By Mary Ellen O'C
Which government agency should have primary responsibility for the
Internet? The USA seems to have decided this question in
favour of the military—the US military today has
the largest concentration of expertise and legal authority with respect
to
cyberspace. Those in the legal community who
support this development are divided as to the appropriate legal rules
to guide
the military in its oversight of the Internet.
Specialists on the international law on the use of force argue that with
analogy
and interpretation, current international law can
be applied in a way that allows great freedom without sending the
message
that the USA is acting lawlessly when it comes to
the Internet. Others reject this argument as unnecessary and potentially
too restrictive. The USA need not observe
international law rules, especially not with respect to the Internet.
The way forward
is to follow the Cold War strategy of threatening
enemies with overwhelming force and preparing to act on these threats.
This
article also questions the application of
international law on the use of force to the Internet. Rather than
rejecting international
law in general, however, the thesis here is that
international law rules governing economic activity and communications
are
the relevant ones for activity on the Internet.
Moving away from military analogy in general and Cold War deterrence in
particular,
will result in the identification and application
of rules with a far better chance of keeping the Internet open and safer
for all.
Source: Journal of Conflict and Security Law
Comments