Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
ETRD EAGR ETTC EAID ECON EFIN ECIN EINV ELAB EAIR ENRG EPET EWWT ECPS EIND EMIN ELTN EC ETMIN EUC EZ ET ELECTIONS ENVR EU EUN EG EINT ER ECONOMICS ES EMS ENIV EEB EN ECE ECOSOC EK ENVIRONMENT EFIS EI EWT ENGRD ECPSN EXIM EIAD ERIN ECPC EDEV ENGY ECTRD EPA ESTH ECCT EINVECON ENGR ERTD EUR EAP EWWC ELTD EL EXIMOPIC EXTERNAL ETRDEC ESCAP ECO EGAD ELNT ECONOMIC ENV ETRN EIAR EUMEM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID EREL ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA ETCC ETRG ECONOMY EMED ETR ENERG EITC EFINOECD EURM EENG ERA EXPORT ENRD ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EGEN EBRD EVIN ETRAD ECOWAS EFTA ECONETRDBESPAR EGOVSY EPIN EID ECONENRG EDRC ESENV ETT EB ENER ELTNSNAR ECHEVARRIA ETRC EPIT EDUC ESA EFI ENRGY ESCI EE EAIDXMXAXBXFFR EETC ECIP EIAID EIVN EBEXP ESTN EING EGOV ETRA EPETEIND ELAN ETRDGK EAIDRW ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ENVI ELN EAG EPCS EPRT EPTED ETRB EUM EAIDS EFIC EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR ESF EIDN ELAM EDU EV EAIDAF ECN EDA EXBS EINTECPS ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EPREL EAC EINVEFIN ETA EAGER EINDIR ECA ECLAC ELAP EITI EUCOM ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID EARG ELDIN EINVKSCA ENNP EFINECONCS EFINTS ECCP ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEFIN EIB EURN ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM ETIO ELAINE EMN EATO EWTR EIPR EINVETC ETTD ETDR EIQ ECONCS EPPD ENRGIZ EISL ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO EUREM ENTG ERD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECUN EFND EPECO EAIRECONRP ERGR ETRDPGOV ECPN ENRGMO EPWR EET EAIS EAGRE EDUARDO EAGRRP EAIDPHUMPRELUG EICN ECONQH EVN EGHG ELBR EINF EAIDHO EENV ETEX ERNG ED
KMDR KPAO KPKO KJUS KCRM KGHG KFRD KWMN KDEM KTFN KHIV KGIC KIDE KSCA KNNP KHUM KIPR KSUM KISL KIRF KCOR KRCM KPAL KWBG KN KS KOMC KSEP KFLU KPWR KTIA KSEO KMPI KHLS KICC KSTH KMCA KVPR KPRM KE KU KZ KFLO KSAF KTIP KTEX KBCT KOCI KOLY KOR KAWC KACT KUNR KTDB KSTC KLIG KSKN KNN KCFE KCIP KGHA KHDP KPOW KUNC KDRL KV KPREL KCRS KPOL KRVC KRIM KGIT KWIR KT KIRC KOMO KRFD KUWAIT KG KFIN KSCI KTFIN KFTN KGOV KPRV KSAC KGIV KCRIM KPIR KSOC KBIO KW KGLB KMWN KPO KFSC KSEAO KSTCPL KSI KPRP KREC KFPC KUNH KCSA KMRS KNDP KR KICCPUR KPPAO KCSY KTBT KCIS KNEP KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KGCC KINR KPOP KMFO KENV KNAR KVIR KDRG KDMR KFCE KNAO KDEN KGCN KICA KIMMITT KMCC KLFU KMSG KSEC KUM KCUL KMNP KSMT KCOM KOMCSG KSPR KPMI KRAD KIND KCRP KAUST KWAWC KTER KCHG KRDP KPAS KITA KTSC KPAOPREL KWGB KIRP KJUST KMIG KLAB KTFR KSEI KSTT KAPO KSTS KLSO KWNN KPOA KHSA KNPP KPAONZ KBTS KWWW KY KJRE KPAOKMDRKE KCRCM KSCS KWMNCI KESO KWUN KPLS KIIP KEDEM KPAOY KRIF KGICKS KREF KTRD KFRDSOCIRO KTAO KJU KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KO KNEI KEMR KKIV KEAI KWAC KRCIM KWCI KFIU KWIC KCORR KOMS KNNO KPAI KBWG KTTB KTBD KTIALG KILS KFEM KTDM KESS KNUC KPA KOMCCO KCEM KRCS KWBGSY KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KWN KERG KLTN KALM KCCP KSUMPHUM KREL KGH KLIP KTLA KAWK KWMM KVRP KVRC KAID KSLG KDEMK KX KIF KNPR KCFC KFTFN KTFM KPDD KCERS KMOC KDEMAF KMEPI KEMS KDRM KEPREL KBTR KEDU KNP KIRL KNNR KMPT KISLPINR KTPN KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KTDD KAKA KFRP KWNM KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KWWMN KECF KWBC KPRO KVBL KOM KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KEDM KFLD KLPM KRGY KNNF KICR KIFR KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KDDG KCGC KID KNSD KMPF KPFO KDP KCMR KRMS KNPT KNNNP KTIAPARM KDTB KNUP KPGOV KNAP KNNC KUK KSRE KREISLER KIVP KQ KTIAEUN KPALAOIS KRM KISLAO KWM KFLOA
PHUM PINR PTER PGOV PREL PREF PL PM PHSA PE PARM PINS PK PUNE PO PALESTINIAN PU PBTS PROP PTBS POL POLI PA PGOVZI POLMIL POLITICAL PARTIES POLM PD POLITICS POLICY PAS PMIL PINT PNAT PV PKO PPOL PERSONS PING PBIO PH PETR PARMS PRES PCON PETERS PRELBR PT PLAB PP PAK PDEM PKPA PSOCI PF PLO PTERM PJUS PSOE PELOSI PROPERTY PGOVPREL PARP PRL PNIR PHUMKPAL PG PREZ PGIC PBOV PAO PKK PROV PHSAK PHUMPREL PROTECTION PGOVBL PSI PRELPK PGOVENRG PUM PRELKPKO PATTY PSOC PRIVATIZATION PRELSP PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PMIG PREC PAIGH PROG PSHA PARK PETER POG PHUS PPREL PS PTERPREL PRELPGOV POV PKPO PGOVECON POUS PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PWBG PMAR PREM PAR PNR PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PARMIR PGOVGM PHUH PARTM PN PRE PTE PY POLUN PPEL PDOV PGOVSOCI PIRF PGOVPM PBST PRELEVU PGOR PBTSRU PRM PRELKPAOIZ PGVO PERL PGOC PAGR PMIN PHUMR PVIP PPD PGV PRAM PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOF PINO PHAS PODC PRHUM PHUMA PREO PPA PEPFAR PGO PRGOV PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PREFA PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PINOCHET PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA PRELC PREK PHUME PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PECON PEACE PROCESS PLN PRELSW PAHO PEDRO PRELA PASS PPAO PGPV PNUM PCUL PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PEL PBT PAMQ PINF PSEPC POSTS PHUMPGOV PVOV PHSAPREL PROLIFERATION PENA PRELTBIOBA PIN PRELL PGOVPTER PHAM PHYTRP PTEL PTERPGOV PHARM PROTESTS PRELAF PKBL PRELKPAO PKNP PARMP PHUML PFOV PERM PUOS PRELGOV PHUMPTER PARAGRAPH PERURENA PBTSEWWT PCI PETROL PINSO PINSCE PQL PEREZ PBS

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 08GENEVA982, International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Working Group

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #08GENEVA982.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
08GENEVA982 2008-11-18 15:51 2011-08-25 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED US Mission Geneva
VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHGV #0982/01 3231551
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 181551Z NOV 08
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7491
INFO RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 2866
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 5732
RUEHVI/AMEMBASSY VIENNA 2820
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 3352
UNCLAS GENEVA 000982 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ITU AORC KUNR AMGT
SUBJECT: International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Working Group 
on Financial Regulations 
 
REF: Geneva 000825 
 
1. SUMMARY: USG maintained its positions at the Working Groups of 
ITU Council, which consisted of two meetings on terminology use at 
the ITU, two meetings on the World Summit on the Information Society 
(Geneva, 2003 and Tunis, 2005) (WSIS), and a meeting on financial 
issues.  The working groups will submit reports on their activities 
to the ITU Council November 12-21, 2008. END SUMMARY. 
 
2.  The Working Groups of ITU Council consisted of a series of 
meetings to prepare for the meeting of the ITU Council in November 
2008.  There are five Working Groups of ITU Council comprising 
groups on: 1) Security Definitions & Terminology: Use in ICTs (Sept. 
22-23); 2) Terminology: Use in the Constitution & Convention (Sept. 
23-24); 3) WSIS: Implementation of outcomes (Sept. 25-26); 4) WSIS: 
Participation of stakeholders in ITU Activities (Sept. 29-30); and 
5) Financial Regulations and other related Financial Management 
Issues (Oct. 1-2). This cable reports on meetings of the first four 
groups. The meeting of the fifth group was reported in reftel. 
 
WORKING GROUPS ON TERMINOLOGY 
 
3.  At the first meeting, on security definitions and terminology, 
the United States introduced its contribution stating that the 
United States supports the definition of Cybersecurity agreed by 
ITU-T Study Group 17 in ITU-T Recommendation X.1205, which is as 
follows: "Cybersecurity: Cybersecurity is the collection of tools, 
policies, security concepts, security safeguards, guidelines, risk 
management approaches, actions, training, best practices, assurance 
and technologies that can be used to protect the cyber environment 
and organization and user's assets. Organization and user's assets 
include connected computing devices, personnel, infrastructure, 
applications, services, telecommunications systems, and the totality 
of transmitted and/or stored information in the cyber environment. 
Cybersecurity strives to ensure the attainment and maintenance of 
the security properties of the organization and user's assets 
against relevant security risks in the cyber eQronment.  The 
general security objectives comprise the following: availability; 
integrity, which may include authenticity and non-repudiation; and 
confidentiality." 
 
4.  There was no opposition to this position.  The Russian 
Federation offered an additional proposal, which they broached at 
the previous meeting of the group in January.  At the January 
meeting Russia indicated that it believed that, "in accordance with 
the para 36 of the WSIS Declaration of Principles and mandate of 
this Group (on Resolution 149) the subject of [the group's] 
discussion should include cybercrime, cyberterrorism and the use of 
ICT for purposes that are inconsistent with the objectives of 
maintaining international stability and security.  They added that 
these fields should be reflected in any security-related definition 
discussed by the group.  The Russian proposal for the September 
meeting included terms and definitions for information war, 
information weapons, international information crime, international 
information terrorism, and illegal use of information and 
telecommunications systems and information resources.  The group 
concluded (with the exception of the Russian Federation) that those 
terms were outside the purpose of the Union as stipulated in Article 
1.  After discussion, Russia agreed that the definition of 
cybersecurity contained in X.1205 to a certain extent covers some 
items of its proposals. 
5.  At the end of the meeting, the Syrian chair proposed several 
ways of going forward with the work of the group.  Two of his 
proposals involved including the word "security" or "cybersecurity" 
in the ITU Constitution and Convention (CS/CV).  The other options 
involved either drafting an independent resolution on the definition 
of cybersecurity, or modifying an existing resolution.  The United 
States stated "that the Constitution and Convention should be stable 
documents, and as such, we prefer other solutions, such as using 
Resolutions, over adding terms to the CS/CV.  We believe that 
changing the CS/CV may cause difficulty for national 
administrations; however, we do support the use of accepted 
definitions, such as the definition of cybersecurity established by 
SG 17.  These definitions are contextual and often "working" 
definitions, which make them flexible in the face of changing 
technologies.  The United States believes that putting the SG 17 
definition of cybersecurity in a Resolution is the appropriate 
response to Resolution 149."  Canada supported this approach. The 
Syrian chair strongly opposed this approach because Syria hopes to 
revise either Article 1 of the Constitution, which indicates the 
mandate of the Union, or the definitions contained within the Annex 
to the Constitution or the Annex to the Convention. 
 
6.  The debate on terminology continued in the second meeting, on 
terminology in the CS/CV.  In this meeting, the United States 
introduced a contribution stating that the U.S. continues to support 
no change to Article 1 of the CS/CV.  USG believes the purposes of 
the Union and associated definitions, including the definition of 
telecommunications (CS 1012), are sufficiently broad to meet the 
 
needs of the Membership and a changing telecommunications 
environment.  USG indicated that there are other ways to define 
terms in the ITU, such as in decisional elements.  Japan and Iran 
supported the U.S. position.  Russia and Syria opposed the U.S. 
position.  Russia and Syria proposed modifications to the definition 
of telecommunications.  Syria accused the United States of 
attempting to abrogate the rights of Member states to modify the 
Constitution and Convention.  The U.S. indicated, and the Emirati 
Chairman agreed, that this view was incorrect, because the United 
States only offered its position while suggesting alternative means 
to define terms within the ITU.  At this point no consideration is 
being given to adding any definitions to the CS/CV.   A Draft 
interim report of the WG-Terminology was distributed and submitted 
for discussion. In the course of the debate, the final version of 
the report to be submitted to Council was agreed by all 
participants. 
 
WORKING GROUPS ON THE WORLD SUMMIT ON THE INFORMATION SOCIETY (WSIS) 
(Geneva, 2003 and Tunis, 2005) 
 
7. At the third meeting, on WSIS Implementation, the ad hoc group on 
Internet matters was convened by the French chair.  The French chair 
indicated that no contributions were received from Membership for 
the ad hoc group.  Syria opined that the Internet Governance Forum 
(IGF) served no purpose, and is not helpful to developing nations, 
and that the ITU does not play a role at the IGF.  The French chair 
stated that ITU plays a role at IGF, on the multi-stakeholder 
advisory committee, for example.  Syria indicated appreciation for 
the work of the Chairman, while also suggesting an evaluation of the 
usefulness of the IGF, and of the ITU's role at the IGF. 
 
8. During the regular session of the group, the Russian chair and 
Secretariat introduced multiple documents on WSIS implementation. 
Most of these documents lacked controversy.  One document suggested 
changing the name of the WSIS Action Line meetings, or organizing 
the meetings differently by themes as opposed to Action Lines. 
Egypt, Gabon, Kenya, and Syria opposed changing aspects of the 
Action Line meetings.  The U.S. (and the other Member states) 
agreed, because the Action Lines, and their related meetings, were 
carefully negotiated during the WSIS. 
 
9. At the fourth meeting, on WSIS stocktaking, the group discussed 
the questionnaire on participation distributed to WSIS-accredited 
entities after the previous meeting in January.  The group noted 
that the number of answers to the questionnaire sent to the 
Secretariat was very low, representing only 3.5 percent of Member 
States, less than one percent of ITU's Sector Members and Associates 
and less than 0.1 percent of WSIS-accredited stakeholders. The Group 
noted that additional contributions had been sent by Canada and the 
United States, and two more Sector Members, but these answers were 
never received by the Secretariat. 
 
10. The group agreed that due to the small number of answers and 
lack of clarity and coherence of those answers, the relevance of the 
result of the consultation would be questionable; however, they 
decided to continue discussion on the answers given by Member States 
and to provide conclusions for each of the Questions.  The Group 
also discussed the answers from Sector Members, Associates and 
WSIS-accredited stakeholders and had the opinion that, in most 
cases, the answers from Sector Members and Associates and to the 
lesser extent, the answers received from WSIS-accredited 
stakeholders, were normally consistent with the replies received 
from their Member States. 
 
11. The Group felt that it was not yet time to discuss a draft 
structure of the final report to Council 2009.  The Group asked the 
Chairman, in cooperation with the Secretariat, to present a proposal 
for a draft structure of the final report to be discussed at its 
coming meeting, to be ready one month before the meeting.  The Group 
encouraged Member States to contribute to the next Meeting of this 
Group, taking into consideration the output of the Council on the 
Report. 
 
TICHENOR#