On Mar 8, 2025, at i:26 PM, Jordan Carter <jordan.carter@auda.org.au> wrote:

Bill, all… what is it we need to do, then, in your view?

Haven’t thought it through but:

First, sustain conversation on this list elsewhere, coordinate and strategize within and across stakeholder groups, try to rebuild a little of what we had 20 years ago.

Second, assume that the intergovernmental alignments of the past may be gone. When whichever courtier gets into Trump's ear and raises IG, the usual instinct to do the opposite of whatever Bush, Obama and Biden did may take hold. Since he hates the EU (formed in order to “screw the US”) and did the Executive Order Wolfgang mentioned, there may not be a coherent global “West” or “North” coalition on anything that could scan as “globalist” when seen in MAGAvision. What that could mean concretely is anyone's guess. Presumably there won't be an embrace of enhanced multilateral “oversight” or anything contrary to “individual rights” as Farzi mentions, but will this translate into support for multistakeholder participation or governance? Or could we see some sort of show of revisiting the IANA transition, as Alex and Michael mentioned? Perhaps the US private sector can influence US policy, unclear if anyone else can.

Third, maybe try to circle the wagons around reaffirming Tunis basics and the transition? Wouldn’t satisfy folks who want new provisions on new issues but those could attract more heat. Unless of course one welcomes that prospect.

All fluid, who knows. Look forward to hearing from others.

Bill

Sent from my iPhone

Jordan Carter — .au Domain Administration

+61-417-243-647 on Signal or iMessage

From: William Drake via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 8, 2025 8:43:04 AM
To: Israel Rosas <rosas@isoc.org>
Cc: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] - [wsis20] Re: Data point: Shift in USG position regarding the SDGs

Hi Isra

Needless to say, this is more than a data point, it’s a new environment. Probably they’re just getting started and there’s lots more stuff laying around waiting to be broken. According to a State Dept report I read yesterday, as of FY 2022 the US pays 22% of the overall UN budget (not counting arrears) and over $21 billion to 179 international organizations and multilateral entities (85% voluntary funds, 15% assessed). As the cultural revolution’s march through the institutions proceeds, one has to assume the administration will claim to find lots more “woke/DEI/waste, fraud and abuse” in those budgets, as well as lots more treaties and agreements to abandon.

Taking a "business as usual" approach to WSIS20 and related might lead to some surprises down the road...

Cheers

Bill

On Mar 7, 2025, at 3:22 PM, Israel Rosas via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:

Hi all,

I'd like to bring your attention to the remarks delivered on 4 March by the US Minister Counselor to ECOSOC regarding the USG position about the Agenda 2030. This is a significant shift that can have serious implications in the WSIS+20 review, particularly in a context where many of us have advocated for the Internet as a force for good that helps advance global development.

The remarks are located here: https://usun.usmission.gov/remarks-at-the-un-meeting-entitled-58th-plenary-meeting-of-the-general-assembly/

A couple of concerning extracts:

"We have a concern that this resolution is a reaffirmation of Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Although framed in neutral language, Agenda 2030 and the SDGs advance a program of soft global governance that is inconsistent with U.S. sovereignty and adverse to the rights and interests of Americans."

"Put simply, globalist endeavors like Agenda 2030 and the SDGs lost at the ballot box. Therefore, the United States rejects and denounces the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals, and it will no longer reaffirm them as a matter of course."

Best,

Isra

Isra Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development

Internet Society