November 10 & 11, 1997

FUNDESCO seminar on
"Freedom and control in the Internet"
-----

The risks of talking about freedom versus protection in the already well known electronic information and communications network called Internet, are to be found in that one might choose a hasty regulation, lacking the necessary perspective and, consequently, the indispensable experience.

For this reason, in connection with a subject so delicate, complex and pioneering as the one studied at this seminar on "Freedom and control in the Internet", I would like to give a few reflections which I hope may serve to provoke the necessary contrast of views that should be the outcome of this round-table together with the other speakers.

I would like to outline just five matters:

  1. The Internet "boom" and its consequences.
  2. The appearance of controversial and polemic subjects in politics, culture and economy.
  3. The importance of investigating the new freedoms that are beginning to be seen in the Internet.
  4. An approach to managing all these subjects.
  5. An attempt to reach a conclusion:
    1. Freedom versus control.
    2. Control versus chaos.
    3. Encryption of polemic contents?

1. The Internet "boom" and its consequences.

In February and April of this year two reputable publications, "Time Magazine" ("Welcome to the Wired World") and "Le Monde Diplomatique" ("Apocalyse Médias"), already made an important forecast stating that the Internet in two and a half years from now, that is at the turn of the millennium, would have 700 or 1.000 million users, and, as far as I understand, some very discrete and possibly erroneous offers of electronic trade, amounting to about 100.000 pages offering a wide variety of services.

Logically, facing such an explosive growth, an accelerating phenomenon possibly without precedent in the history of mankind, the result of this is about to become the rapid and simultaneous appearance of a large number of issues and problems within a specific field (electronic communications) to a degree hitherto unknown in the trajectory of our planet.

This unexpected prediction of the great exponential growth in the Internet lies precisely in the basis of the subject of this seminar.

Should the Internet be controlled? And if so, how to do it?

I take the liberty of adding, in connection with the theme of this seminar, the question of whether the organs usually employed to control any subject, either public, private or a combination of both, are adequate for such a unique and spectacular case as the unstoppable and enormous growth of the Internet.

Quite simply, it is possible that the nation-state as a concept, its ways and means of taking action, and its traditional focus based on hierarchical societies is facing the novelty of some extremely decentralized electronic networks that, as Marshall McLuhan already put it, bring about a contradictory effect, to globalize the individual before the Internet and decentralize as much as possible his vision of reality, moving him to take root even more in his local and regional surroundings.

2. The appearance of controversial and polemic subjects in politics, culture and economy.

Ever since the Internet was created as a key element of the US Defence to face the fear of nuclear holocaust, followed by its cultural transformation through the National Science Foundation, until, when the Berlin Wall came down, its use and applications were completely popularized, there have been problems of a political kind, new cultural requirements appear, and innovative economic structures are being established.

You may ponder the validity of the units on which the nation-state is based (territory, foreign affairs, money and defence) by observing the present reality of the EU, the NAFTA, MERCOSUR, APEC or ASEAN, which breaks many geographical bases (Schengen) as well as the foreign policy of traditional nationalism. You only have to compare the remaining concept of money in the nation-state with the debate about the European Monetary Union and the Euro before its coming into force. Finally, the defence unit only needs a brief reflection on NATO and the OSCE in order to see its transnational dimensions.

Here we have, thus, a set of themes that can be debated extensively throughout this seminar and, in particular, at this round-table.

Are the concept and the powers of the nation-state still valid for and capable of controlling the Internet?

3. The importance of investigating the "new freedoms" that are beginning to be seen in the Internet.

The new freedoms that we are vaguely beginning not only to see but also to live by, are perhaps the gist of what we should discuss thoroughly to get the best result from this seminar.

The concept of privacy versus the ever valid and old human rights, the universal freedom of publication and the total freedom of expression on the Internet versus the traditional means employed by the publishers would only be an example.

The existence of this, apparently, new freedom can only be upheld if it is intelligent, attractive and consistently put forward. This is something we sense more and more, but which we do not yet know how to handle.

The big polemic issues on the Internet, such as racism, totalitarism, pornography, the existence of certain dubious copyrights or the propagation of fundamentalist ideas and movements, have already become a reality stemming from a type of freedom that was absolutely unknown till now, to the extent that some people ask themselves if the concept of freedom should not be given another equally noble and dignified name in the case of the Internet.

4. An approach to managing all these subjects.

How to do this? How to manage the capacity of a person becoming without limits his own editor, without restrictions his own creator and without frontiers his own broadcaster? This perhaps is the great philosophical question to which we, the humanists and technologues, must dedicate much of our beginning knowledge about the Internet, many of our practices as well as a great capacity for creativity and a tolerant opening position towards the new society that has already almost transformed those values of ours with which the first literate and agricultural revolution of mankind began.

I hope that you understand that I do not have here any specific answers to this effect. That I ask and request you to reflect upon this matter, to elaborate on it and to discuss it, which to me would be the biggest gratification of this seminar.

There are great dangers in the Internet. There are great expectations. There are great efforts being made to find solutions that further the progress of people and the understanding of the transcendent transformation that the binomial expression of "global-local" has already represented for some years in our everyday lives.

5. An attempt to reach a conclusion:

A) Freedom versus control. This I do not at all consider a solution, as technologically it is simply not feasible and even almost metaphysically impossible, and also because it would mean a halt in a curve rising towards a progressive and perhaps utopian horizon in the evolution of our planet. But you must not forget that there has never been, I repeat, there has never been a single basic success in the progress of our society that has not, fortunately, arisen from the perception of a certain Utopia.

B) Freedom versus chaos. Freedom versus chaos does not need any further explanation either. Today one only has to surf on the Internet for a few minutes to understand that it is like watching the horizon of the ocean. What lies further ahead is immense, endless and, from the beach, there does not seem to be any shores on the other side. However, there are indeed shores, cliffs and beaches, and in the present chaos in the Internet one will find the beaches at the other side when 1) the technologies for selecting themes appear, 2) the big theoretical and philosophical questions are sorted out, and 3) practical ways are found in which the surfer - what an image! - can reach a good harbour or at least the harbour that he wants.

C) Encryption of polemic contents? As bad as it is when you are talking secretly in a public area, the presence, development and establishment of important encryption systems in the Internet can also be considered, at least, impolite.

But undoubtedly, the use of encryption is necessary in the Internet and especially in many of its business activities, to the extent that there are codes containing dozens of digits. The already widespread electronic commerce will not become sufficiently developed until the sophisticated encryption technologies that the USA now possesses come into general circulation.

But in spite of this I do not believe either that the secret communication between two points, which, I repeat, is necessary in many cases, is the answer to the big question that the Internet poses and will continue to pose for some time to come concerning freedom versus the protection or the encryption of some of its contents and even more the possible punishment of those who infringe the so-called controlling policy.

Finally, it would be useful to reflect upon how man has again discovered new worlds in physics and has to use the meta-physics in order to manage the innovative, pioneering and progressive results of his own intellectual and creative capacity.

Copenhagen, October 24, 1997
J.L. Pardos
Ambassador of Spain to Denmark.