Mediaboss Marketing

On April 28, the Biden administration announced a new global partnership that sets norms for the use of technology by nation-states: the Declaration for the Future of the Internet. While the declaration might seem like a reproach of the digital authoritarianism of Russia and China, it is far more likely to warn off wavering democracies from internet transgressions.

The statement was signed by 61 nations and aims to establish a code of practice for how democratic countries should engage with the web. The declarations vision for the internet is broadaspiring to promote universal internet access, protect human rights, ensure fair economic competition, design secure digital infrastructure, promote pluralism and freedom of expression, and guarantee a multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance. While this is an ambitious scope for a three-page nonbinding document, the priorities are admirable and reflect the diverse interests of the signatories. This is especially notable when compared to an early draft leaked in 2021, which was far more focused on U.S. economic interests.

At a glance, it is easy to see why much news coverage framed the agreement in opposition to China and Russia, as some Biden officials have presented the declaration as an alternative to the model of digital authoritarianism. This contextualization also aligns neatly with the mindset of strategic competition toward China, which is prominently held by some members of the Biden administration. However, China and Russia are all but certain to ignore this declaration. The Biden administration knows this and is more likely trying to affect the behavior of wavering democratic nations that have committed questionable, although not outright authoritarian, internet transgressions.

No single nation on the list seems dramatically out of place, yet many of the participating countries cannot boast a flawless record on internet freedoms. Colombias digital freedoms have recently been in decline, and especially concerning are efforts by the Colombian military to expand online surveillance of journalists and politicians. Niger, despite completing its first-ever peaceful and democratic transition of power in 2021, also experienced around 10 days of state-initiated internet blackout. Hungary, apparently the most reluctant signatory in the EU, targeted journalists with Pegasus, a highly invasive spyware system. Israel is guilty of approving the sale of Pegasus not just to Hungary but also to Mexico, where it may have been used in mass surveillance of government critics, and to Saudi Arabia, which infamously used the spyware in its plot to surveil and later murder Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi (Mexico and Saudi Arabia are not signatories). Oh, also, the former president of the United States is predominantly responsible for an online disinformation campaign that has undermined faith in the nations core democratic process.

These are certainly troubling behaviors for democratic nations, yet they are symptoms of an ongoing struggle for democratic preservation, not the presence of more systemic digital authoritarianism as in China or Russia. It is in these cases that the declaration can make a difference at the political margins. This is especially true if the declaration partners hold one anothers feet to the fire. By both privately and publicly criticizing these state behaviors, as well as offering legitimacy to pro-democratic voices that are resisting state overreach, the coalition of signatories can perhaps tilt the scales.

There are signs from the Biden administration that this more modest goal is the projects true ambition. At the declarations White House launch event, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan asserted that it is not about what we are against, its about what we are for. Its about an affirmative vision. Sullivan is contending that the declaration is about the behavior of the signatoriesnot the rest of the world.

Comments from Tim Wu, a White House special assistant co-leading this initiative, also support this interpretation. In a prepared speech to the Internet Governance Forum in December 2021, Wu asked: What should the duties and responsibilities of a nation-state be with respect to the internet? He then went on to list specific practices that democratic states should rise above, including state-condoned disinformation, internet shutdowns, online radicalization, economic concentration and government surveillance. All of these harms can be illustrated, of course, by at least one of the declarations signatories. However, it is clear from Wus speech that the immediate target of the declaration is not China but, rather, improving the behavior of signatory nations and those nations that may realistically aspire to join.

The reason to point this out is not to argue that the declaration is hypocritical but instead to note that it can have impactespecially if it leads to a more self-critical conversation within this group of nations, in which they directly and, if necessary, publicly identify violations of the declarations principles. Of course, without this frank discussion, the critics calling the declaration redundant and distracting will be proved right, especially as no enforcement mechanisms are written into the statement.

The White House is correct to think a renewed effort is worthwhile. According to Freedom House, global internet freedom has declined for 11 consecutive years. Unfortunately, the decline is not isolated to the web, as the global recession of democracy continues unabated. Freedom House writes that nearly 75 percent of the worlds population lived in a country that faced deterioration in 2021. One metric puts the global height of democracy in 2012, suggesting a full decade of decline. The Economist Intelligence Units Democracy Index scored global democracy at its lowest point since the index started in 2006. Another study suggests that the average citizen of the world is experiencing the same level of democracy as in 1990 during the collapse of the Soviet Union.

At best, the expansion and modern shaping of the internet has emerged contemporaneously with this enormous challenge to the democratic world. More likely, it has contributed to it. A meta-analysis of almost 500 research studies found that digital media has led to declining institutional trust, growing polarization and an advantageous environment for populists in established democracies. An ongoing literature review examining the interaction between social media and democracy is pointing in a similar direction. So, not only is there democratic backsliding both on and off the web, but there may also be a self-perpetuating interaction between the two.

This is the dire context to which the Biden administration is responding. Its also clear evidence that the Declaration for the Future of the Internet is not enough, even though the effort is valuable. It still pales in comparison to the comprehensive regulatory systems for online platforms that the European Union is implementing through the Digital Services Act, Digital Markets Act, the AI Act and others. Further, it is not sufficiently backed by an explicitly pro-democratic technology policy agenda, although there are related efforts by the White House to expand high-speed internet access, fund research and development into privacy preserving technologies, and enforce more consumer protections.

Despite its nonbinding nature and lack of enforcement, this declaration is better than none. The Declaration for the Future of the Internet at least shows a marked and renewed interest in fighting for the webs potential for democracycertainly an improvement over the prior two presidential administrations. If the Biden administration and the coalition of signatories are willing to follow through with hard conversations that push back on digital transgressions, then there is progress to be made for the future of the internet.

Original post:
The Declaration for the Future of the Internet Is for Wavering Democracies, Not China and Russia - Lawfare

The Youth Department of the Council of Europe launches the call for participants for the Youth Here: Democracy Now! The Council of Europe Youth Action Week which will take place in Strasbourg between 27 June and 2 July 2022.

The Youth Action Week is the flagship event of the Democracy Here | Democracy Now campaign and of the anniversary of 50 years of the youth sector in the Council of Europe. The event is organised under the patronage of the Irish Presidency of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and in partnership with the City of Strasbourg.

It will bring together activists, civil society, member States and partners of the youth sector to strengthen the youth campaign for revitalising democracy and celebrate the 50th anniversary of the youth sector of the Council of Europe.

Objectives

The week will result in a pledge for action containing proposals and recommendations for action at local, national and international level in the framework of the Democracy Here | Democracy Now youth campaign aiming to revitalise democracy and support the meaningful participation of young people in democratic processes and institutions.

Read more about the Youth Action Week

Apply online

Deadline for applications 19 May 2022, 11 AM CET.

Continue reading here:
Youth Here: Democracy Now! Apply now to take part in the Council of Europe Youth Action Week (Strasbourg, 27 June 2 July 2022, DL 19 May 2022, 11AM...

If you awakened this morning to news that the candidate you wanted didn't win and you failed to vote, then you shouldn't have anything to say.

According to election sources, there were only 48,848 votes cast out of 232,752 eligible voters in Hamilton County. Half of those votes were cast by mail and during early voting.

This alone is an indictment against the eligible voters of Hamilton County, who evidently did not care or think it necessary to vote.

Democracy does work! But it requires the active participation of citizens at the poll.

The casting of one's ballot is the most powerful participation that is constitutionally afforded to eligible citizens. But when there is a failure on the part of citizens to exercise this right, it also renders citizens void of power, as well as the lack of a voice in who serves in leadership.

So, if you are not pleased with the outcome of the election, then you may want to turn your displeasure to the 183,904 eligible, non-voting citizens of Hamilton.

This includes you. If you were among the non-voters.

Now all that can be done is learn the lesson of voter apathy and vow to do better.

But for now, "it is what it is." Therefore, we must pull together and do our part in building and maintaining a viable and harmonious city and county, where citizens can with great pride call home.

Dr. Jean Howard-HillFormer UTC Outstanding Professor of the Year 2006, UTC, Political Science Department

Link:
Democracy And The Will Of The People Must Be Reflected In Voting And Active Participation Of Citizens - The Chattanoogan

Kathmandu: Political instability, rising unemployment, widespread corruption, poor service delivery and a looming economic crisis may have dismayed many people in Nepal. However, there is something to cheer about as well Nepals grassroots democracy has taken root.

On May 13, Nepal will hold its second elections for 753 local governments. The first election of local governments under the new constitution which was promulgated in 2015 and adopted a three-tier system of government was held in 2017. However, Nepal plunged into a deep political crisis after the dissolution of the House of Representatives in December 2020; much before the expiry of the term.

Due to the fragile political situation, there were fears of the derailment of local elections, posing a threat to the newly-established federal structure. Due to pressures from civil society and the media, however, major political parties, irrespective of their differences, agreed to hold elections for local governments on time.

Elections in six metropolitan cities, 11 sub-metropolitans, 276 municipalities and 460 rural municipalities will be held under the first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system.

The ruling alliance partners, the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN) (Maoist Centre), led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal, and the CPN (Unified Socialist), chaired by Madhav Kumar Nepal, were not in favour of delaying the local elections due to their relatively weak organisational structures. Later, the Nepali Congress agreed to forge an electoral alliance, and those parties decided to hold elections on time as well.

The Election Commission also took a firm stance in favour of holding elections before the expiry of the terms of the incumbent leadership. The main opposition, CPN- Unified Marxist-Leninist (UML), also warned against attempts to delay the electoral process.

Also read: Debate: First Past the Post Means India is Only a Namesake Democracy

Local governments in Nepal are empowered by both rights and resources. The constitution grants 22 exclusive political and administrative rights to local governments. Similarly, there is a long list of concurrent powers that the three-tiers of government can implement in coordination with each other. Holding the elections for local governments on time is, then, imperative to strengthen local democracy and governance.

Growing pains

Due to a lack of experience and knowledge, many local bodies failed to perform well in their first term. It was the first time in Nepals political history that a totally new setup was instituted from the grassroots level.

For the first time, local legislatures were allowed to draft the necessary laws for the provision of services. Additionally, the concept of federalism was, itself, new to Nepal and came into practical operation only after the 2017 elections. If elections are held on time, leaders will gradually overcome the challenge and learn how to make this system function effectively. It is widely expected that local government leaders will perform better than they did in their first terms.

Despite these shortfalls, the first elected local governments, under the new constitution, have performed relatively well in terms of providing services to the people over the last five years. People now can get all services at their doorsteps, unlike in the past, when they would need to visit the capital, Kathmandu.

Their work has laid a good foundation for the future and timely polls are needed to keep up the pace of the work. Holding elections on time means creating a robust institution at the local level.

Women in government

These local governments have also begun to bear fruit in that they are contributing to grooming female leaders at the local level. According to a study conducted by Asia Foundation, in the 2017 elections, 91% of second-ranking positions such as those of deputy mayors in municipalities and vice-chairpersons in rural municipalities were won by women. However, men won 98% of the top posts; of mayors and chairpersons.

Similarly, women were elected as members of ward committees, in line with the mandatory legal provisions. Additionally, scores of women from marginalised communities, mainly the Dalit community, came to power in the elections. As per the law, every ward committee should have at least one Dalit member.

This increased representation of women is likely to continue after the second elections, although there are concerns that the number of women could dwindle due to the electoral alliance among five parties.

As per election law, parties must field at least one female candidate if they are contesting both the top two posts of chief and deputy chief. However, this rule does not apply if the parties field a candidate for only one of the top seats. Even though they are in an alliance, political parties can show that they are contesting only one of the top seats and, therefore, take advantage of this loophole in the law.

However, most major political parties have picked female candidates in vital metropolitan cities.

Also read: Will Differences on MCC Grant Break Nepals Ruling Coalition?

For instance, the Nepal Congress has nominated Srijana Singh as its mayoral candidate for Kathmandu Metropolitan City; the CPN (Maoist Centre) has nominated Renu Dahal as a mayoral candidate for the Bharatpur Municipality. Similarly, the main opposition, the CPN-UML, has nominated female candidates for the deputy mayors seat in Kathmandu as well as other places. All these exercises contribute to more and more female representation in Nepal politics.

As women already constitute 33% of the representatives in federal houses, the number of female representatives is increasing, even at the grassroot level.

Female leaders often face the criticism that they can only fight elections because of reservation. However, this is gradually changing as the number of women fighting elections directly against male candidates is increasing across the country. In the future, women will not have to rely on quotas to join politics and, as such, the representation of women at the local level is likely to create a new debate on the reservation policy.

The first five-year term has made women leaders confident that they can perform equally with men. Ahead of the candidate selection process, dozens of women who served as deputy mayors for the last five years openly claimed the top position, stating that they could now take on the leadership of local governments. Now, they can claim the tickets for provincial and federal parliamentary elections as well.

The increase in the number of female representatives has also helped minimise corruption and the provision of effective services to locals. Local governments led by women appear to be paying more attention to health, education, and womens issues. After the 2017 elections, 18 of the 753 local governments were led by women and these local bodies saw fewer complaints of corruption and irregularities.

Since a large volume of funds has started trickling down to local government coffers, timely elections will facilitate development at the grassroots level. Some local governments provide quality health and education facilities at the local level. Similarly, infrastructure development has taken off. Senior citizens, orphans, and the poor and marginalised receive incentives from the local government. Moreover, the school enrolment rate has increased due to the measures taken at the local level.

The May 13 local election is, therefore, vital to strengthen inclusive and participatory local democracy.

Kamal Dev Bhattaraiis a Kathmandu-based journalist and political commentator.

Read the original post:
Timely Local Polls in Nepal Mean the Return of Grassroots Democracy - The Wire

The more Ive gotten to know her, the more Ive come to think that Wang Tzu-Hsuan exemplifies some of the best qualities of the younger Taiwanese Ive met here in Taipei: open-minded, serious but not too serious, spontaneous, and thoughtful. At 33, she is unlike most surgeons in Taiwanwho are typically older, and maleand while many of her medical-school classmates sought more lucrative careers in the United States, she opted to stay, out of a sense of duty. When shes not busy in the operating room or meeting with patients, we catch up over food or drinks and talk about whats happening in the world, which for us in Taiwan, where pandemic rules still bar foreign visitors, feels quite far away.

I was taken aback when Wang told me over dinner at a local Japanese-style izakaya restaurant that shed decided to broaden her skill set from her usual thyroid, liver, pancreatic, and intestinal surgeries to include traumanamely bullet and shrapnel wounds. Gun and bomb violence are almost nonexistent in Taiwan, but having spent her whole life unworried about the possibility of China attacking her homeland, she said she had begun to think about how she could help if the worst happened. Although the threat from China has always been there, she said, it has also always seemed so distant for us.

Not anymore. Seeing the devastation that Russian bombs and missiles have wrought upon once-tranquil Ukrainian cities spurred Wang to approach local volunteer groups to figure out how to prepare a generation of surgeons who have never experienced war for the realities of conflict. The Chinese Communist Party seeks to annex Taiwan, which it claims despite having never ruled it, and eliminate Taiwanese identity. With a densely concentrated population roughly the size of Floridas on a mostly mountainous island that is little bigger than Maryland, any invasion attempt by China would incur substantial civilian casualties.

Wang is not alone, either. Many Taiwanese are looking at Ukraines current reality as something that could befall their homeland. A number of Taiwanese friends and interviewees have told me theyd stay and fight, while others have described family plans to secure citizenship elsewhere, just in case. The former commander of Taiwans military has called for the formation of a territorial defense force to deter Chinas ambitions. The war has intensified political discourse too, and Taiwanese politicians are using it to rationalize their views of China: For President Tsai Ing-wens Democratic Progressive Party, it justifies the past five years of buying weapons from the U.S. while expanding largely unofficial diplomacy with other democracies; for many members of the opposition party Kuomintang, an on-and-off frenemy of the Communists over the past century, heightened concerns over an invasion attempt by Beijing highlight the risks of getting too close to Washington.

Both Taiwan and Ukraine democratized in the 1990s, following years of brutal authoritarian rule. Today these two young democracies, as well as those in Central and Eastern Europewho share similar historiesare most directly affected by Russias and Chinas expansionist pushes. Whereas the threat to democracy posed by the Beijing-Moscow alliance is more ephemeral in older and more established democracies such as the United States, Britain, Germany, France, and Japan, in Ukraine it is manifested in widespread death and destruction. In Taiwan and the European countries of the former Soviet bloc, it is viscerally unsettling.

Indeed, if there is a front line in the emerging global standoff between democracy and autocracy, it lies at the borders of these younger democracies, where peoples and governments are changing their behavior in real ways and making tangible sacrifices to maintain their freedomsfrom a peacetime surgeon in Taiwan preparing to deal with conflict, to countries adjoining Ukraine donating weapons to aid the fight against Russia.

Whether Ukraine and Taiwan get the support they need to remain sovereign is likely to be a defining geopolitical question of this generation, extending beyond regional political dynamics. Countries in both Europe and Asia appear to see this clearly nownote how quickly the Biden administration enlisted Asian allies such as South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and even Singapore to sanction Russia over its invasion of Ukraine. Their willingness to show concern about faraway Ukraine suggests that they think one day they could be looking for similar support from Europe, should China enter into a conflict with one of them.

The revanchist violence that Vladimir Putin has unleashed on Ukrainians has yet to come to Taiwan, but it has jarred the collective consciousness nevertheless. There have been multiple protests outside the de facto Russian embassy in Taipei, a solidarity march through the center of the capital, and a rush to send money and nonmilitary aid to Ukraine. Tsais move to sanction Russia and cut it off from crucial Taiwanese semiconductors is perhaps the most confrontational shes been with any major power. (For his part, Putin declared in a joint statement with President Xi Jinping on February 4 that Russia considers Taiwan an inalienable part of China.)

Just as much as Russias invasion of Ukraine has stoked fears here in Taiwan that a Chinese attack might be more a matter of when than if, the whole-of-society Ukrainian response has also inspired Taiwanese to think that, should Xi make a move, it wouldnt necessarily end in Chinese victory. I think Ukraine has shown us all a lesson that people in their own countries have to be willing to fight for their democracies and freedom, if it really comes down to it, Albert Wu, a historian who relocated back from Paris last year, told me. Their bravery and resistance has been a real inspiration to us all.

Ukrainians I know who live here have made similar observations. I hear from Taiwanese friends saying that Ukraine is currently fighting for Taiwan as well, and that means a lot, Oleksander Shyn, a university student living in Taipei, told me. Because if Ukraine loses, and if the Ukrainian people end up in Putins hands, it might inspire China to do this here. So while most people around the world are wishing us peace, many Taiwanese people are wishing us victory.

The Russian invasion has awoken many of Taiwans leaders and its people from a collective slumber, a less-than-urgent attitude toward the threat from Beijing rooted in decades of a poorer China being ill-equipped to pull off what would be the largest amphibious invasion ever. But Chinas rapid economic development, and consequent naval buildup, is tipping the scales in Beijings favor.

Last month, Taiwans defense minister, Chiu Kuo-cheng, proposed extending military conscription for men from the current four months to one year. In a mid-March survey by the Taiwan Public Opinion Foundation, 75.9 percent of respondents supported the idea. One senior legislator from Tsais ruling party has floated the idea of mandating conscription for Taiwanese women for the first time.

Thinking has been changing at the diplomatic level too, with a growing awareness in Taiwan and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe that the threats they face are part of a global struggle. In recent months, Taipei has seen a flurry of visits from lawmakers from Lithuania, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Estonia, and Latvia, all of whom became democracies in the 1990s after being controlled by Moscow. Alongside those was a visit from Jakub Janda, a Russia expert who arrived here late last year from Prague. The 31-year-old Czech think-tank director and reservists mission: to establish a Taipei office for the European Values Center for Security Policy, founded in 2005 to protect Czech democracy. Now back in Prague, Janda told me that the struggles against Russian expansionism in Europe and Chinese expansionism in Asia have converged. After the initial Russian invasion of Ukrainian territory in 2014, Janda said, his think tanks focus shifted to protecting European democracy from Russia. By 2018, Beijings growing influence in Central Europe led the center to include China in its remit.

Today it is clear, Janda said, that Ukraine and Taiwan are not disparate geopolitical tinderboxes, but rather different fronts of the same battle against a new bloc that occupies eastern Ukraine and Crimea, has taken over and militarized disputed islands in the South China Sea, and subsumed Hong Kongs democracy. Both Russia and China have territorial disputes with Japan. Moscow has put former Soviet states on alert, while also making vague nuclear threats in Europes direction. Meanwhile, Beijing is testing the resolve of India, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia to defend their territory.

To either side of the Atlantic, the repercussions of a successful Russian invasion of Ukraine are obvious: Countries once under Soviet sway would face a greater threat from Putin, who might continue his adventurism to shore up support as the Russian economy suffers from sanctions. Citizens in Western democracies are less aware, however, of the importance of Taiwans continued sovereignty to the current security order in Asia, and beyond.

Geographically, China would control key sea lanes through the South and East China Seas, significantly increasing its ability to exert military pressure across the Western Pacific and political influence around the globe. Technologically, Beijings jurisdiction over the worlds most advanced semiconductor manufacturing facilities would put China in a commanding position to establish dominant military advantages, expand global economic dependencies, and set the standards for humankinds technological future.

Politically, the loss of Taiwan would validate and propel Beijings narratives of the inevitability of American decline and the superiority of Chinas ruthlessly efficient autocratic system over the incoherence and disunity of Western-style liberal democracy, says Ivan Kanapathy, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments who previously served as the National Security Councils deputy senior director for Asia and as a U.S. military attach in Taipei. It would, he told me, represent an epochal strategic shift of global power and influence.

As in Ukraine, the most important factor in Taiwans survival is the willingness of its people to defend its hard-earned democracy. Wang, the surgeon, told me that shes already shifted from wanting to avoid getting involved in politics to feeling a sense of responsibility for doing so, and hopes that other Taiwanese do too.

I want to be more brave, and am more willing to speak up about my feelings for my country, she said. No matter what happens, I will choose to stand up for Taiwan.

See more here:
The Lessons Taiwan Is Learning From Ukraine - The Atlantic