The Chinese Internet Century

Even as U.S. officials still give a rhetorical nod to the ideal of an open and transparent global Web, it's time to plan for another reality.

BY ADAM SEGAL | JANUARY 26, 2010

Few minds in China are likely to change on account of Hillary Clinton's call for "a single Internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas." Last week, the U.S. secretary of state laid out two competing visions of the Internet: one open and global, the other highly controlled and often used for repression. Given that China is rapidly trending toward the latter, it's time to start asking: What might a permanently fractured Web look like?

Clinton's speech was not utopian. Her remarks were fairly measured about the potential political impact of network technologies. Eschewing the exuberant optimism that has characterized so much past thinking about the Internet, Clinton recognized that "modern information networks and the technologies they support can be harnessed for good or for ill." Still, she held out hope that the United States could strategically use Internet technology to advance freedom and human rights around the world. To tip the balance to the good, she said, the United States plans to develop and distribute technologies to help people avoid censors, foster international norms against cyberattacks, cooperate across national borders to identify and prosecute cybercriminals, and exploit public-private partnerships to build a robust cyberdefense at home.

These are noble aspirations, but they will have a very limited impact on China. Censorship, hacking, and economic warfare as practiced in China are rooted in a political and economic calculus that is unlikely to change. From the first introduction of modern information technologies, the Chinese have viewed them as a double-edged sword: essential to economic growth, but a threat to regime stability. Using a combination of old-school intimidation and high-tech surveillance, Beijing has managed to keep most materials it deems harmful off most computer screens in China and still promote economic growth.

The fact is that the majority of Chinese simply don't care, giving the government even less incentive to change its ways. Technologically savvy Chinese "netizens" -- if that term even has meaning in a place like China -- find ways to fan qiang (scale the "Great Firewall"), but most users, like their counterparts elsewhere, are more interested in entertainment gossip, pirated MP3s, and updates from their friends than missives from Falun Gong or the latest report from Human Rights Watch. U.S. State Department spending on proxy servers or technologies that hide users' identities temporarily allow some Chinese greater access to information online, but won't substantially change the underlying dynamics. 

While the hacking of the accounts of individual human rights activists has garnered the most public attention, the primary objective of the cyberattack on Google was probably intellectual property theft. The Chinese leadership has a strategic view of technology development, and the cybertheft of corporate secrets is married to an industrial policy designed to promote "indigenous innovation" (zhizhu chuangxin). Through local content requirements, tax benefits, government procurement, and the development of competing technology standards for 3G mobile phones, Wi-Fi, and other products, China consistently seeks to free itself from dependence on foreign technology, particularly from the United States and Japan. In a few cases, China has backed down in the face of concerted pressure from more technologically advanced trading partners, but old policies were quietly replaced with new ones designed to forcibly transfer technology to Chinese firms. Cyberespionage is this industrial policy taken to its logical extreme, subsidies in the form of intellectual property theft.

Frederic J. Brown/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

 SUBJECTS:
 

Adam Segal is the Ira A. Lipman senior fellow for counterterrorism and national security studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

TOMHE

9:12 PM ET

January 26, 2010

natural course of diffusion

When Internet was created at CERN, it was used to exchange scientific research papers. The scientisits did not expect that the Internet would be dominated by American political values. US companies made a global tool to exchange business information, and they did not expect to export American political values as the prioritized products. The US politicians, who are noramlly a few steps behinds businessmen, have been trying to make a better use of the Internet for political purposes. Of course, you are more privileged than the Chinese politicans to earn more profits from Interent. But you are not morally superior to the rest of politicians in world. The reason is simple: you are still looking after earthy power of influence. My suggestion to you is that: please calm down; let the natural course of diffusion continues in the Internet.

 

PEGDASHFAB

4:37 AM ET

January 27, 2010

the voice of ignorance

as someone who used the internet throughout the decade before CERN "created" it, allow me to point out that tomhe does not know what he is talking about. his argument is founded on total ignorance.

 

TOMHE

6:58 AM ET

January 27, 2010

yes, there were something before that but...

I think it was a US military project. But that project was focused on protocol study for high error rate data links. I was thinking more on the application side.

 

POTATOCHIP

7:52 AM ET

January 27, 2010

Internet and WWW

The Internet was an ARPA project. What you're thinking about is the World Wide Web (WWW) based on the hypertext protocol. That was developed by Tim Berners-Lee at CERN.

 

FREETRADER

12:24 AM ET

January 27, 2010

Not necessarily

There is no contradiction between having an internet that is a relatively open forum (a la Foreign Policy, Slate, etc.) and ensuring that internet users maintain their secure proprietary information. Companies and countries will have to take steps to ensure the security of their secrets, even using closed networks for their most valuable information, but open public discussion can continue. So, it is unlikely that the Chinese restrictions will change the internet outide of China in any substantial way.

In the long run, the position of the PRC government is actually quite weak -- its internet-savvy early adopters will continue to access Google.com outside the Great Firewall, while information disseminated from Hong Kong and possibly Taiwan will weaken the State's control of open discussion from the quasi-inside. Over time, the internal Chinese internet will come to resemble AOL - useful for some purposes, but backward, isolated, and a 'second best' choice. It is not necessary for all of China's internet users to have access open information in order for them to be aware that the alternative internet platforms are much better. Some information may be restricted in the Chinese domestic market for, say, users of Baidu, but the knowledge that Baidu is an inferior choice will prevent the Chinese version of the internet from ever being a real alternative to the West's more open model, even among Chinese speakers. In the long run, this will ensure that Baidu and other restrictive, PRC-focused internet gateways will become ever less cutting edge and relevant.

 

JOSH

3:30 AM ET

January 27, 2010

the internet is for all...

the internet is for all... for all with no bad country. but i don't use self only internet at work, buy only software and games that don't use DRM and with no or a few Bugs. When Chinese will struggle then they can have better life.
so far... Josh