[log in to unmask]"
type="cite">
I share Edward's concerns, and offer a few comments:
1) In the ICANN ecosystem, the GAC is the (only) place where states are represented as such. It follows, therefore, that we should do nothing that would weaken the current arrangements within the GAC, where (to take the example mentioned by Edward) both Beijing and Taipei are fully represented.
2) The question of "geographic regions" within ICANN needs to be viewed in the wider context of geo-strategic realities, with its complexities and inadequacies. In this respect, one of the most striking developments in recent years has been a growing convergence between states built on widely different political models, with regard to fundamental rights. Take the trend towards mass surveillance: the revelations by Edward Snowden in 2014 have shown to what extent a well-established democracy is, in fact, engaging in practices which have been (rightly) criticized in theocracies and single-party autocracies. I have called this a "regrettable convergence",
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130826_global_surveillance_towards_convergence/
3) The Internet is still, to some extent, a preserved area of liberty, freedom of expression, human rights. It is important for our communities to be aware of the current threats and future perils, and that they help preserve, at least in the narrow area of their volunteer engagement in ICANN, the principles of freedom, democratic representation, diversity, fairness.