Domestic legislators and regulators have done a lot to build a "sovereign Internet". In particular, the study of the possibilities of functioning of the Runet in conditions of complete isolation - disconnection from the global network is being carried out. Among the latest novels is a bill by deputy Gorelkin (United Russia faction) on limiting the share of foreign ownership of significant information resources.
The bill will primarily concern such IT giants as Yandex and Mail.ru. And although the representatives of the former have already stated that adopting such a law is like shooting oneself in the foot, the legislators, the regulators behind them, and, most likely, the security forces clearly have different considerations about the targets of the “shooting”. Related to the area of national security. And since many representatives of the ruling class in our country habitually see on the Internet, first of all, threats and only tenth of all opportunities, then they prefer to fight against threats open to all vortexes hostile to our information space.
Historically, this is nothing new. Exactly in the same way in Soviet times, and even before, they fought against "subversive" literature, "alien ideas", "enemy voices", shortwave receivers, typewriters, and after them with copiers. However, we were not alone in this.
The situation in the world today is in many ways reminiscent of the Cold War. It's about a civilizational clash. The trade war between the United States and China is just one manifestation of this war. The essence of the confrontation is not at all whether China will buy more American soybeans and other agricultural products, whether it will allow American financiers into its market, whether it will weaken measures to restrict foreign ownership, or whether it will reduce subsidies to enterprises. And it’s not even that (although this is a very important point), whether he will stop stealing intellectual property. It's about the opposition of two fundamentally different models of the development of society. Our current "tactical" in comparison with this conflict with America (Ukraine has become only a pretext for aggravation) objectively pushes us into the arms of China, although lamentations in the far corners of the political "clearing" that we, they say,European civilization, everything does not subside. But it will pass. Ancient Egypt also belonged to a specific type of civilization, and after the Arab conquest, it was so "reforged" that it is impossible to recognize.
Two camps fought in the Cold War, and now there may be more. However, one way or another, the construction of a new "iron curtain" is also supposed.
Until now, we have mainly paid attention to the actions of our legislators and regulators: where else will they tighten the screws, what else will senators Klishas and Bokova, the faithful successors of the Yarovaya case, as well as the deputy Gorelkin, who joined them, come up with regarding the blocking?
How possible is it? And will not at least some of the efforts of the builders of the "sovereign Runet" appear in a new light? By analogy with how at the dawn of the current sanctions, many said that, they say, why do we need a national payment system if we have Visa and MasterCard, but now it seems like it will be. So, just in case. So it is with Runet - at least a taxi can be ordered and food for the evening. Through the Unified State Portal of Digital Services. EGPTSU.
The first "swallows" (they can be considered "black swans") have already flown, if someone has not noticed. After the scandal surrounding "Russian interference in the US elections", which from the outside seems like a manifestation of American paranoia (but they are all serious there), Facebook began to take a more careful approach to filtering both content and political advertising. Especially carefully with regard to Russia. There is an invisible construction of walls in social networks so that not a single "enemy" troll sneaks through. At the same time, Mark Zuckerberg still refuses to obey the persuasions and requirements of Roskomnadzor to transfer the processing of personal data of Russians to our country. Moreover, for purely political reasons: we, they say, are not a democratic country and we have a bad respect for human rights.
Promotional video:
And I personally have little doubt that if the pressure on this IT corporation continues to increase, it will simply leave Russia. And Instagram will leave with him, leaving Olga Buzova with VKontakte and Odnoklassniki, and many others. Firstly, our market is not that big, and Zuckerberg can do without even the Chinese market. Secondly, now are not the times when, according to the Marxist formula, the capitalist for 300% of the profit would go to all the trouble. That is, not every capitalist anymore. Because there are such "costs" as principles. It is for the same reason that America and China may as a result fail to agree on a “big deal” (by agreeing “in a small way”) - after all, it’s not only about big money, but also about principles.
This was even before Crimea became ours, and deputy Irina Yarovaya was invited to talk to the Security Council, giving her an important "package" (of laws), looking deeply into her eyes, as only these people know how to look. Seeking confirmation of just how much Schmidt's idea is still alive today, I came across an article in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs by former US President's Special Adviser on Cybersecurity Richard Clarke and former Director of Internet at the US National Security Council Rob Kneake.
And that's what they write.
Moreover, authoritarian regimes such as China use modern information technologies to strengthen their power, to monitor their citizens, and also restrict their citizens in obtaining information in the West, and Western companies in access to their markets. And in the same China, 2 million censors (here we are very far from them) filter content day and night, cleaning out sedition. In parallel, the system of "social credit" works, collecting a variety of information about citizens and rating their behavior in terms of compliance with "social values", introducing rewards for good behavior or, conversely, punishment for bad.
In general, the rhetorical set, we note, is approximately the same as in the years of the Cold War. Then, however, there was not even an analog, but a paper war, and now it will be digital.
And so the authors of the article in "Foreign Affairs" propose to create a League of Free Internet. Where will the states (it is assumed that many dozens) that share certain principles of freedom and openness in the information space? An analogy is drawn with the Schengen visa area in Europe. And you can draw analogies even with NATO, even with the EU, even with the League of Nations. Access to the League's Internet space is sharply limited. Entrance - with special individual "visas". On the “digital border” there is effective “digital border control”, inside there are own “sanitary” security services. Both persons and companies conducting “malicious activities” are blocked and entered into “black lists” (you can guess who will determine and how). Whole countries can also be subject to sanctions of complete isolation, which will be noticed in, for example,that they sheltered hackers (in the article it is called Ukraine). The member countries will also jointly rebuff (just like in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty) the attempts of such large "external" players as China to secure a ban on the dissemination of this or that information objectionable to it.
Now, individual Internet companies can make concessions to the authorities for admission to the Chinese market, but this will be prohibited under the general rules of the League. The activities of such IT corporations as Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and indeed a lot of all kinds of useful software and technologies, will not go beyond this "zone of freedom" without special permission.
And it just so happened that if you do not follow the FATF rules, then you have big problems throughout the global financial system. Of course, you can do some postings, even in dollars, but you won't really turn around. In principle, communication on the world Internet can be organized in the same way. Moreover, the rules will also be dictated by the one who is stronger. Not only financially (as in the case of FATF), but also technologically.
The admission of relevant "digital products" from countries outside the "zone of freedom" is severely restricted. So, hypothetically, a double blow will be inflicted on the same Yandex, unless, of course, by that time its deputies, the burners, will finish it off, so as not to suffer from the problem of choice, which, as you know, is the most difficult.
Is it possible to build a digital iron curtain? Until recently, many said that the construction of the Great Wall of China on the Russian Internet is also impossible. And so far it is. While. However, we agree that Roskomnadzor's extrajudicial round-the-clock tireless zeal is bearing fruit. Although Telegram is still too tough for him, he is working on this too. And then they will go to meet him from the other side. And they will succeed together!
Although already now, access from Russia to many resources in the same America, including the official websites of government agencies, is possible only through a VPN. And something suggests that the same America will "negotiate" with leading VPN services faster than Russia's Roskomnadzor.
The Cold Cyber War will only partially resemble the previous confrontation - including in the information space. It will take place at a higher technological level. And the winner, ultimately, will be the one who owns more advanced technologies. Which, that's the same bad luck, cannot be created and, most importantly, mastered in conditions of isolation from the outside world. But they can be stolen and used in your own way. But more about that some other time.
Author: Georgy Bovt
