GROSS SEES OFFENSE AS U.S. STRATEGY IN 2ND PHASE OF WSIS

Now that the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) is over, the U.S. needs to think about how to “play an active role” in the working group on Internet governance and the Task Force on the digital solidarity fund, said David Gross, who represented the U.S. at the Geneva summit. Under the declaration of principles and the action plan adopted by 176 govt. delegations, the 2 groups under the leadership of United Nations Secy. Gen. Kofi Annan will produce reports to prepare for the 2nd phase of WSIS scheduled for 2005 in Tunis. Gross clarified, however, that the reports would result in action in Tunis only “if appropriate.”

Discussing U.S. strategy for the 2nd phase, Gross said at an FCBA lunch: “I don’t think it’s the U.S. position that we want to maintain a status quo.” He said he was “cautious” because he didn’t know what the focus would be. However, he said that to achieve a good outcome, “it’s imperative that you play offense, not defense.” He said the summit was about negotiations: “In this context, when you have 175 other countries, when you play defense… there are only 2 things you know are going to happen: One is that you are going to lose, and 2 is by how much.” He said the U.S. had “a positive message” at the summit, and the key was “to understand what it is that we want to accomplish and… to be able to articulate it.” He said the U.S. views were reflected in the documents because “we were able to figure out ways to explain why it would be in [other countries'] interest as well.” He said as the U.S. was moving toward the 2nd phase, “we'll try to understand what ought to be addressed in Tunisia… We need first to catch our breath and understand where we've been, and then identify where we want to go.”

The U.S. is “very pleased” with the outcome of the first phase of the WSIS, which brought together 46 heads of state, Gross said in an interview. He said the 12,000 registered attendees were at least 50% more than had been projected. This was the first U.N. summit where not only govt. but private sector and civil society representatives were invited to participate, Gross said. He said he was particularly pleased that the documents, which he said were “extraordinarily good” because they embodied a consensus of so many countries, expressly recognized freedom of information society, freedom of media and network security as “very important” and came up with “good language” on intellectual property.

On the controversial issue of creating a digital solidarity fund, Gross said the language of the documents gave countries freedom to create a fund “if they wish.” He said the U.S. already had come up with the Digital Freedom Initiative, under which USAID, the Dept. of Commerce, the Peace Corps, the State Dept., businesses and others make resources available to other countries for technological development. The “least controversial” item was one on “the importance of the rule of law,” Gross said, and he was particularly pleased with the documents’ “strong language” on that issue. That was a change from several years ago, when he said “a fight” had been projected.

On VoIP, Gross said “there was very little discussion, particularly in terms of the political part of the summit.” He said he had “a lot of discussion” with regulators from around the world, who he said were trying “to grapple with [VoIP].” He said the ITU’s regulators conference, held right before WSIS in Geneva, “actively discussed” VoIP -- “both the promise of it and some economic issues.” However, Gross said many countries were concerned about VoIP because “it will affect settlement rates.”

Gross said he was “impressed” by the enthusiasm developing countries had demonstrated at the summit. “It wasn’t a traditional trade show… but rather” people from the developing world sharing the ideas about the new technologies they used in their countries, he said: “That seems for me to underscore the power of the transformational aspect. It isn’t any more just major governments… explaining to other people why” ICT is important -- “we are in a different place now.” He said that was a “transformation from a promise and opportunity associated with it to a recognition about how robust the actual reality is.”