|
Trade agreement and
the Internet
By Liu Ching-Yi ¼BÀR©É
No one disputes that the government¡¦s decision to sign the cross-strait service
trade agreement was both arbitrary and crude. In response to this criticism,
however, the government ¡X apart from attempting to co-opt anyone who would
potentially stand to benefit from the agreement and answering their concerns
with a lot of empty talk ¡X does nothing to address the asymmetric access to
information either side of the Taiwan Strait, and this is likely to create many
problems for Internet users.
Taiwan has never had the necessary understanding and vigilance when it comes to
imports and use of Chinese Internet communications equipment and computer
services. There are three main reason for this: The first reason is the inherent
disadvantage from users who lack information about technical or operational
issues. The second is because of a lack of information transparency. The third
is that awareness of Internet freedom is not sufficiently widespread.
However, ¡§necessary understanding and vigilance¡¨ does not have to involve
animosity toward China. Rather, it points to the fundamental understanding of
the Internet era that any normal and rational democracy should possess: the
understanding that people should have communications freedom, the right to
privacy, freedom to obtain information and freedom of expression.
The government insists that the deregulation of value-added network services and
Internet portals offering Web hosting and other such computer services is a
¡§less important¡¨ area of deregulation. However, anyone with an understanding of
basic Internet infrastructure understands that businesses offering such
value-added network services function as guardians of the Internet. Companies
operating Internet portals or offering Web hosting are granted access to a wide
range of information from their users. If we add the various types of software
and hardware services that will also be deregulated, it could be described as
setting up a small but complete Internet framework that none of us can escape.
It is well known that Chinese telecommunications and Internet service providers
comply with the Chinese government¡¦s demands to provide strict monitoring of
Internet communications. Not even well-known international companies such as
Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube can avoid the filters in the
Chinese market. One of the main reasons international Internet companies cannot
relax is that this kind of compliance culture ¡X in which everyone follows
everything the Chinese government says ¡X is negatively affecting free and
democratic countries.
Given the different control frameworks that are in place on each side of the
Taiwan Strait, we can only speculate as to which framework will apply when
Chinese companies move into Taiwan. There are many questions surrounding this
issue:
How will the Taiwanese government audit these companies? Does it have a complete
set of measures in place to protect users? If a company¡¦s operations pose a risk
to safety and property, what measures are in place to help users get
compensation? As operators used to adhering to China¡¦s Internet control culture
enter the Taiwanese market, how will Taiwan¡¦s Internet freedom and Internet
culture be affected? Has the government made any detailed impact assessments? If
they have, why do they not make the results public?
The government has a duty to tell us what position normal and rational
democracies take on opening their country¡¦s telecommunications and computer
services to foreign operators ¡X those backed by Chinese capital in particular ¡X
and what rules they impose. It should also tell us how these countries enter
into democratic dialogue and debate with their critics. International trade
stresses complementarity in order to maximize results, but it does not deny that
participants following the rules of international trade should protect their
freedom and democracy.
The government has a duty to clarify which complementarity effects the service
trade agreement will have on Internet freedom. The practical foundations, the
controls in Taiwan and China and any risk impact assessments, are all part of
the due process that should be an integral part of the service trade agreement.
None of us want to be part of a decision that harms the country, and we do not
want to become the victims of such a decision. Focusing on the freedom and
prosperity of consumers and users: should our Internet use be decided by the
cross-strait service agreement?
Liu Ching-yi is a professor in the Graduate Institute of National Development
at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
|
