ICANN’s future is in its hands

When President Clinton launched the process that created ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) seventeen years ago, his stated goal was to privatize its function and, thereby, “increase competition in, and promote international participation in the domain name system.”  Although ICANN was formed and housed by the U.S. Commerce Department at the outset, the aim from the start was ICANN’s emergence as a fully independent entity. 

A year ago the Obama administration announced its intent to sever ICANN’s last link to the U.S. government and, with it, the Commerce Department’s oversight.   Now, standing on the cusp of that independence, ICANN’s leadership must demonstrate how the organization will remain accountable – to the broad Internet community, including end-users, business, civil society, governments, and, most importantly, to the goals that Clinton set at the outset.  

{mosads}That, unfortunately, seems to be the sticking point.  While ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé has clamored to remove the last vestiges of U.S. oversight, including the function of allocating IP addresses, he has failed to persuade the Commerce Department that ICANN will be run on a truly transparent basis.   It is hard to envision how ICANN can be faithful to its obligation to be accountable to the Internet community about its operation and interactions in the absence of that transparency. 

Having worked at the Commerce Department, I understand the important role that ICANN plays in ensuring the Internet’s technical future.   That experience, however, also offers some perspective on ICANN’s unwillingness to provide the assurances needed to ensure accountability.  It has proved a continuing problem.  

ICANN rejects the notion that any entity should have oversight over its management of the Internet’s technical function. When, for example, regional groups that handle IP address allocation suggested they could provide oversight over how ICANN does the job, ICANN indicated it would “reject any proposed agreement in which ICANN is not deemed the sole source prime contractor for (IP address) functions in perpetuity.”

While ICANN has tried to chalk that up to a misunderstanding, it is no surprise that many in the Internet community find it difficult to credit ICANN’s assurances of openness to new accountability measures and transition proposals being developed by the community.  

While technical in nature, the question of ICANN’s role and its governance lies at the heart of how the Internet will be governed. Governments, businesses, organizations, and users all have a stake in the future of the Internet.  Responding to the needs and interests of a diverse constituency will undoubtedly prove a challenge, but the  Internets future depends on ICANN’s ability to meet that challenge.  That requires a willingness on the part of ICANN’s leadership to understand that its success is inextricably linked to its ability to meet that challenge.  It requires an ICANN that is responsive and accountable to all of those stakeholders, rather than the interests of the corporation alone.  

The invisible side of the Internet – DNS, IP addresses and the routing that connects users to addresses – is unseen but fundamental to how our digital world works. If the DNS were to break down, it would cripple the Internet and therefore the global economy. 

Up until now, DNS stewardship has been in the hands of those who believe in a free and open Internet.  For that reason, the Internet has become a central factor driving growth in the global economy, while at the same time promoting the diffusion of technology and social inclusion that are central to economic development and rising living standards around the world.  

It would be disastrous for the future of the Internet if the technical functions were taken over by those countries or inter-governmental groups that don’t believe in open markets or free expression of ideas on the Internet.  The United States and U.S. firms, large and small, have a huge stake in ensuring that does not happen.  But, this is not simply a problem from a U.S. perspective. 

One way to understand that is from the perspective of a young app developer in Nairobi, Kenya, who produces a large share of his family’s income due to his access to the coding tools and markets that the Internet provides.  In real and tangible ways, the Internet allows that young app developed to be the author of his own future.  Anything that undercuts the openness and freedom of expression and association that the Internet allows diminishes that opportunity. 

That is why this decision about ICANN’s future is important. If ICANN wants to finally be untethered from the U.S. government, the ball is really in its court to demonstrate willingness to be held accountable to the Internet community. The community has just published draft proposals to ensure ICANN is accountable moving forward; all that stands in the way to final independence is ICANN agreeing and implementing the final version of those proposals. 

Think of it this way: When your son or daughter is ready to drive you might hand them the keys  — but you hold on to the title, or ownership papers for the car.  You make clear that the opportunity to drive and the freedom that comes with it also comes with a responsibility to others.  

ICANN has had the keys to the Internet for 18 years old and has matured significantly.  But it must demonstrate it understands accountability before the community hands ICANN the title to the Internet.

Aldonas served from 2001-2005 as Commerce Department’s under secretary for international trade, He is principal managing director of Split Rock International, a Washington, D.C.–based consulting and investment advisory firm, and a senior adviser at CSIS.