Early in 2006, the international community will revisit a long-simmering issue that was slated for discussion, and perhaps even a solution, in 2005, but was neither discussed nor solved.

So important was the issue of political governance of the Internet that it became the focal point of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), a forum with the laudable goal of seeking ways to bring the benefits of the Internet to developing countries.

The world press headed for Tunis, Tunisia, ready for a showdown between the United States, which much of the rest of the world believes to have far too much control of the Internet, and the rest of the world.

The showdown did not materialize. The political and business communities gathered in Tunis were taken aback by the strength of the U.S. resolve to retain the status quo. A temporary ceasefire was called in the heated war for political control of the Internet, and an Internet Governance Forum (IGF) was formed (see U.S. Chides Summit Host).

“The delegates have found a diplomatic way to leave this issue for a future fight,” said Michael Geist, a professor at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. “The creation of the governance forum sounds much like WSIS itself: multilateral, multi-stakeholder, nonbinding, U.N.-created, and able to address a wide range of Internet and technology policy issues.”

Mandate, But No Power

The IGF has a very broad mandate, but no real power to do anything except meet in Greece in the first quarter of 2006. In fact it says just that in its mandate.

“The IGF would have no oversight function and would not replace existing arrangements, mechanisms, institutions, or organizations, but would involve them and take advantage of their expertise,” said the mandate. “It would be constituted as a neutral, non-duplicative and nonbinding process. It would have no involvement in day-to-day or technical operations of the Internet.”

U.S. Rep Rick Boucher, one of the leaders in Congress on technology matters, summed up the role of the IGF.

“Any change in Internet management was put aside in favor of the creation of an international forum where other kinds of Internet-related issues can be discussed, perhaps including ways to bring the Internet to more of the world’s population and to address collectively problems common to all such as spam or Internet viruses,” he said.

The issue of Internet governance would not go away. The IGF may not possess the mandate, or the will, to challenge the U.S. for control of the core computers that form the nerve center of the Internet, but the issue will perhaps outlive the IGF.

“At a minimum, the governance forum certainly looks like the obvious method for continuing the work that WSIS started,” said Mr. Geist. “Notwithstanding the creation of a review clause after five years, there is every reason to think that the governance forum will provide the venue for continuing dialogue on possible Internet governance reform.”