty.

The transition “has rankled Republicans who say it could put the internet in
the hands of hostile actors,” reported The Hill, once again casting only
Republicans, and not citizens, as in opposition to this change.

This is a radical change,” argued
<http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/08/the_end_of_the_internet_as_we_k
now_it.html>  Rick Moran for The American Thinker. “I suspect we will see
almost immediately that it was a mistake. But once the transfer is made, it
will be too late to get it back, leaving us pretty much at the mercy of
anti-freedom governments.”

The liberal media continue to assert that handing over a function of the
Internet will have minor repercussions. That’s because few in the media want
to blame President Obama for, once again, damaging U.S. interests in his
pursuit of the transformation of America. This is a complicated issue, but
after the lies employed to sell the country on the phony Iran deal
<http://www.aim.org/aim-column/iranian-nuclear-deal-is-a-catastrophic-hoax/>
, and on Obamacare
<http://www.aim.org/aim-column/the-deceitful-selling-of-obamacare-coming-hom
e-to-roost/> , Congress should block this surrender of U.S. Internet
oversight for at least as long as Obama is President.

 

 

EM

On the 49th Parallel          

                 Thé Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja and Dr. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda is in
anarchy"
                    Kuungana Mulindwa Mawasiliano Kikundi
"Pamoja na Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja na Dk. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda ni
katika machafuko" 

 

_______________________________________________
Ugandanet mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet

UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/

All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including 
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------

Reply via email to