Internetophobia: Friends and Enemies of the Ukrainian Web

The National Security and Defense Council held a meeting in late October to discuss the topic, Measures to Improve the National Information Policy and Provide Information Security in Ukraine, which called forth sharply negative responses from separate electronic and print media. Since the nation’s information policy had of late been augmented by the Internet, the meeting broached the subject of the Ukrainian Web. The said media, long suspecting the powers that be of scheming to make restrictions in the free information space, obviously decided that the time had come and braced themselves for a counterstrike. As it turned out, they overreacted.

Eventually both sides agreed on a meeting between NSDC Secretary Yevhen Marchuk and electronic media people on November 12 at the NSDC. The virtual media noted that it was their first dialogue with the regime. In fact, virtual is the best adjective for the status and essence of the newspapers and magazines available on the Internet in Ukraine. First, because few in this country are familiar with such electronic publications, second, because the virtual media are simply nonexistent under Ukrainian law (making the media, society, and state suffer), and third, because the Internet media are so free, enjoying their indefinite status, as to have become totally unpredictable.

To clarify the situation with the electronic media and their fears, Yevhen Marchuk suggested that those present share their opinions and ideas. Conveniently, everything said during the meeting can be split in two parts: constructive and not (or emotional). The latter includes Olena Prytula’s statement, as the publisher and manager of the noted Internet project Ukrayinska pravda , to the effect that the very notion of the National Security and Defense Council discussing the Internet makes one wary. Proceeding from her logic, the NSDC ought to have ignored a phenomenon of perhaps the greatest world import, lest someone get nervous. Incidentally, the World Wide Web means access to both general and classified information — e.g., hacker raids on protected sites, penetrating bank electronic systems, strategically important and dangerous projects like nuclear power plants or NASA on the eve of September 11.

Moreover, there is no denying that the Internet’s national component, considering the Web’s universal accessibility, forms a given country’s image abroad. National libraries, stocks of art museums, official statistics, research papers, etc., available on the Internet (as envisaged by a presidential edict over a year ago) are meant to build a single image of this state in the virtual world.

On the other hand, information discrediting the country pumped there, concerning leading statement and politicians, as targets of domestic political strife, create an altogether different image. Commenting on this aspect, Mr. Marchuk said at the meeting: “The nation’s image is a real value, which is assessed economically. If we go along with the media-technology-developed notion of a country with an unstable domestic situation, with the state being on the verge of a civil conflict, it will mean no foreign investment, no long-term contracts and projects, and an outflow of capital, manpower, and technologies.”

The NSDC secretary further told the Internet media people that a couple of days previously the Council of Europe had adopted the world’s first convention against computer crime. He said that the bill is aimed at stepping up struggle against cybercrimes, including Internet shady financial manipulation, hacker attacks, copyright violations, proliferation of child pornography, and so on. This convention provides for close cooperation among law enforcement authorities in different countries and vests the police with a broad range of powers. Mr. Marchuk opined that the very fact of adopting the convention means that even the Council of Europe, democratic as it is, realizes that the Internet has to be protected.

Mr. Marchuk stressed that the NSDC meeting dealt with information policy in general and information security in particular; that broad range of issues was discussed concerning the development of the telecommunications infrastructure, transition from analog to digital communications, the presence of foreign capital in the electronic media, providing central and local authorities with means of information, book publishing, to mention but a few.

To put an end to speculations about the resolution passed by the NSDC meeting, Mr. Marchuk read out all clauses of the document having to do with the Internet in Ukraine. The Day follows suit: The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, within two months, shall take a series of coordinated measures to unconditionally implement the decisions thus made and intended for the state support and development of effective media, as per Edict of the President of Ukraine ‘On Measures to Develop the National Component of the Global Information Network Internet, and to Secure Broad Access thereto in Ukraine,’ of 07.31.01;

“The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, Security Service of Ukraine [SBU], jointly with the State Committee for Communications and Information [Derzhkomzviazku] shall, within six months, prepare and submit to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine the draft law On Data Protection in the Information and Telecommunications Systems, envisaging compulsory protection of data when rendering services, including [such services] using the Internet, and compulsory storage, by the Internet provides, of Internet traffic data for six months and providing such information if so ruled by a court of law;

“the Cabinet of Ministers, jointly with the Derzhkomzviazku and DSTSZI of the SBU, shall within two months submit proposals concerning the establishment of the Ukrainian Internet Segment Security Center and the Ukrainian Antivirus Data Protection Center;

“prepare a bill introducing changes in the current legislation, stipulating the licensing of Internet providers in the territory of Ukraine; (When asked whether this clause made any mention of the Internet media, Mr. Marchuk replied in the negative — Author)

“the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, Ministry of Industrial Policy, Derzhkomzviazku, et al., shall work out and within six months and in keeping with established procedures submit a National Program for the Development of the Television and Radio Industry, allowing for long-term problems and taking into account the national segment of the Internet.”

Mr. Marchuk said the above clauses would be included in a presidential order embracing a much broader range of issues, and that the chief executive would sign it sometime next week. Amending the said clauses is unlikely. “This could be done only by the legal department of the Presidential Administration, for they will expose the document to a legal examination. As a rule, however, any changes at this stage are not aimed at making things tougher,” he pointed out.

Among those present at the meeting was a representative of the Internet versii.com whose response to the NSDC meeting of October 31 had been most emotional, mildly speaking. He remained silent from beginning to end. Another constructive aspect was that practically everybody present agreed that the Internet situation is far from ideal. Individual Internet project coordinators even declared they were willing to register their sites in case an appropriate procedure is adopted. Oleksandr Brams, AIN publisher and analyst with the International Institute for Media Studies, said this approach would allow information sites to reach a new feedback level, and a new level of responsibility. However, not all Internet media editors are eager to go by the book, probably assuming that the Internet must be a special all-permissive form of data exchange. An example is a dialogue between Olena Prytula and Yevhen Marchuk.

Y. M.: You will agree that the editors and the quality of information and grammar in the Internet editions often prove lower by an order, compared to the print media?

O. P.: Yes, and I can explain why. Because we work faster by an order than the rest of the media.

Y. M.: Aren’t you interested in improving the quality of Internet periodicals in this sense?

O. P.: We are working on it, all the time.

Y. M.: Suppose an Internet edition carries information insulting or accusing somebody of committing a crime. How should the overall legislative regime respond to such Internet media? Or do they remain untouchable even in this case?

O. P.: They are, for the time being, because this sphere is still to be regulated.

Y. M.: Is this normal? Suppose there appears an article accusing Olena Prytula of a crime and other media pick it, with or without referring to the original source. Would you consider this normal?

O. P.: No, it wouldn’t be normal, but such is the reality.

Olena Prytula is right. Such is the reality, but one crying out for change, like all those homeless in the street, back wages, and a lot of other things that are part of our horrible realities that must be changed immediately.

Getting back to the constructive part of the meeting, Serhiy Moruhin voiced his opinion about the existing relationships between the Internet media and the state. He said (quite correctly) that “the state has long ignored the development of the Internet, although it is one of the priority spheres of the Ukrainian economy.” As a result, he added, a situation has developed where Internet people and the state speak different languages, so this meeting should have taken place much earlier. “We must meet each other halfway,” the Internet project coordinator concluded.

Another constructive element was Oleksandr Brams’ proposal to help Web site developers in the public sector. State bodies need consultants. “Each of us is an expert in his field and everyone will be honored to help, explaining how to build a Web site and keep it going,” he said.

Let us recall that a briefing was held after the 31 October NSDC meeting and Yevhen Marchuk noted in part, “President Leonid Kuchma instructed the ministries and agencies to take measures to have their activities covered by sites most comprehensively, and to place on the Internet objective and complete information of interest to the general public. This instruction primarily addresses the military and security ministries and agencies, particularly the Internal Affairs Ministry, General Prosecutor’s Office, SBU, border guard troops, customs authorities, and State Tax Administration. These agencies are instructed to place on their sites not only progress reports, but also the most complete information concerning extraordinary events.” Mr. Marchuk said at the meeting with Internet people that “all state structures without exception should open their own web sites, and there should be someone seeing to it that they are properly kept.”

COMMENT

Yevhen MARCHUK, NSDC Secretary:

I wanted to hear, first, what the Internet publications were concerned about and, second, whether there was a constructive approach to the problem. Also, I wanted them to see that there is no cause for alarm that was deliberately mounted by some media outlets. I realized that it was hearsay, a rumor made almost sensational that started to spread and gain scope and momentum of its own. None of those present at the meeting could quote me as having said anything to the effect; no one had called on the NSDC to ask a question, just as no one had tried to figure out the problem. In fact, only Oleksandr Brams and Serhiy Morhun came up with proposals worth being considered. The rest of the discussion came down to the question of whether the Internet media would be subject to licensing. I understand why they were worried over that, and I also understand why half of them remained silent.

The Day: Do you expect the Internet to threaten Ukrainian national security in any way?

Y. M.: That’s the wrong way to put it. As a technology, the Internet cannot pose any danger to our national security. It’s just an implement revolutionizing the world of telecommunications. Yet like all other implements it can be used to do harm. Hackers can, for example, break into a nuclear power plant’s software. But that’s not the Internet, that’s a different phenomenon. As such the Internet is no threat to national security, because it has a million more positive aspects than possible dangers.

The Day: Does today’s meeting mean that the NSDC will be the Ukrainian Internet coordinator?

Y. M.: No, the NSDC has no executive functions like the government does. We can only give recommendations, and they can be implemented by a presidential order or cabinet resolution. The government can submit bills or propose amendments to Verkhovna Rada. Now this is already a public process.

The Day: What do you think is the biggest problem of the Ukrainian Internet?

Y. M.: Its lack of Internet computer terminals in Ukraine. We are lagging behind the rest of the world and that’s dangerous. We must do something and quick to let the broadest strata have access to the Internet. By the way, there is a presidential edict to this effect, signed more than a year ago, but the previous cabinet effectively bungled it. There is no end to discussing Internet problems, but it will remain just talk unless we have telephone lines installed all over Ukraine, particularly in the countryside, village schools, clubs, and libraries. You can’t access the Internet without having a telephone line. Also, we must have those data protection and antivirus centers, because we all know what happens after hacker attacks and viruses. It’s not just losses amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars, but also disorganization of important government agencies and projects.

As for the Internet media, it’s another extraordinary phenomenon, and I think they will be actively used only in the political domain only before the parliamentary elections. After passing this stage associations controlling various Internet sectors in Ukraine will realize the need for self-regulation, as will their counterparts elsewhere in the world. On the other hand, the state can’t ignore this new phenomenon, stay on the sidelines, and make no attempt to influence it. Things like that never happen in any other country. The state must provide conditions for the development of the Internet and see to it that Internet technologies are not used for criminal purposes. The Internet is a special kind of publicity making it possible to place and disseminate any information worldwide. Yet the restrictive technologies must be reduced to a very narrow minimum, because the Internet cannot be regulated by taboos. Standards must be worked out, which the state can stimulate, rules of Internet ethics binding on the providers and electronic media. The regime must not even attempt to close a single Internet edition. None of those present at the meeting could cite a single such example of this incidentally.

Our biggest hazard is that we are way behind the rest of the world in installing data exchange and Internet systems in Ukraine. We are even behind Poland and Russia, countries close to us in terms of historical progress. I’m not even mentioning Europe, Japan, or the United States. This was the main point discussed by the NSDC session.

Unfortunately, some of the founders of Internet publications are not interested in a serious discussion involving experts. Instead, they skillfully manipulate various phobias and stab us in the back. They are torpedoing the dialogue, and we insist upon it; we have arguments. Otherwise the current archaic stage of the Ukrainian Internet will become chronic.