American University in Cairo AUC Knowledge Fountain Theses and Dissertations 2-1-2016 The role of non-state actors in regime formation: Case study on Internet governance. Sameh Mohamed Elkhishin Follow this and additional works at: https://fount.aucegypt.edu/etds Recommended Citation APA Citation Elkhishin, S. (2016).The role of non-state actors in regime formation: Case study on Internet governance. [Master’s thesis, the American University in Cairo]. AUC Knowledge Fountain. https://fount.aucegypt.edu/etds/241 MLA Citation Elkhishin, Sameh Mohamed. The role of non-state actors in regime formation: Case study on Internet governance.. 2016. American University in Cairo, Master's thesis. AUC Knowledge Fountain. https://fount.aucegypt.edu/etds/241 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by AUC Knowledge Fountain. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of AUC Knowledge Fountain. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Role of Non-State Actors in Regime Formation Case Study on Internet Governance Sameh Elkhishin Supervisor: Dr. Ezzeldin Fishere Abstract Many scholars argue that the Internet is a symbol of globalization and avoidance of state control. The Internet governance negotiations, which aims to establish an international regime for the Internet, is conducted through a multi-stakeholder setting associated with extensive involvement of non-state actors. This has been viewed as an indicator for a 'diminishing state role' in international relations; particularly, formation of international regimes. This study indicates that the role of states does not diminish in regime formation. States, especially great powers, are the main actors that set international principles, norms, rules and decision-making procedures. They create regimes in order to regulate international behaviour as to global sectors, including the Internet. States deliberately enable certain non- state actors to participate in regime formation and governance of some global sectors, based on conscious perception of the utility and usefulness of such participation. Table of Contents Chapter 1: The Research Design 1 I. The Research problem 1 II. Framing the research question III. Hypothesis 7 IV. Literature Review 8 V. Theoretical Framework 12 VI. Methodology 18 Chapter 2: Brief History of the Internet 22 Three phases of the Internet evolution 23 First Phase: Creation of ARPANET and the mergence of an epistemic community from a military-sponsored project 23 Second Phase: Transition from defense-related networking into academic and scientific- based networking 25 Third phase: The public and commercial Internet 28 Chapter 3: The Internet Architecture 31 I. Complexity of governing the Internet 31 II. Conceptualizing the Internet and the Internet epistemic community 32 III. How does the Internet operate? 35 1. Transmission Communication Protocol/ Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) 35 2. Domain Name System (DNS) 36 IV. Conclusion 38 Chapter 4: The Internet epistemic community: power of knowledge 41 I. IETF: The technical knowledge shapes the overall Internet system 42 1. The institutional structure of IETF: Unique form of international organization 42 2. Values of the Internet epistemic community as reflected in the architectural principles of the Internet design 43 3. The process of setting Internet standards: Innovative model of policymaking 46 IETF versus ISO: Rivalry between two different systems of governance 47 4. The power of IETF as an independent non-state actor in the Internet governance dynamics 49 II. ISOC as political evolution of the Internet epistemic community: Transformation of technical concepts into beliefs and values 50 Chapter 5: The United States and Internet governance 52 I. The informal ad-hoc administration of the Internet 53 II. Endeavors of the Internet epistemic community to form a new regime for DNS administration 54 Analysis of the gTLD-MoU 55 III. The United States government intervenes 57 IV. The White Paper: Formation of a new regime for administration of the Internet architecture 60 Scope of the Internet governance 60 The influence of the Internet epistemic community on the White Paper 61 The Internet architecture regime: US-centric international regime 66 V. Identifying the interests: United States commercial-oriented policy for the Internet 67 The Internet as a global marketplace: Making the Internet a duty-free trade zone 68 Protection of intellectual property rights over the Internet 71 VI. Constructing perception for the Internet: Internet as medium of published content 73 VII. Conclusion 74 Chapter 6: ICANN: From self-regulation to mulistakeholdeirsm 77 I. Establishment of ICANN 77 II. The evolution of ICANN: Multistakeholderism as a model for global governance 78 III. The relationship between ICANN and the United States' government 83 IV. Legitimizing ICANN: Decision of the American government to relinquish control over the Internet 85 V. The Future of ICANN 86 VI. Is ICANN a unique model of global governance? 87 Chapter 7: The International debate on Internet governance 89 I. World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) 90 WSIS pluralistic approach 91 Geneva Summit, 2003: Unanticipated emergence of Internet governance issues 92 Analysis of the outcome document adopted by Geneva phase of WSIS 96 Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) 98 Analysis of the WGIG's report 98 Tunis summit, 2005: pushing Internet governance to the front 101 Analysis of the outcome document adopted by Tunis phase of WSIS 106 IGF 107 Enhanced cooperation 109 II. The World Conference on International Telecommunication (WCIT) 111 Analysis of the Final Acts of WCIT 111 Examination of the official documents and transcripts of WCIT 112 Reactions to the failure of achieving consensus on the Final Acts 114 Conclusions 119 References 130 Appendix I: The Internet Pioneers. 151 Appendix II: How the Internet operates? 152 Appendix III: ISOC. 166 List of figures Figure 1: ICANN Organizational Chart 82 Figure 2: Domain Name Space 160 List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ACLU American Civil liberties Union ARPA Advanced Research Projects Agency BBN Bolt, Beranek and Newman BITNET Because It's Time network CCBI Coordinating Committee on Business Interlocutors ccTLD Country Code Top-Level Domain CDA Communications Decency Act CORE Council of Registrars DNS Domain Name System EARN European Academic and Research Network gTLD generic Top-Level Domain gTLD-MoU generic Top-Level Domain Memorandum of Understanding IAB Internet Architecture Board IANA Internet Assigned Numbers Authority IAHC International Ad-Hoc Committee ICANN Internet Corporations for Assigned Names and Numbers ICB International Cooperation Board ICCB Configuration Control Board IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IETF Internet Engineering Task Force IFWP Internet Forum on the White Paper INRIA National Institute for Research in Computer Science and Control INWG International Network Working Group IRG Internet Research Group ISO International Standardization Organization ISPs Internet Service Providers ITRs International Telecommunications Regulations ITU International Telecommunication Union MAG Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group NRO Numbers Resource Organization NSF National Science Foundation NSI Network Solutions Incorporated OSI Open Systems Interconnection RFCs Request for Comments RIRs Regional Internet Registries SRI-NIC Stanford Research Institute, Network Information Center TCP/IP Transmission Communication Protocol/ Internet Protocol TLD Top-Level Domain UDRP Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy W3C World Working Group on Internet Wide Web Consortium WCIT World Conference on International Telecommunication WGIG Working Group on Internet Governance WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization WSIS World Summit on Information Society WTO World Trade Organization Chapter 1 The Research Design I. The research problem States have been able to establish international regimes with effective verification systems employed to ensure compliance with the agreed rules and norms. International cooperation is manifested throughout various issue-areas such as nuclear non-proliferation, international trade, intellectual property, environment, human rights...etc. While globalization and complex interdependence magnified the need for more global cooperation in order to set rules and norms for the growing global interaction in various sectors, transnational non-state actors have emerged as significant players on the international scene. Does the emergence of these actors lead to a diminishing role of states in setting international rules and norms? In other words, with globalization, does the role of the states in forming international regimes diminish? This study seeks to answer this question. In this context, this study analyzes the role of states and non-state actors in forming international regimes, through a close examination of the 'Internet regime' case. This case is chosen for a number of reasons. First, the Internet has been rarely addressed from the perspective of international relations, and less so from a theoretical perspective. Second, the Internet regime seems, at the onset, to be a favorable case to the thesis of a 'diminishing state role'. The Internet itself is a symbol of globalization and avoidance of state control, and the Internet regime's negotiations are conducted in what could be called multi-stakeholder1 settings, where non-state actors participate