passion that the people could be governed in the public interest rather than true faction or mobs megan the latest edition of foreign affairs magazine underlr the banner world or web joining us to talk about it from new york the editor from foreign affairs morning. >> good to be here.

why in the terms of a world war? >> it's a great question and the ppswer is that something similaa to what is generally happening with globalization and capitalism over the last two decades has been happening with the internet as well. it is actually an interesting story of liberal universal open market open system that is gradually facing pushback because it went too far, too fast and got in trouble. let me explain.think of four think of a four act played the first act united states government helps create the fundamentals of what now we have as the internet with secure communication system that could survive a nuclear war and develop a network. war. the first act united states government has a public infrastructure and decide to ru

it as aden open system that everybody can communicatee easily. act number two u.s. government decides to partner with techthey company to have the market develop this as it should be not in the 80s and 90s united states government turned it open pblic infrastructure over to partnership with the private sector to develop so we get all of the wonderful things in the 1990s. and early 2,000 as the golden age of the web and the internet. that is act number two. act number three the last decade or so. these private companies dominate the marketplace with the oligopoly and now have big tech formerly a large open internet is now filled with bought and fan and crooks trying to take

your money and other people trying to manipulate it in various ways and acts has real th regulation the system starts to fray and breakdown. and in fact number three the fraying of the system leads to pushback in the issue of several kinds of pushback that are happening around the world willt basicallyhe constrict the open d free flowing internet that we used to know and love. what do i mean?net first of all talk about u.s. against the tech mark tech mark tucker berg drag before congress now think about regulating google and amazon and facebook. but but that is the least of the pushback because u.s. iss still u dominated by.s liberals or market-oriented principals. so very slow to regulate in fact

united states government help to partner with the big tech companies to dominate in the first place. the real pushback with comeseuo elsewhere the europeans for example are trying to regulate the internet they have just sent something an entire new law about data control to make sure individuals have the right to individu data and businesses in particular cannot use against citizens wishes. so regulation in one sense that other people save a year p.m. for kind of thought the problem with regulation. problem the indians are trying to solve it by building a better internet talking about what's going on in india they will reengineer from the bottomas up doing that as a public goods a public good then there is china which tries to go of the phone internet thankff you very much you can do whatever you want we will just wi the create a china cybersovereignty

idea it should rule and the ide. of the single global internet sorry that fm what wereare the interested and we are the chinese government want to so i willrythingvernment and e basically arrange china cyber's wantr's fear the way i want to and that's essentially our internet you have yours we will have hours and that it is now the splinters down the road so the common system to separate. anyway, we don't know what willp happen.pen so as it offers public goods to the world but act number two of mis. companies lead in u.s.leado dominated open way and act iii packets into trouble there is pushback so what will happen act

number four? who will control the internet of the future? government? companies? individual people? one internet or many? this is what we don't know nothing will happen the next few years. >> with that in mind you can ask questions about the stories involved with this idea laid out in world war i as from foreign affairs if you want to ask questions. so when it comes to act number four then ultimately what happens to the consumers depending on when? you you make a really great question. i there will be a lot of wonderful eechnology wonderful glory of the internet in the digital future. every year we can see the development of new opportunities

down the road.oprtunit no question future generations will look back at us to think os the wonderful things they can do down the road that we could not do now because of the ads and not act and not just of digital technology with theta connection coming into a giant hole. however that future will probably be a lot more m compartmentalizedet and much moe of a reflection of the existing power structure in the market, geopolitics rather than liberal utopia we thought it might be some people thought it might be in the 1990s so the idea thato would drive politics in a certain direction we don't thine that anymore because the chinese prove you can use the technology just as easily for control liberation for those who thoughw

technology would inherently great and would change humanity has approved in proved in the hirst few decades of this erantt wrong because they bring to the internet all the problems and w. will see them reflect that at hoch. that. >>host: we hear the term cyberwarfare with the conversation michelle and michael write this in part to say it turns out bobby increasing the cyberpearl harbor shows little appetite for cyberattack immediate threat is more corrosive states are using the tools of cyberwarfare toteso undermine the very foundation of the internet.ruction. t can you be in onhe that? >> yes.f

the ve these are top level technocrats somebody would probably have been secretary of defense in the next in the craddick administration and in charge of cyberpolicy at the pentagon. people people who basically say given what i just said beforere out the and the threats that are out there right now people trying to come in, what can united statesv do to save the internet and protect consumers from the threats that are out there? it's a little detail but it's a great piece if you want to know what we can do that to be.that t but the best part of the pieces the mind that you just said the threat are corrosive and not explosive. rlen you first thought of thinga like a digital pearl digital pearl harbor or cyberwarfare weo thought in terms of a government trying to do an attack there are

still possibilities there is an actual war possibly between united states and china that also go after internet but in bt short of war, governments are not using it to attack other governments directly in the warlike fashion. instead a lot of sneaky covert y activities warlike with more like what the russians are doing in ukraine it is a gradualust. trust a lot of nigerian prince a lot of nigerian prince so you don't know what's happening. so the beginning of the internee age all in front of a computer the caption was and it was very

funny because if you think abou that nobody knows if you are a bot or a 400-pound man on the couch. and that lack of trust nobody knows you are a dog or a russian by.n is eroding that trust everybody operates online we will all be denied the best measures and benefi benefitsts of a common pool a common pool of internet everybody has access to.irst cam >>host: the independent line in virginia go ahead be 14 be 14 good morning.the spli it is fascinating but what do

you think is the most probable at for given the current situation? also bringing up the dark web and how the internet may affect that or not? and how the internet may affect that or not? be met great question.at quest first let me start off by sayint i am not a digital expert one of my jobs is to run the conversation and talk to the general public and to the general forum but the experts are talking about and what they are saying. so i i don't anybody to think i'mdy posing but our job atatext foreign affairs is to assemble good experts you can listen to all sides that putting a good job to put a debate together so owaders can make up their own u mind.mind.what i thi. but basically as to what will

happen next, we really don't know it depends on the united states for example will get it back together if you think abouc the problems in the last ten ten or 15 years in the writing of areas fromst 10-15 capitalism to globalization there has been a breakdown or a breakdown or a failure of regulation so things can go forward with lots of benefits with less turmoil and disorder and then to be destabilizing to various countries economic globalization which caused problems for different people in different areas. so the internet was racing forward in the connection will race forward to fast beyond the capacity of regulators..

there really are no big globalde regulators and there are huge issues like data nobody foresaw. is a good example one of the fai fascinatingng thing that came about was the control of data is the biggest issues in all ofst this it has market issues, policy issues, political and personal but yet there is no real great model the entireentie world has moved transactions and commercial enterprises online so quickly that to produce realms of data with multiple players multiple transactions every time you make a transaction on my.on onli who can keep for report or monetize or track that data? that is the central question of

the ages that age is you? company? the government?on. is i the regulating agency? get to control and monetize that data?nteresti i don't know where we will go next but the trend is the chinese like in other areas of the economy so far they played her hand rather well effectively playing the long game forr technological dominance if they can faking her system using forward intelligently and widely and avo avoid throughout the u.s going into dysfunction the future of the internet is far more chinese and dysfunction asl than u.s. or english. s >>host: independent-minded go-ahead. gary i'm sorry she left. baltimore maryland go-ahead tee14 i hope you can me report -- okay. economic nationalism the main

spokesperson for that was the van and and he made the point there will be a lot of pushbackf because individuals data is used emarket withh in the the global economic system. in he says the individuals should get paid for their information for the market so that is one point but also about facebook as an example with the. algorithm they are nothing more than engineering the market and engineering data for the use of the prophet for the economist.

>> so that is absolutely correct in one good way to think aboutr. this is the reaction against the unfettered globalism and populist or economic mesh nationalism where they try to reassert their sovereignty and take back some of the controls over their own state that seem to have been surrendered to the authority authorities to the broad global trend photos wemic were seeing elsewhere with breakfast in the trump election and other aspects, you can imagine a version that exact same thing going on with the internet with china. tng china says okay, why should we be subject to the big global thing line on american terms with american western language and infrastructure?

no. we don't want to play in your area we chinese create our on internet and assertrt cybersovereignty entire internet policy right now is to potentially cybersovereignty a similar parallel to the economic nationalism of state capitalism the chinese do in economics. and what other people in the o st are trying to do now to ard create those flows to mess it semester created a very similar phenomenon. >>host: from hawaii republican mine be 14 be 14 but i don't think i notices about wall

street there seems to be no introduction whatsoever i know a lot and then the mall called and 50,000 going to california. they don't have a choice they take a right for safety away from us which is fine becausehey they have proven and now inan an england is a republican mine go-ahead be 14 so my question can you explain what do you suggest that they should get

their act together per se?take o >> that's a great question if you think of the fundamental ger question as we created a a playground called the internet and partnered with those it is easy for tech companies to create products that we use and enjoy in the playground then ras it's ran on a song for a decade or two without paying attention in the social media company and wonderful commercial companies and then the economy in many increasingly world to parts of the world to increasingly online stuff but f.en the question becomes who of regulates this area and pool whs from the same? everybody now tries to push back in different ways. in the united states doing this

little bit of regulation on the little bit of regulation on the tech company in the most radical suggesn package is an article that basically says the simplest way to do this without nationalizing everything or destroying companies or ruining the internet is simply forcing companies to share the data they collect with everybody. so essentially, you get to collect the data but you don't to collect it exclusively or monetize it alone. so like scientists now where scientists are being asked to deliver the data sets and conclusions so other people can see the data. you can collect what you want but everybody gets to see it. in india, there are saying we should do things differently and get companies out. europe is putting stricter

regulations in place. the chinese are saying, why are companies powerful in the first the government should be in charge and beijing is basically telling its companies that they will congrehem in for a talk before congress we will simply say this wh you have have toosi do. we don't know what will happen next week on boundary. cultivate of how you imposeat is regulation producing wonderful things that are getting out of hand. talking about the story world war web where you can find it. online yesterday with the national security adviser john bolton talking about the larger issues of cyberwarfare and want to get your thinking on that as well be met so the director of

the nsa with offensesop cyberoperationser to any type of election meddling. what that means?what w >> in the exactly that it is ap. classified matter it is a a priority of mine to make sure that we are using the full range of our capabilities not just elections but the vulnerable systems in the united states to --berwarfare operations. that is something that is very important because what we want is not more in cyberspace do ste that establish structures so our adversary conductedries who

cyberoperation or cause the state will pay a much higher a much higher price if that fan ih they simply refrain of that is why it is potentially so important if you are only found the defendant you cannot create truck chooses which do not talk about that turn deterrent. >> i have no problems with what the national security advisor just said. s and that logic and subject to problems themselves. and that it will be nasty. beiay that is a legitimate tool

essentially what we do in the military. and in the economics fear.to whs you are violating accent we will punish you. spheresthis i and with that next administration. >> tool of retaliation during w- will start doing it too. none of us want to go down that road. m that is a legitimate tool in thl kit but the danger in the game of chicken and if you don't stop and you're not careful you can bring down the entire structure. the dang that way simply is failing toer recognize that it .

more than those temporaries wobble.ular are the older version of the so the entire global trading system everybody operates economically they work out everybody's benefit. a and th everybody played by the rules including the government and the economy. that that could be either thee government trying to get the and nobody is looking.

but that's only if everybody plays legitimate. you want a game to continue but not everybody in their own thing. that economic.s don't they want things to be nationally based. ikere are people like thed therl chinese that don't believe in the global internet they are trying to make better. we are. we are playing chicken with somebody who takes the wheel and wrote out the car and we say we will just punish you would do our own thing and do exactly what you are you're doing thatan is why you have a potential thing with the eye for an eye level world one so the dangerous part of his administration trade or security will be too much of a aggressive cat by rolling

olinging down that cooperativerh system that we are still benefiting from tee7an line. massachusetts republican might go ahead good morning. talk about that gross income is a government been internet arena. with all of the hackingtity thea selection will offer the familyg tey have done nothing over to rigging decade.. the fbi intel and have done nothing all the intellectual property has been and i'm wondering why approaches them but they will fail. >> again i cannot disagree with

your point but what i i would say in the governments of or in defense of the government agencs that have failed to address this problem it the problem it is just their fault. it is part of a broad government should not dominate the nba and all-american western edition that the government should organize the economy that with o regulation to allow the doctors to develop and and those that wl will provide been to ultimately serve the public government's

job is not to run things to their benefit but the is to r te overarching with the market googleition that is how we gott amazon and google and facebook and all the big tech company giant behemoth that that did not even a a decade ago because we think that companies provide the dynamism and the government provide a structure and that works well except we fell aslee at the wheel and forgot the gold always for the good of the hole. they think of their own good. you facebook provides wonderful benefit but they are also using a benefit it isn't out ofs the a altruism but to make al with dor and about a book -- about. capil

companies can make about by giving benefit that they would gladly pay for. when capitalism works badly they screw the people and take things away from them so how do you regulate companies that are allowed to dominate that area th without killing that golden goose? >>host: when the when you hear apple pulling out about out of china because they are illegal but they would bend to china's will?

>> so what i would say is america should speak very carefully about this. one of the great interesting stories of the current age is the emergence of the post- american world or globalization a world in which they have more to say then they used to.the uns to say then they used to. a view about regulating tech abo companies we are the cuttingear edge of everything.worl to be hegemonic for so long and a lot of things we have been done is excellent but that later approaches internet regulation. over to or to do things we don't want.

to bring them in and wrap them up inthem in the hearing and tr. error with regulation. that is one possible way but only one possible way to regulate. in china they dispense with the middle stuff this is what you have to do if you want to keep operating. they say we would never do that to our company that the tech companies that can we control facebook? in china there is no debate. they are much more with more leon in europe. now they are scrambling to comp. comply and that is a different model.

so with the with governmentgovet regulators u.s. authorities have fallen asleep at the wheel but the fundamental question how do you manage public they went government as part of the in tha swimming pool the world uses. will you contract that out and o then how do you control blackwater? >>host: pennsylvania independent line. >> why doesn't the united states stt together domestically and ge internationally with another

component to help regulate thene miternet?es. militarily economically etli cetera?why computer science along with the united nations to hash outited d something where we can start regulating to make this is a i greatt question and there are such obvious benefit if there tn were no set topic would be in.d

so having that country you drive on that i do about action should be possible to have a lot ofof benefits from a variety of ways that we should be able tobe abln develop, intelligent mutually beneficial of the road. the problem is people are people dnd they don't trust the othertn group. t pretty soon.discsion pretty soon wonderful discussion reat you talk about a think whe about how to regulate this for n common that project works well and for a while, but if it starts to breakdown and-over the

last it has been over the last decade, to see they are not my partners or my friend let create our own private club over here hard again -- start again fresh. but you regulate that common public good for all treat in smr little bubbles but not the reall benefit which is to come -- intiallydefault and beneficial way. fro >>host: new hampshire, we are honored to be with you in morning.honored you guys rock you have the best learn fro

>> it is impressive in c-span is and c-span is and international resource. resourc china doesn't bother me if they want to have their own internet that'sina doesn' fine i feel the messing themselves up but russil is a differentdw story i saw th on c-span the other day that led america to said whoever rules -- the internet rules thee world sy spending money on bombs and guns and ships they want to run the internet.. and as a comparison of the internet being a giant highway you have a lot of wrecks and people speeding and not obeying

the laws, i think we could use some cyberpolice. and russia uses their internet to rule the internet becauseoplb some of these people are bad actors when you start to act bad messing with infrastructure if a we have the capability to stop n them and i get the great question. do we have the capability? we definitely do have the capability to shut some people down that if we have the will ti do that and how to do that is difficult.gh but i disagree little bit i thank you characterize the the situation well but flipped the actors i don't fear the russians as much as i i do the chinese

long-term because russia doesn't have a lot of power they do in the existing realm they are strong regional power and a wean economy and a military base with a strong authoritarian leader who places hand very well and s shrewd but they are going down therearn economy doesn't have any real le future no real place for 20th century success demographically where the chinese are growing so fast and has managed to rise their rise so well with such extraordinary potential economically and have managed tr their digital future the last couple decades so intelligentlyy that there is a real challenge t to be that successor hegemon to the united states. not russia think of u.s.

infrastructure by building trains across the.- they the russians like butch cassidy and the sundance kid they are like the badlands attacking the train and being a pain in the butt for the railroad but the russians will not create a a new railroad. the chinese will come in either via the railroad that we have in ain it themselves and then hirer their own or build the entire numeral road and say no you have rulelay by our rules. so the russian threat in the short term hackers and their weapon nice warfare is on the margin margins but the chinese development is full-scale new major down the road we will sit

in our little bubble here 30 years from now where the asian internet is the main source that is the interesting question than what happens in that world.now. ho >>host: the cover piece world war where you can find it online in magazine gideon rose herbs as says editor thank you for your time to make happy to talk about any other issues including form policy or the middle east or the american presidency identity politics we wrote a wonderful essay against identity politics that argues right and left of both potentially what happened with the internetn is happening with the american domestic politicalc sphere with single common universal spirit breaking down into heading little groups that cater to

themselves more with the breakdown of liberal universalism and i thank you for your time.