guardian.co.uk,
Nick Hopkins, Tuesday 1 November 2011
 |
| William Hague, the foreign secretary, said nothing would be more self-defeating than the heavy hand of state control on the internet. Photograph: Reuters |
The UK has
issued a direct challenge to China and Russia over regulation of the internet,
with William Hague insisting that cyberspace must not be "stifled by
government control or censorship".
In a
strongly worded opening address to an international conference hosted in
London, the foreign secretary told delegates that the internet "must
remain open and not become ghettoised" – rebuffing the notion that new
international treaties were needed to police online activity.
"Nothing
would be more fatal or self-defeating than the heavy hand of state control on
the internet, which only thrives because of the talent of individuals and of
industry within an open market for ideas and innovation," he said.
Hague told
delegates that cyberspace should not be "subject to separate rules and
processes in different regions set by isolated national services, with
state-imposed barriers to trade, commerce and the free flow of information and
ideas".
This, he
said, would be deeply counter-productive. Both China and Russia have pushed for
new international treaties governing cyberspace. China has also been heavily
criticised for censoring the internet by blocking news or comment that it deems
damaging.
This
summer, David Cameron appeared to blame social media for the spread of the
London riots, raising the prospect that ministers may try to shut down sites
such as Twitter during times of unrest.
Hague,
though, said that it was his "passionate conviction that all human rights
should carry full force online".
He added:
"Not just the right to privacy, but the right to freedom of expression.
Human rights are universal. Cultural differences are not an excuse to water
down human rights … We reject the view that government suppression of the
internet, phone networks and social media at times of unrest is
acceptable."
The London
Conference on Cyberspace was the brainchild of Hague, and delegates from more
than 60 countries, as well as pioneers of the internet, such as the founder of
Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales, and the president of Facebook, Joanna Shields, among
the speakers.
Cybercrime,
the spread of damaging malware, and the use of cyber warfare by states have
pushed questions about the rules governing the internet to the fore.
The
conference is a first attempt to get all interested parties around the table to
discuss potential ways forward, though it is not expected that anything binding
will emerge during, or in the immediate aftermath, of the two-day meeting.
In his
speech, Hague acknowledged that "many of the countries and representatives
here will have very different views. But the reasons to co-operate are far more
compelling than the issues that divide us".
He linked
global prosperity to the expansion of the internet but warned of its dangers
too.
Hague said
online crime was "growing exponentially" and claimed that more than
6m unique types of new malware were detected by industry in the first three
months of this year alone.
This
activity was making it harder to protect people, and countries with weak cyber
defences also made themselves vulnerable to state-sponsored attacks.
But Hague
said the answer to these issues did not lie in repression.
He said
Britain will "always be on the side of people aspiring for political and
economic freedom, in the Middle East and around the world. In the place of
today's cyber free-for-all, we need rules of the road".
Without
them, a darker scenario could well prevail, he said.
Individuals,
companies and states would all suffer.
Concluding
the speech, he set out the varied problems the world was facing.
"Rising
costs to business from cyber crime … companies being held to ransom by
hacktivists, and the theft of intellectual property sapping prosperity and
innovation.
"For
individuals, a heightened risk of exposure to crime as efforts to clamp down on
crimes such as child pornography in one part of the world are rendered
ineffective by illegal practices on networks in other countries. Disruption in
service due to state intrusion or crude censorship in some parts of the world,
the general uncertainty, fear and loss of confidence in a compromised
cyberspace.
"And
for governments, threats to critical infrastructure, the loss of tax revenue or
the defrauding of government services, the theft of confidential national
information and vulnerability to attacks in cyberspace. If these scenarios come
to pass, they will undermine the wider benefits of our networked world."
Related Articles:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.