In My Opinion

Andres Oppenheimer: Brazil’s proposal to regulate Internet is scary

 

aoppenheimer@MiamiHerald.com

Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff’s angry denunciation of U.S. electronic spying at the United Nations General Assembly in New York this week was applauded by most in the room, but her proposal to regulate the Internet should make all of us very nervous.

During her opening speech at the 68th U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, Rousseff referred to the recent leaks by former U.S. intelligence contractor Edward Snowden showing that the U.S. government had intercepted electronic communications from top Brazilian officials, including herself, and from Brazil’s state-controlled oil company, Petrobras.

“The revelations of activities of a global network of electronic espionage have caused indignation and repudiation in public opinion around the world,” Rousseff said. “That is a breach of international law, and is an affront to the principles that must guide the relations among [countries,] especially among friendly nations.”

So far so good. Until that point it was hard to disagree with Rousseff.

Even if U.S. officials say privately that all countries intercept other nations’ communications, and that the U.S. government has a duty to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks by conducting intelligence activities abroad, these arguments sound pretty hollow in the case of Brazil.

While Brazilian diplomacy often sides with radical dictatorships, and Brazil shows a near total disregard for the collective defense of human rights and democracy in other countries, it is a democratic country at home, and is hardly a haven for terrorists.

But immediately after her denunciation of U.S. spying in her speech, Rousseff went on to say that the world needs “multilateral mechanisms” to regulate the Internet. She added that the United Nations should play a leading role in creating these mechanisms.

“The United Nations should have a leading role in efforts to regulate the states’ behavior regarding these technologies,” she said. Brazil will propose a “responsible regulation” of the Internet to prevent bad practices, she added.

The trouble with this proposal is that Brazil, Russia, China, South Africa and India have been making proposals to regulate the Internet since 2005, and they are generally scary, freedom of speech advocates say. While paying lip service to freedom of expression, the proposals would effectively lead to censorship, the advocates say.

Last December, at a major U.N. World Conference of the International Telecommunication Union in Dubai, some of the countries demanding Internet regulation proposed a resolution to regulate “unsolicited bulk electronic information,” or spam emails.

The United States and several European countries objected, arguing that China and Russia’s interpretation of “spam” could lend itself to censorship.

China, which censors Facebook, Twitter, and many web pages that it considers as going against its national interests, could include political and religious Internet sites in its definition of spam in the proposed new treaty to regulate the Internet, critics said.

Freedom of expression advocates say that Brazil’s proposals to regulate the Internet are much more respectful of individual freedoms than China’s or Russia’s. But freedom advocates are nevertheless worried.

“The Internet functions best under a decentralized system of government that involves the participation of experts, human-rights advocates and the technical community,” says Emma Llanso, of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Democracy and Technology, an Internet freedom advocacy group.

She added, “I would have concerns about any framework that puts governments in charge, and leaves civil society out of the process.”

My opinion: Rousseff’s call for “multilateral mechanisms” to regulate the Internet should not be automatically dismissed, because there are some aspects of the Internet — such as electronic spying, child pornography or financial fraud — that will require some form of international oversight.

But putting that task in the hands of the United Nations, where China, Russia and its authoritarian friends wield enormous power, is a very bad idea. It would allow these countries to do abroad what they do at home: censor what people can read or watch on the Internet.

You are right to be angry about electronic spying, President Rousseff, and you may be right about the need to set some international guidelines to stop it. But allowing the United Nations to take the lead on this would most likely give too much power to governments, and too little to freedom-of-expression and other private sector and civil society groups.

It would mark the end of freedom of expression on the Internet for the part of the world that still enjoys it.

Read more Andres Oppenheimer stories from the Miami Herald

  • In My Opinion

    Andres Oppenheimer: It’s time for International Anti-corruption Court

    The more I read about the massive government corruption in Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Venezuela and other countries where top officials have been accused of stealing fortunes with near total impunity, the more I like a new proposal that is making the rounds in world legal circles — creation of an International Anti-Corruption Court.

  •  
Argentine vice president Amado Boudou, right, shakes hands with China's president Xi Jinping during his visit to the Argentine Congress in Buenos Aires on July 19, 2014.

    In My Opinion

    Andres Oppenheimer: China is flexing its muscle in Latin America

    On his visit to Latin America, Chinese President Xi Jinping promised new trade and investment deals that he said will lift China’s booming economic ties with the region to new heights. Many Latin American leaders hailed it as great news amid their countries’ economic slowdowns.

  • In My Opinion

    Andres Oppenheimer: BRICS’ emerging world bank: good idea, bad timing

    This week’s announcement by the presidents of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — the so-called BRICS countries — that they will create their own international financial institution was greeted with polite skepticism and some criticism in Washington D.C. But on this issue, the BRICS are doing the right thing.

Miami Herald

Join the
Discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Marketplace

Today's Circulars

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category