An internet tug-of-war
What else would be seen as a tool for violence in this age than information
The internet is many things. It is our window to the world. It is our all-in-one entertainment hub. It is, simultaneously, our best friend and our worst tormentor. It is also a new frontier for a different kind of war.
Those who study human history sometimes like to divide it neatly into ages, defined among other things by certain technologies or a technological superstructure. For the past couple of decades, we have been living in what can safely be described as the Information Age. And what else would be seen as a tool for violence in this age than information.
Take a recent Russia-led drive to create a new convention on cybercrime, which has now found approval from the United Nations. One would think it would be innocuous enough. After all what is wrong with preventing any crime, cyber or otherwise.
But a vague articulation of what exactly would be ‘criminal’ use of information and communication technologies and its backing by a who’s who of regimes whose human rights record is not that spotless has prompted fears among activists that such a convention would give some international cover to any government that wants to muzzle dissent.
At the same time, the insistence of the attempt’s most vocal critic, the United States, hints at how cynical the intersection of geopolitics and internet freedoms has become. The alternative Washington wants to press ahead with is to expand the Budapest Convention, which focuses on international cooperation to curb fraud, child pornography and copyright violations.
While no sane and morally sensible individual would have any objection to the former two, some may feel the latter only protects a select elite at the expense of the masses. And while once many would have scoffed at Russia’s argument that giving investigators access to computer data across borders violates national sovereignty, can we really do so in a post-Snowden revelations landscape.
As various world powers jostle for control over the web, the only losers it seems are average users and their freedom.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 30th, 2019.
Those who study human history sometimes like to divide it neatly into ages, defined among other things by certain technologies or a technological superstructure. For the past couple of decades, we have been living in what can safely be described as the Information Age. And what else would be seen as a tool for violence in this age than information.
Take a recent Russia-led drive to create a new convention on cybercrime, which has now found approval from the United Nations. One would think it would be innocuous enough. After all what is wrong with preventing any crime, cyber or otherwise.
But a vague articulation of what exactly would be ‘criminal’ use of information and communication technologies and its backing by a who’s who of regimes whose human rights record is not that spotless has prompted fears among activists that such a convention would give some international cover to any government that wants to muzzle dissent.
At the same time, the insistence of the attempt’s most vocal critic, the United States, hints at how cynical the intersection of geopolitics and internet freedoms has become. The alternative Washington wants to press ahead with is to expand the Budapest Convention, which focuses on international cooperation to curb fraud, child pornography and copyright violations.
While no sane and morally sensible individual would have any objection to the former two, some may feel the latter only protects a select elite at the expense of the masses. And while once many would have scoffed at Russia’s argument that giving investigators access to computer data across borders violates national sovereignty, can we really do so in a post-Snowden revelations landscape.
As various world powers jostle for control over the web, the only losers it seems are average users and their freedom.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 30th, 2019.