Internet governance back in the limelight

However the Snowdon revelations have also revealed a very nasty element of government involvement in the internet, completely undermining the American mantra to leave the internet alone. It has become clear that their interference in the internet was not just used to spy on possible terrorists – it was also used for political interference in the affairs of their allies; for economic espionage; and, according to the allegations, they even used malware to infiltrate computers and other devices.

Obviously this dealt a very severe blow to the grandstanding tactics of the USA on issues in relation to internet governance, and the reaction was particularly strong from the country's international allies, as opposed to their political rivals – as well as from private American organisations, who are experiencing the commercial fall-out of their government's interference in the internet.

Key lessons to be learned here are that trust is very precious – and, once lost, it is difficult to regain; and that transparency has to become a central element in whatever governments are doing in our increasingly connected and transparent world.

ICANN – a positive step forward

As a result of this; we see the USA now finally willing to relinquish its control over ICANN, the organisation managing the domain registration of internet addresses – a semi-regulatory role with important commercial/competition elements linked to it.

As discussed below, US control of this body (perceived or otherwise) has become a lightning rod in recent years for those countries that opposed America's dominance over the internet, and its decision to now yield control should appease these countries and increase the true international notion nature of the internet.

Unfortunately, however, the American international political issue is far broader than this, and the question will be whether the ICANN resolution will really lead to an overall improvement in the relationship between America, its allies and the rest of the global community regarding internet issues.

In relation to ICANN, back in the 1990s when the organisation was established the National Telecommunications Industry Agency (NTIA) – part of the US Department of Commerce – stated that its goal was to speedily make the organisation subject to international democratic control. It was envisaged that this would happen around 2003.

When it didn't happen the European Union frequently addressed the issue and reminded the US government of this promise. It was only much later that non-European countries began to express their concern, and their sheer numbers became the dominant force behind the more recent requests to honour the promise. These countries used the International Telecommunication Union (a UN body) to address their concerns, and in some quarters this created the American 'hatred' of the ITU, which has become the most recent focal point of criticism against the organisation's attempt to achieve international cooperation on internet governance.

International telecommunications regulations

Another issue under the control of the ITU are the International Telecommunications Regulations (ITRs). They mainly handle network connections and, in some instances, the financial arrangements involved in that process. With the majority of these networks now carrying internet traffic the discussions here obviously include internet interconnections; however any debate that included the word "internet' is strongly objected to by the USA.

The ending of American control over ICANN will not have any significant direct consequences, as the country didn't ever really take effective control over the organisation, but the symbolism is very important. Nevertheless, this is also the right spot to acknowledge the American leadership, and thanks are due for their non-interference in the daily activities of ICANN, which has enabled the internet to grow in the way it has.