China Hails ITU Internet Takeover By Blowing Its Favorite Trumpet: Distrusting The US

from the one-way-of-looking-at-it dept

While there’s been plenty of talk about the upcoming ITU process, the ITU keeps attempting to downplay what it’s trying to do — and insisting that Russia, China and other regimes aren’t looking to use the process to clamp down on the internet. Of course, proposal leaks from Russia suggest otherwise. As for China, Dave Farber points us to an editorial in the People’s Daily newspaper in China from back in August that argues that the ITU process is necessary to wrest control of the internet away from the US.

This indicated the U.S. decision to retain ultimate control over the global Internet, which enabled it to unilaterally close the Internet of another country. A suddenly paralyzed Internet would definitely cause huge social and economic losses to the country.

More and more countries are beginning to question the U.S. control over the world’s Internet as the international resource should be managed and supervised by all countries together. However, the United States has conducted a pre-emptive strike, and refused to give up control over the Internet in the name of protecting the resource. The refusal reflects its hegemonic mentality and double standards.

The United States controls and owns all cyberspaces in the world, and other countries can only lease Internet addresses and domain names from the United States, leading to the U.S. hegemonic monopoly over the world’s Internet.

This is an exaggeration of reality. While ICANN has serious problems — which we frequently discuss here — that doesn’t mean that dumping it entirely in favor of a ridiculously secretive and bureaucratic process like the ITU makes sense. The article goes on to cite the US apparently turning off the .iq domain for Iraq during the invasion in 2003. Of course, that’s an interesting rewriting of history. The issue with the .iq domain wasn’t quite as cut and dried as the editorial implies. First of all, .iq wasn’t a widely used domain no matter what. But, more importantly, it was entirely managed and controlled by a guy in Texas who was accused of funding terrorists and eventually sentenced to 84 months in jail. It wasn’t so much a case of the US government running to ICANN and saying shut down the domain, as it was a criminal investigation into separate issues that happened to scoop up the one guy who controlled the TLD. And, it should be noted that ICANN gave .iq back to the Iraqi government years ago.

This kind of stuff indicates the lengths to which the Chinese government seems willing to go to prop up the ITU process for taking over aspects of internet governance: they’ll just lie and make up stories when the truth isn’t particularly convenient.

Filed Under: , ,
Companies: icann

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “China Hails ITU Internet Takeover By Blowing Its Favorite Trumpet: Distrusting The US”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

but dont anyone else think that the US aids in this opinion when it continues to do as it did yesterday, and shut down websites (132 this time), without any form of checking or giving the owners any chance to defend themselves. it also doesn’t matter that the sites may not be US sites either! if the US wants to stop this type of condemnation of how it is perceived as the controller of the internet, it needs to stop taking control of the internet! it isn’t rocket science, is it!
does anyone in their right mind that buys an item at a fraction of the real price, actually think they are buying the genuine article? of course not! does anyone in their right mind think that closing down a website or a shop that sells counterfeit/imitation goods means that the buyers are going to go and buy the genuine item instead? of course not! all that happens is that those that were buying the non-genuine articles buy something else, but lose their little bit of fantasy. those making the non genuine items lose their jobs, they have less money, things dont get bought, taxes dont get paid. it ends up as a lose-lose situation except for the satisfaction law enforcement get from fucking something else up. buying ‘knock-offs’ hardly constitute lives. by going after those people instead of real criminals could do.

Anonymous Coward says:

What a terrible article.

Your fear mongering of China and Russia does nothing for your argument. You deliberately mislead the reader by failing to properly present the ITU – a United Nations agency which includes 193 nation states and is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. So yes, while China and Russia are members, so to is the United States. If control of domains were handed over to the ITU the United States would still have a say, but could no longer dominate.

Also, your excuses for the .iq domain seizure are incredibly weak. All this proves is that the US can arbitrarily and preemptively seize domains as they see fit. Whether the evidence of this terrorist affiliation was manufactured or not, the entire domain was seized at a time it was advantageous for the United States. This is unacceptable, and reason alone for a transfer domain operations to ITU.

Not an Electronic Rodent (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Like they say, ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!’.

I dunno, it doesn’t exactly look entirely unbroken from here and the argument about not trusting the US with it has some weight, witness the amount of bullying of both ICANN and other countries by the US to remove stuff it doesn’t like that may be completely legal in the hosting country.
On the other hand amputation with a chainsaw is almost never a terribly good solution to a broken leg, no matter how much it hurts.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Response to ITU cheerleader pep rally

What a terrible comment.

Your blissful bending over for the ITU does nothing for your argument. You deliberately mislead the reader by failing to properly present the ITU – a power grabbing bunch of assholes. So yes, the group of assholes has assholes from everywhere. If the internet were turned over to a bunch of assholes then everyone would still have a say, but would not be listened to.

Also, your excuses for seizure of the internet are incredibly weak. All this proves is that the ITU can arbitrarily and preemptively censor the entire internet as they see fit. Whether they have evidence of piracy or political dissent will not matter, they will shut the sites down simply because they do not like them. This is unacceptable and reason alone to leave the internet be.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

What a terrible comment.

Your complete disregard for who is asking for the transfer and why doesn’t meant it doesn’t matter or that pointing it out is ‘fear mongering.’

Also your excuse for transferring to the ITU is incredibly weak. There’s no evidence what-so-ever that a transfer to the ITU would result in less restrictive domain seizures while circumstantial evidence that a transfer to the ITU would result in more restrictions abounds.

Vidiot (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Good Lord! No on/off switch? No cops on patrol? Why, those rotten terrorists would have a field day… doing their terrorist-like things wherever and whenever they want, right out in public!

It’s a good thing that those nice people at the ITU explained it for me — how I’d have nothing to fear if they were in charge. What a load off my mind!

Last Freeman says:

ITU supports slavery

The ITU closed door talks are scheduled to occur at Dubai, which is a constituent of the United Arab Emirates.

United Arab Emirates law:
“Confiscation of passports, although illegal, occurs on a large scale, primarily from unskilled or semi-skilled employees.

The UAE’s system of employment for non-citizens ties an employee to the employer and prevents him or her from seeking alternative employment without the express approval of the original employer. Also, among employers of foreign laborers non-payment of wages, cramped and unsanitary living conditions and poor health and safety practices are widespread and have been the subject of foreign media attention.”


I couldn’t think of a better place for the ITU to discuss the enslavement of the internet and her people. Bravo ITU for selecting Dubai as your location of choice to kill the free internet. Bravo…

theres a word for that says:

an internet that is under control of a bunch of nations many of them despots? theres a word for that: broken.

the US is no angel by any means. but to hand over the net to guys that send there people to re education camps for going to protest? if your really that desperate when it comes to not liking how the US does things you need a break from politics.

and this is coming from a guy who regularly says obscene things about the US government.

anon says:


We all really need a charter of rights for internet citizens and internet businesses. This has to be created and designed by the people in a public manner. Yes many will be unhappy with this but it needs to be done with the only goal in mind the protection of the people from governments that abuse there power to monitor and control the internet.

Anonymous Coward says:

China does have an ounce of a point here that US has been trying to gain control over the Internet bit by bit.

BUT..if CHINA of all countries is all for the changes that they want to implement at ITU this year, that should seriously scare everyone’s pants off. Nothing China ever is for in regards to Internet is a good thing. So I know which side I’m on this time.

Gee says:

“The article goes on to cite the US apparently turning off the .iq domain for Iraq during the invasion in 2003.”

“ was entirely managed and controlled by a guy in Texas who was accused of funding terrorists..”

“ was a criminal investigation into separate issues..”

Umm, the war in 2003 was because of TERRORISTS. I wouldn’t really call that a separate issue.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »