ºÝºÝߣ

ºÝºÝߣShare a Scribd company logo

China¡¯s Internet Security _Dichotomy of National Security and Human Rights in Relations to the US

?Download as PPTX, PDF?
?
Emily V?
Emily V?

This document discusses China's approach to internet security and the tension with human rights and relations with the United States. China tightly controls internet access and censors information deemed threatening to national security. This has led to censorship of political dissent and restrictions on human rights. Other Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam are adopting similar policies. While China views this as protecting national security, others see it as infringing on freedom of expression. The United States promotes internet freedom but has faced hypocrisy claims due to NSA surveillance practices. Overall, the document examines the dichotomy between national security and human rights in China's internet policies and their geopolitical implications.

1 of 23
CHINA¡¯S INTERNET SECURITY: DICHOTOMY OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN RELATIONS TO THE UNITED STATES By Emily Vo
China¡¯s Internet Security _Dichotomy of National Security and Human Rights in Relations to the US
National Security ? The definition of national security refers to the protection and defense of a country both domestically and internationally. National security in modernity moves beyond the physical protection of land but has to be examined on a broader scope with the use of the Internet.
Research ? Internet security is a key role in the discourse of human rights, freedom of speech, and privacy against the backdrop of protecting national security. Growing countries such as Vietnam and other Southeastern Asian countries is following on a similar path as The People¡¯s Republic of China (PRC, ¡°China¡±) in regards to their Internet policies and restrictions. The focus on what I¡¯m researching is that national security comes into conflict with the global agenda for Internet freedom. ? So what exactly is the global agenda for the Internet? ? The key priority for the Internet now is to ensure that both the legislative and public spheres understand the advantages and disadvantages of the Internet. Legislators has to be able dispersed the skeptical distrust of the public to the government¡¯s role in monitoring the Internet. The public should have to access to examples in the real world of Internet security for them to engage in discussion. ? It is essential to consider alternative models of Internet governance to fully appreciate how the Internet might evolve in the future -Global Agenda Council on the Future of the Internet 2013 (http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GAC12/IssueBrief/IB_FutureInternet.pdf)
Aspects of Internet Security ? ¡°We often talk about security with respect to computers and computer networks as though it were a clearly defined, monolithic concept. It¡¯s not; security has several aspects, and, in differing contexts¡­or some varying combination.¡± ¨CBarry Leiba ? Availability: Is the system available when it¡¯s needed? ? Authentication: Who am I, and how can I prove it? ? Authorization: What am I allowed to do? ? Access Control: What data am I allowed to access, change, create, delete? ? Confidentiality: Are communications and data safe from unauthorized viewing? ? Integrity: Are communications and data safe from unauthorized modification?
Research Objectives and Questions ? Since the Internet is borderless, is it necessary to create boundaries to determine if such cyber usage is a threat to national security? International boundaries and regulations? ? Following suit of China, the lockdown on the Internet is seen as national security and promoting national unity, but is it another infringement on human rights in Vietnam? ? Both countries recent aggressions toward activists, bloggers, and dissidents online are creating a dialogue about the sensitivity of the cyber communication and rights. ? Is the heavy monitoring of the Internet and suppression of freedom of expression going to deter the growing relations between Vietnam and China with the United States? ? What about its¡¯ neighboring ASEAN community? Is their policy on non-interference going to differ from the interaction between them and non-ASEAN countries significantly from the United States? ? Will allowing PRC¡¯s government to control Internet security and locking down freedom of speech of its¡¯ citizens going to create a similar domino effect to other neighboring countries with similar regimes? ? Is this going to strain economic tides between PRC and the US? Is it different to China¡¯s economic relations with Asian countries?
OpenNet Initiative: Global Internet Filterning Map
China ? With over 1.3 billion citizens, China has one of the biggest populations for Internet users. Yet, their citizen has a limited amount of access of information and opinions if it is seen as detrimental to the country¡¯s security and future. ? The Internet was first allowed to the public in 1996, with 20 million users in 2001, and to over 200 million users in 2008. While Chinese citizens has access to Internet technology such as video websites, social networking, email, etc. it is still immensely limited in regards to any providers outside of China. Most are government owned. ? Chin¡¯s reason for Internet controls is about limiting pornography, gambling, and other damaging practices, but these matters is easier to monitor than online information from political groups. The Communist Party considers any information or discussions about the government and human rights in China to be threatening its domestic legitimacy.
? China¡¯s Goal Regarding the Internet: ? In 2009, the State Council Office issued its first ¡°National Human Rights Action Plan of China.¡± The goal being that the ¡°state will take effective measures to develop the press and publications industry and ensure that all channels are unblocked to guarantee citizens¡¯ rights to be heard.¡± ? Information Office of the State Council of the People¡¯s Republic of China, National Human Rights Action Plan of China (2009 ¨C 2010), 2009, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-04/13/content_11177126.htm .
China¡¯s Internet Security _Dichotomy of National Security and Human Rights in Relations to the US
Human Rights ? Blogging about political issues and criticizing the government in China has resulted in major cases regarding dissidents in and out of the country has risen in the last few years. ? Blogging about the government is also prohibited in the country, the Chinese ¡°government has one of the most rigorous Internet censorship systems, which relies heavily upon cooperation between the government and private Internet companies¡± (Lum, Figliola, and Weed 2012: 1). ? Hu Jia, a well- known human rights activist and winner of the European Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, was sentenced to three and a half years in prison in April 2008. ? Huang Qi, an outspoken human rights activist, was detained in July 2008 on charges of ¡°illegal possession of state secrets¡± for posting criticism of Sichuan earthquake relief efforts on his website. ? Liu Jin, a former university librarian, in November 2008 was sentenced to three years in prison in Shanghai on charges of ¡°using a heretical organization to undermine implementation of the law¡± after she downloaded information about the Falun Gong from the internet and passed it to others. ? Liu Xiaobo, Nobel Peach Prize winner in 2010, vocal publication for a political change in China earned him an eleven-year sentenced in jail
Google ? Google Inc. (¡°Google¡±), an American (MNC) is a major search engine that has pulled its services from China in 2010. This action from Google elicited responses from both the United States and Chinese government that showed the two countries contrasting ideologies on Internet security (Tsai 2011: 401). ? This demand for Internet freedom is further exemplified by the previous United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton¡¯s speech on the implementation of the United States foreign policy on global Internet freedom (Welch 2011: 65). Regarding this policy Clinton has stated the United States¡¯ position as ¡°we stand for a single Internet where all humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas and we recognize that the world¡¯s information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it¡± (Clinton 2010). ? Predictably, many countries such as China and the Middle East (i.e. Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and Syria) have taken to criticize that the Internet freedom policy as a major opposition to their countries¡¯ sovereignty (Welch 2011: 67).
Relations to the US ? According to Yannakogeorgos (2012: 108), the emergence of China¡¯s economic power plays a heavy role in the relationship between the country with the US. Primarily, due to the US¡¯s reliance on China as a manufacture for many of its¡¯ technological components. Many US policymakers have been weary with the US¡¯s problematic call for Internet freedom but its inability to regulate China¡¯s censorship because ¡°strategic goods rely on governments to adopt trade policies¡­but states do place restrictions on what may be exported¡± (2012: 110).
NSA
? Some big stakeholders for the Internet, including the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), and Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has heavily criticized the US for the NSA scandal, condemning pervasive government surveillance and calling for an international governance for the Internet and its framework. These institutions are mainly in the US. Source: ICANN
Some Debates to Consider ? 1. While the US is promoting ¡°Internet Freedom¡± and calling out China as violating human rights and privacy, is the US being a hypocritical ¡°big brother¡± as well? ? Recently, there has been a call for the UN to have a larger influence on the control and regulation of the Internet; of course, the US was strongly against it. But, post NSA admissions have diminish the US¡¯s role as protector of the Internet. ? Debatable? The UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon¡¯s view on free speech is that ¡°freedom of expression should be and must be guaranteed and protected, when they are used for common justice, common purpose¡± (2012). ? 2. China¡¯s Internet ID Policy ? China¡¯s legislature has pass a new policy that now requires users to use their real names to register for Internet access. The discourse on this is weather or not this will intimidate bloggers and activist to cease or lessen their opinions on the government and society. Sina Weibo, a major blogging website, mainly used by citizens to blow whistle on corrupt officials has been asking users to fill out their real names at the beginning of this year.
Relations with Southeast Asia ? China¡¯s internet suppression has diffuse into SEA. ? Park (2009) investigates Internet security in Asia through the international regime theory (IRT). Through this theory, an effective policy in a particular area of concern occurs through a ¡°set of principles or norms¡± and regime ¡°indicates¡­cognitive frameworks or norms that are tacitly accepted as a global policy agenda¡± (Park 2009: 398). Through this concept, the 2003 Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting aim was to create Internet security on a transnational level with a global policy between developed, developing, and underdeveloped countries (2009: 399).
"Many of these Southeast Asian countries -- and we're talking about the likes of Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia -- are increasingly copying some of China's techniques and methods to suppress online freedoms and increasingly into social media spaces, as well.¡± - Shawn Crispin, Southeast Asia representative for the Committee to Protect Journalists
? According to Steve Herman from Voice of America, countries such as Vietnam and Thailand are beginning to implement new regulations regarding the Internet. Thailand has more than 15 million FB users, which is more than 1/5 of the population. Vietnam has more than of 40% its pop. using the Internet (about 12 million on FB). ? Thailand: Although theoretically a democracy, the government can ¡°crack down¡± on FB users that maybe ¡°like¡± any references or articles that criticizes the Thai monarchy. Since Thailand practice l¨¨se-majest¨¦, and anyone can file a charge against anyone else in Thailand, the Internet is precarious a platform for opinions as in conjunction with this law it can be an oppressive tool of political repression. ? Vietnam: Also just passed a new law, Decree 72, that forbids people from posting news articles on social media and blogs. Vietnam¡¯s new law requires any posts on social media to be related only to personal information. There is little doubt that the Vietnamese authorities will enforce the new laws on social media; over the past four years, Vietnam already has been engaged in one of the harshest crackdowns in the world on bloggers posting items on politics, land grabbing, or other sensitive issues. Source: Joshua Kurlantzick, The Diplomat
Limitations of the Study ? Within this analysis there are certain limitations due to the fact that the topic is an ongoing debate and has only been analyze through literature in the last decade or so. This is also limited in its scope considering that the major source of information is coming from secondary sources.
China¡¯s Internet Security _Dichotomy of National Security and Human Rights in Relations to the US
Bibliography ? Lum, T., Figliola, P.M., & Weed, M.C. 2012. ¡®China, Internet Freedom, and U.S. Policy¡¯, Congressional Research Services, Available: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42601.pdf (Date of access 11 September 2013) ? Park, Y.J. 2009. ¡®Regime Formation and Consequence: the Case of Internet Security in the East-Asia Four Tigers¡¯, Government Information Quarterly, 26, pp. 398-406. ? Tsai, K. 2011. ¡®How to Create International Law: the Case of Internet Freedom in China¡¯, Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 21(401), pp. 401-430. ? Verton, Dan. 2001. National Security Threatened by Internet, Studies Say. Computerworld. 05 January. 7.
? Welch, C. 2011. ¡®Global Internet Freedom Policy: Evolution, Action, and Reaction¡¯, Internet Computing, IEEE, 15(6), pp. 65-69. ? Wilhelm, A. 2013. ¡®ICANN, W3C Call for End of US Internet Ascendancy Following NSA Revelations. [ONLINE] Available: http:// techcrunch.com/2013/10/11/icann-w3c-call-for-end-of-us-internet- ascendancy-following-nsa-revelations/ (Accessed 02 October 2013). ? Yang, K.C.C. 2007. ¡®A Comparative Study of Internet Regulatory Policies in the Greater China Region: Emerging Regulatory Models and Issues in China, Hong-Kong SAR, and Taiwan¡¯, Telematics and Informatics, 24, pp. 30-40. ? Yannakogeorgos, P.A. 2012. ¡®Internet Governance and National Security¡¯, Strategic Studies Quarterly, 6(3), pp. 102-125.

More Related Content

China¡¯s Internet Security _Dichotomy of National Security and Human Rights in Relations to the US

  • 1. CHINA¡¯S INTERNET SECURITY: DICHOTOMY OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN RELATIONS TO THE UNITED STATES By Emily Vo
  • 3. National Security ? The definition of national security refers to the protection and defense of a country both domestically and internationally. National security in modernity moves beyond the physical protection of land but has to be examined on a broader scope with the use of the Internet.
  • 4. Research ? Internet security is a key role in the discourse of human rights, freedom of speech, and privacy against the backdrop of protecting national security. Growing countries such as Vietnam and other Southeastern Asian countries is following on a similar path as The People¡¯s Republic of China (PRC, ¡°China¡±) in regards to their Internet policies and restrictions. The focus on what I¡¯m researching is that national security comes into conflict with the global agenda for Internet freedom. ? So what exactly is the global agenda for the Internet? ? The key priority for the Internet now is to ensure that both the legislative and public spheres understand the advantages and disadvantages of the Internet. Legislators has to be able dispersed the skeptical distrust of the public to the government¡¯s role in monitoring the Internet. The public should have to access to examples in the real world of Internet security for them to engage in discussion. ? It is essential to consider alternative models of Internet governance to fully appreciate how the Internet might evolve in the future -Global Agenda Council on the Future of the Internet 2013 (http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GAC12/IssueBrief/IB_FutureInternet.pdf)
  • 5. Aspects of Internet Security ? ¡°We often talk about security with respect to computers and computer networks as though it were a clearly defined, monolithic concept. It¡¯s not; security has several aspects, and, in differing contexts¡­or some varying combination.¡± ¨CBarry Leiba ? Availability: Is the system available when it¡¯s needed? ? Authentication: Who am I, and how can I prove it? ? Authorization: What am I allowed to do? ? Access Control: What data am I allowed to access, change, create, delete? ? Confidentiality: Are communications and data safe from unauthorized viewing? ? Integrity: Are communications and data safe from unauthorized modification?
  • 6. Research Objectives and Questions ? Since the Internet is borderless, is it necessary to create boundaries to determine if such cyber usage is a threat to national security? International boundaries and regulations? ? Following suit of China, the lockdown on the Internet is seen as national security and promoting national unity, but is it another infringement on human rights in Vietnam? ? Both countries recent aggressions toward activists, bloggers, and dissidents online are creating a dialogue about the sensitivity of the cyber communication and rights. ? Is the heavy monitoring of the Internet and suppression of freedom of expression going to deter the growing relations between Vietnam and China with the United States? ? What about its¡¯ neighboring ASEAN community? Is their policy on non-interference going to differ from the interaction between them and non-ASEAN countries significantly from the United States? ? Will allowing PRC¡¯s government to control Internet security and locking down freedom of speech of its¡¯ citizens going to create a similar domino effect to other neighboring countries with similar regimes? ? Is this going to strain economic tides between PRC and the US? Is it different to China¡¯s economic relations with Asian countries?
  • 7. OpenNet Initiative: Global Internet Filterning Map
  • 8. China ? With over 1.3 billion citizens, China has one of the biggest populations for Internet users. Yet, their citizen has a limited amount of access of information and opinions if it is seen as detrimental to the country¡¯s security and future. ? The Internet was first allowed to the public in 1996, with 20 million users in 2001, and to over 200 million users in 2008. While Chinese citizens has access to Internet technology such as video websites, social networking, email, etc. it is still immensely limited in regards to any providers outside of China. Most are government owned. ? Chin¡¯s reason for Internet controls is about limiting pornography, gambling, and other damaging practices, but these matters is easier to monitor than online information from political groups. The Communist Party considers any information or discussions about the government and human rights in China to be threatening its domestic legitimacy.
  • 9. ? China¡¯s Goal Regarding the Internet: ? In 2009, the State Council Office issued its first ¡°National Human Rights Action Plan of China.¡± The goal being that the ¡°state will take effective measures to develop the press and publications industry and ensure that all channels are unblocked to guarantee citizens¡¯ rights to be heard.¡± ? Information Office of the State Council of the People¡¯s Republic of China, National Human Rights Action Plan of China (2009 ¨C 2010), 2009, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-04/13/content_11177126.htm .
  • 11. Human Rights ? Blogging about political issues and criticizing the government in China has resulted in major cases regarding dissidents in and out of the country has risen in the last few years. ? Blogging about the government is also prohibited in the country, the Chinese ¡°government has one of the most rigorous Internet censorship systems, which relies heavily upon cooperation between the government and private Internet companies¡± (Lum, Figliola, and Weed 2012: 1). ? Hu Jia, a well- known human rights activist and winner of the European Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, was sentenced to three and a half years in prison in April 2008. ? Huang Qi, an outspoken human rights activist, was detained in July 2008 on charges of ¡°illegal possession of state secrets¡± for posting criticism of Sichuan earthquake relief efforts on his website. ? Liu Jin, a former university librarian, in November 2008 was sentenced to three years in prison in Shanghai on charges of ¡°using a heretical organization to undermine implementation of the law¡± after she downloaded information about the Falun Gong from the internet and passed it to others. ? Liu Xiaobo, Nobel Peach Prize winner in 2010, vocal publication for a political change in China earned him an eleven-year sentenced in jail
  • 12. Google ? Google Inc. (¡°Google¡±), an American (MNC) is a major search engine that has pulled its services from China in 2010. This action from Google elicited responses from both the United States and Chinese government that showed the two countries contrasting ideologies on Internet security (Tsai 2011: 401). ? This demand for Internet freedom is further exemplified by the previous United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton¡¯s speech on the implementation of the United States foreign policy on global Internet freedom (Welch 2011: 65). Regarding this policy Clinton has stated the United States¡¯ position as ¡°we stand for a single Internet where all humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas and we recognize that the world¡¯s information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it¡± (Clinton 2010). ? Predictably, many countries such as China and the Middle East (i.e. Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and Syria) have taken to criticize that the Internet freedom policy as a major opposition to their countries¡¯ sovereignty (Welch 2011: 67).
  • 13. Relations to the US ? According to Yannakogeorgos (2012: 108), the emergence of China¡¯s economic power plays a heavy role in the relationship between the country with the US. Primarily, due to the US¡¯s reliance on China as a manufacture for many of its¡¯ technological components. Many US policymakers have been weary with the US¡¯s problematic call for Internet freedom but its inability to regulate China¡¯s censorship because ¡°strategic goods rely on governments to adopt trade policies¡­but states do place restrictions on what may be exported¡± (2012: 110).
  • 14. NSA
  • 15. ? Some big stakeholders for the Internet, including the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), and Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has heavily criticized the US for the NSA scandal, condemning pervasive government surveillance and calling for an international governance for the Internet and its framework. These institutions are mainly in the US. Source: ICANN
  • 16. Some Debates to Consider ? 1. While the US is promoting ¡°Internet Freedom¡± and calling out China as violating human rights and privacy, is the US being a hypocritical ¡°big brother¡± as well? ? Recently, there has been a call for the UN to have a larger influence on the control and regulation of the Internet; of course, the US was strongly against it. But, post NSA admissions have diminish the US¡¯s role as protector of the Internet. ? Debatable? The UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon¡¯s view on free speech is that ¡°freedom of expression should be and must be guaranteed and protected, when they are used for common justice, common purpose¡± (2012). ? 2. China¡¯s Internet ID Policy ? China¡¯s legislature has pass a new policy that now requires users to use their real names to register for Internet access. The discourse on this is weather or not this will intimidate bloggers and activist to cease or lessen their opinions on the government and society. Sina Weibo, a major blogging website, mainly used by citizens to blow whistle on corrupt officials has been asking users to fill out their real names at the beginning of this year.
  • 17. Relations with Southeast Asia ? China¡¯s internet suppression has diffuse into SEA. ? Park (2009) investigates Internet security in Asia through the international regime theory (IRT). Through this theory, an effective policy in a particular area of concern occurs through a ¡°set of principles or norms¡± and regime ¡°indicates¡­cognitive frameworks or norms that are tacitly accepted as a global policy agenda¡± (Park 2009: 398). Through this concept, the 2003 Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting aim was to create Internet security on a transnational level with a global policy between developed, developing, and underdeveloped countries (2009: 399).
  • 18. "Many of these Southeast Asian countries -- and we're talking about the likes of Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia -- are increasingly copying some of China's techniques and methods to suppress online freedoms and increasingly into social media spaces, as well.¡± - Shawn Crispin, Southeast Asia representative for the Committee to Protect Journalists
  • 19. ? According to Steve Herman from Voice of America, countries such as Vietnam and Thailand are beginning to implement new regulations regarding the Internet. Thailand has more than 15 million FB users, which is more than 1/5 of the population. Vietnam has more than of 40% its pop. using the Internet (about 12 million on FB). ? Thailand: Although theoretically a democracy, the government can ¡°crack down¡± on FB users that maybe ¡°like¡± any references or articles that criticizes the Thai monarchy. Since Thailand practice l¨¨se-majest¨¦, and anyone can file a charge against anyone else in Thailand, the Internet is precarious a platform for opinions as in conjunction with this law it can be an oppressive tool of political repression. ? Vietnam: Also just passed a new law, Decree 72, that forbids people from posting news articles on social media and blogs. Vietnam¡¯s new law requires any posts on social media to be related only to personal information. There is little doubt that the Vietnamese authorities will enforce the new laws on social media; over the past four years, Vietnam already has been engaged in one of the harshest crackdowns in the world on bloggers posting items on politics, land grabbing, or other sensitive issues. Source: Joshua Kurlantzick, The Diplomat
  • 20. Limitations of the Study ? Within this analysis there are certain limitations due to the fact that the topic is an ongoing debate and has only been analyze through literature in the last decade or so. This is also limited in its scope considering that the major source of information is coming from secondary sources.
  • 22. Bibliography ? Lum, T., Figliola, P.M., & Weed, M.C. 2012. ¡®China, Internet Freedom, and U.S. Policy¡¯, Congressional Research Services, Available: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42601.pdf (Date of access 11 September 2013) ? Park, Y.J. 2009. ¡®Regime Formation and Consequence: the Case of Internet Security in the East-Asia Four Tigers¡¯, Government Information Quarterly, 26, pp. 398-406. ? Tsai, K. 2011. ¡®How to Create International Law: the Case of Internet Freedom in China¡¯, Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 21(401), pp. 401-430. ? Verton, Dan. 2001. National Security Threatened by Internet, Studies Say. Computerworld. 05 January. 7.
  • 23. ? Welch, C. 2011. ¡®Global Internet Freedom Policy: Evolution, Action, and Reaction¡¯, Internet Computing, IEEE, 15(6), pp. 65-69. ? Wilhelm, A. 2013. ¡®ICANN, W3C Call for End of US Internet Ascendancy Following NSA Revelations. [ONLINE] Available: http:// techcrunch.com/2013/10/11/icann-w3c-call-for-end-of-us-internet- ascendancy-following-nsa-revelations/ (Accessed 02 October 2013). ? Yang, K.C.C. 2007. ¡®A Comparative Study of Internet Regulatory Policies in the Greater China Region: Emerging Regulatory Models and Issues in China, Hong-Kong SAR, and Taiwan¡¯, Telematics and Informatics, 24, pp. 30-40. ? Yannakogeorgos, P.A. 2012. ¡®Internet Governance and National Security¡¯, Strategic Studies Quarterly, 6(3), pp. 102-125.