DUTCH WANT "SHARED RESPONSIBILITY" FOR INTERNET

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 THE HAGUE 002905

SIPDIS

STATE FOR EB/CIP (GROSS),EUR/ERA, EUR/UBI
STATE PLEASE PASS FCC AND FTC
STATE PLEASE ALSO PASS USTR
COMMERCE FOR NITA (CSPECK)
JUSTICE FOR CWILNER

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/21/2015
TAGS: ECON ECPS KIPR NL EUN
SUBJECT: DUTCH WANT "SHARED RESPONSIBILITY" FOR INTERNET
GOVERNANCE

REF: A. OCTOBER 20 NAMDE (IO/T)-ENSTROM EMAIL


B. LONDON 8166

C. THE HAGUE 665

D. STATE 196384

Classified By: ECONOMIC COUNSELOR RICHARD HUFF,
REASONS 1.4 (B) AND (D)


1. (C) SUMMARY. Dutch Foreign Ministry contacts appear
more receptive to USG concerns about the risks posed by the
EU's recent proposal to create an "international cooperation
model" for internet governance to further innovation of the
Internet and freedom of information issues. Working-level
Economic Ministry officials agree on the need to keep the
technical management of the Internet in private hands but
want oversight of the internet to evolve into a form allowing
for greater shared international responsibility of
decision-making. They do not believe that such a step will
require the creation of a new international organization or
UN entity and remain open to suggestions from the USG on
future structures. Intervention at higher levels in the
GONL, including proposed calls by IO A/S Silverberg to senior
Dutch officials (ref A),may be necessary to bring the Dutch
around to the USG position. Dutch Economic Minister
Brinkhorst has asked for a meeting with the head of the U.S.
delegation to the November World Summit on the Information
Society. See para 10 for action requests. END SUMMARY.

MEA WANTS "SHARED" INTERNATIONAL OVERSIGHT
--------------


2. (C) As a follow up to the October 13 conference call
with Ambassador David Gross (EB DAS and U.S. Coordinator for
International Communications and Information Policy) and U.S.
missions in EU member countries, Econoff met October 20 with
Rodrigo Pinto Scholtbach and Thomas de Haan, Senior Policy
Officers in the Directorate-General for Telecommunications
and Post, Ministry of Economic Affairs (MEA),to discuss USG
concerns with the recent EU proposal on internet governance
submitted to the September 30 Geneva PrepCom for the November
World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Tunis.
Both Pinto Scholtbach and de Haan attended the Geneva PrepCom
and were likely responsible for the hard-line Dutch text
proposed at the meeting (see ref B). De Haan also serves as
a Dutch delegate to the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)
within the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers (ICANN).


3. (SBU) Pinto Scholtbach noted that the Dutch and its EU
colleagues had raised concerns about reaching an agreement on
internet governance during Ambassador Gross' March visit to
the Netherlands (reported ref C) and subsequent US-EU
meetings. He said the Dutch supported the new EU proposal
for a new "international cooperation model," which calls for
equitable and efficient global allocation of Internet
Protocol (IP) addresses, procedures for changing the root
zone file, continuation of crucial DNS functions, the
establishment of an arbitration and dispute resolution
mechanism, and rules applicable to the DNS system. He noted
that the MEA had also briefed Dutch industry providers, who
agreed on the need for a discussion on the future of internet
governance. (NOTE: Post has already shared points similar
to those in ref D with GONL officials and will also provide
these points to industry and business leaders.)


4. (SBU) Both Pinto Scholtbach and de Haan were aware of
USG opposition to the EU proposal, but believed that the
media had exaggerated differences between U.S. and EU
positions. Pinto Scholtbach stressed that there was general
agreement with the USG on the need to ensure that the
technical management of the DNS remained in private hands.
De Haan stressed that the Dutch and the EU continued to
support the work of ICANN as the technical manager of DNS and
had no intention of proposing any replacement organization.
There was no doubt of ICANN's success and progress in
managing this aspect of the Internet.


5. (SBU) Differences did exist, however, over the future
role of the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) and its
supervisory relationship with ICANN. With a growing
worldwide dependence on the Internet, de Haan argued that no
government should have a sole mandate for decision-making
regarding the Internet, including the determination and/or
changing of the root zone file system. Rather, this role,
which is currently played by the DOC, should be placed within
a "more international setting" with participation by all
interested governments. Pinto Scholtbach added that the
"internationalization" of this oversight role would not
require the creation of a new international organization or
UN entity. However, the status quo was not acceptable.

6. (SBU) While it was too early to discuss models, Pinto
Scholtbach suggested that the GAC might play this supervisory
role if it were moved outside the ICANN. Econoff countered
that such an international mechanism controlled by
governments could risk stifling further innovation of the
Internet and could ultimately endanger the security of the
system. Econoff added that the DOC relationship with ICANN
was not a case of the regulator and the regulated, but rather
a joint partnership, where the DOC played no role in the
internal governance of the day-to-day operation of ICANN.
Pinto Scholtbach agreed that governments should not be
involved in the technical aspects of managing the Internet.
The key issue for the Dutch and the EU, he stressed, was a
"sharing of the responsibility" of the oversight of the
system.

LOOKING FOR USG SUGGESTIONS ON FUTURE MODELS
--------------


7. (C) When pushed for examples of cases where the USG and
ICANN had failed to administer the Internet in an equitable
manner, de Haan noted Chinese concerns about a shortage of IP
addresses. He suggested that such issues could be addressed
within a more independent GAC structure, which could also
include a dispute and appeal mechanism to deal with such
issues as root zone file changes. Econoff said that the USG
recognized that governments had legitimate public policy and
sovereignty concerns in this area and was committed to
working with the international community to address these
concerns. Such a dialogue was already taking place among
stakeholders within various fora, including the GAC and the
International Telecommunications Union (ITU). When de Haan
raised concerns about a possible Chinese-led fragmentation of
the Internet system, Econoff questioned whether there really
were economic benefits in creating a separate system, adding
that such a development might even be a welcomed step forward
as economic realities would necessitate inter-connectivity of
such systems.


8. (SBU) While differences clearly remained, Pinto
Scholtbach stressed that the Dutch and EU were open to
suggestions from the USG on future "international cooperative
models" on internet governance that would give other
governments more of a say in decision-making. Given the
success of the current system and the lack of a viable
alternative to the existing DOC-ICANN partnership, Econoff
argued that the work of the WSIS would be better spent on the
issue of how the developed world could better extend the
benefits of the Internet to the developing world.
International cooperation, she added, was also needed in
critical areas such as spam prevention, cybersecurity, and
privacy issues.

MFA TAKES NOTE OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION RISKS
-------------- -


9. (C) In a separate meeting later that day, Bart Paans,
Policy Advisor on WSIS issues in the United Nations and
International Financial Institutions Department, Ministry of
Foreign Affairs (MFA),noted that the MEA had the lead on the
technical substance of the Dutch position on internet
governance. He agreed in principle with Econoff's arguments
about the risks posed by the creation of a new
intergovernmental body to further innovation of the Internet.
He took note of Econoff's point that such a body could play
into the hands of regimes seeking to restrict Internet access
to their citizens. However, he acknowledged that his
Ministry needed to consult further with the MEA before
responding officially to USG concerns.

SEEKING MEETING WITH U.S. WSIS DELEGATION HEAD
-------------- -


10. (U) ACTION REQUESTED: At the conclusion of the MEA
meeting, Pinto Scholtbach requested assistance in seeking a
meeting between the head of the U.S. delegation to the WSIS
and Dutch Economics Minister Brinkhorst, who will lead the
Dutch WSIS delegation. He added that Dutch parliamentarians
planned to be at the meeting in Tunis and asked whether U.S.
Congressmen also planned to attend. He suggested that a
meeting could also be arranged between these representatives.
Post would appreciate guidance from Washington on the
possibility of a meeting between Minister Brinkhorst and the
head of the U.S. delegation to the WSIS for 20-30 minutes
(sometime between 11 am and 1 pm) on Wednesday, November 16,
on the margins of the morning plenary session. Post would
also appreciate guidance on whether U.S. Congressmen plan to
attend the November WSIS event and the possibility of
meetings with Dutch parliamentarians. The following is a
list of proposed Dutch delegates to the WSIS:

-- Laurens Brinkhorst, Minister of Economic Affairs,
Delegation head
-- Mark Frequin, Director-General for Telecommunications and
Post, MEA
-- Mark Esseboom, Director for Strategy and International
Affairs, Directorate-General for Telecommunications and Post,
MEA
-- Willem Rullens, Director for International Affairs,
Directorate-General for Telecommunications and Post, MEA
-- Rodrigo Pinto Scholtbach, Senior Policy Officer,
Directorate-General for Telecommunications and Post, MEA
-- Thomas de Haan, Senior Policy Officer, Directorate-General
for Telecommunications and Post, MEA
-- Judith Thompson, Communications Division, MEA
-- Hans Franken, Member of the Upper Chamber of Parliament
(CDA)
-- Jos Hessels, Member of the Lower Chamber of Parliament
(CDA)
-- Martijn van Dam, Member of the Lower Chamber of Parliament
(PvdA)
-- Zsolt Szabo, Member of the Lower Chamber of Parliament
(VVD)
-- Bart Paans, Policy Advisor, Policy Advisor, United Nations
and International Financial Institutions Department, MFA
-- Sanne Kaasjager, Dutch Permanent Mission to the UN in
Geneva
-- Ian de Jong, Dutch Permanent Mission to the UN in Geneva


COMMENT -- REINFORCING OUR MESSAGE
--------------


11. (C) Dutch MEA officials have said that they do not
favor the creation of a new international organization or UN
entity for international oversight of the Internet. However,
their views clearly convey dissatisfaction with a perceived
USG control of the Internet. Beyond the suggestion of a
possible GAC structure outside the ICANN, Dutch thoughts for
such an "international cooperation model" remain unclear.
Their key concern is that the current internet governance
structure evolves into a form that allows for greater shared
international responsibility of decision-making. They may
also view the current EU proposal as a means of pushing the
USG to come forward with suggestions for future internet
governance models.


12. (C) Post has underscored that the USG does not support
the creation of a new oversight mechanism of ICANN to replace
the DOC. Follow-on calls from IO A/S Silverberg to key
senior officials at the MEA and MFA will reinforce this
message. Our Dutch MFA contact was clearly more receptive to
USG views on this issue than his MEA colleagues. The MFA
could prove to be an ally in bringing MEA officials around to
the USG position. END COMMENT.
BLAKEMAN