Q2/2020 - UN Open Ended Working Group (OEWG)

2nd Draft, 25 May 2020

On 25 May 2020, the OEWG Chair, Ambassador Jürg Lauber, presented the second draft of his final report. 45 governments, five intergovernmental organisations and 17 non-governmental representatives from the private sector, academia and civil society had submitted comments on the first draft of 25 March 2020.

The second draft is more precise, in particular, the last paragraph containing the recommendations. The basic structure of the report with seven chapters has remained unchanged. Only minor amendments have also been made to the descriptions of the challenges inherent in the six themes:

  1. Existing and Potential Threats
  2. International Law
  3. Rules, Norms and Principles for Responsible State Behaviour
  4. Confidence-building Measure
  5. Capacity Building
  6. Regular Institutional Dialogue

Especially the paragraph on a regular institutional dialogue on cyber security goes into greater detail and investigates its usefulness more comprehensively. Even though there are different opinions regarding the best format for such type of dialogue, there are hardly any voices left that oppose the dialogue in general. In paragraph 65, six functions are listed the dialogue could comprise:

  • Awareness raising and information exchange;
  • developing guidance to support and monitor the implementation of existing commitments and recommendations;
  • building trust and confidence;
  • coordinating and strengthening the effectiveness of capacity-building;
  • identifying and exchanging good practices;
  • encouraging further study and discussion on areas where no common understanding has yet emerged[1].

The dialogue is requested to take part once a year under the umbrella of the “UN disarmament machinery”. It should, however, avoid duplicating other activities. Performance of a periodical check to verify observance by the UN member states of the eleven principles of UNGEE of 2015 and the drafting of a comprehensive UN declaration on cyber security are the subjects of other proposals.

Compared to the first draft of the report, there is a stronger recognition of the need for cooperation with non-governmental stakeholders from the private sector, academia and civil society. Paragraph 71 emphasises on the one hand that responsibility for national cyber security rests primarily with states and their governments, and that, the envisaged “regular institutional dialogue” must therefore,  by its very nature, be an intergovernmental process. On the other hand, it is recognised that in order to build a secure cyber space, multi-stakeholder cooperation is essential. New mechanisms need to be found here[2]. The principles of inclusion and transparency are also highlighted, but without specifying how these aspects could be operationalised.

The paragraph containing the recommendations gives more concrete details compared to the first draft, but remains still vague and contains “wildcards” for additional proposals.

The recommendations made in the section on “international law” include the proposal to establish a reporting system, within the scope of which the UN member states provide their national views and practice on how they apply international law in cyber space. The International Law Commission is requested to prepare an expert opinion.

In the section about “rules, norms and principles of responsible behaviour of State”, it is proposed to establish a repository of national policies and strategies regarding cyber security.

Also in the section “confidence-building measures (CBMCs)”, the establishment of a repository is requested, in which all global, regional and national CBMCs shall be recorded. The UN member states are asked to nominate national Points of Contact that shall assume the function of so-called “cyber ambassadors” and that can help to improve the dialogue between the states at a diplomatic level. Close cooperation with regional organisations, such as OSCE, ASEN, OAS or AU is recommended.

Regarding “capacity building”, it is suggested to establish training programs on a neutral basis, in line with specific principles not yet defined, in a coherent way.

New time schedule, 7 June 2020

On 6 June 2020, Ambassador Jürg Lauber proposed in a letter to the UN member states to extend the mandate of the OEWG until spring 2021. He informed that given the ongoing pandemic, it was not possible to have the OEWG report completed by the start of the 75th UN General Assembly in autumn 2020[3]. Lauber would like a series of virtual negotiations to take place between June 2020 and December 2020. Hoping that the situation will have improved by the end of the year 2020 with a view to a physical meeting in New York, the third and final meeting of the OEWG is envisaged for early spring 2021. The proposal met with general approval. Russia even requested to extend the OEWG mandate until 2025. The first round of virtual consultations took place between 15 and 19 June 2020. Still pending is the question which level of transparency is required for these virtual intergovernmental negotiations. At the first two official OEWG sessions in September 2019 and February 2020, accredited non-state stakeholders had been permitted to attend, even though they had no right to speak. In December 2019, informal consultations had taken place between governments and representatives from the private sector, academia and civil society. At the first virtual consultation round in June 2020, however, NGOs had been excluded.

Mehr zum Thema
Q2/2020UN
  1. [1] See: Second “Pre-draft” of the report of the OEWG on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security, 25 May 2020, Paragraph 65, in: https://www.un.org/disarmament/open-ended-working-group/
  2. [2] See: Second “Pre-draft” of the report of the OEWG on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security, 25 May 2020: „Paragrpah 71: It was recalled that States hold primary responsibility for national security, public safety and the rule of law. It was also noted that regular dialogue should be primarily intergovernmental in nature, and appropriate mechanisms for engagement with other stakeholder groups would need to be found. In their interventions, States acknowledged that building a more resilient and secure ICT environment necessitates multi-stakeholder cooperation and partnerships. While recognizing the unique role and responsibility of States in relation to security, there was growing appreciation that States may benefit from the expertise in non-governmental communities and that responsible behaviour of other actors makes an essential contribution to this environment.“ In: https://www.un.org/disarmament/open-ended-working-group/
  3. [3] Letter of Jürg Lauber, Ambassador, Permanent Representative, Chair of the Open-ended Working Group from June, 4, 2020 to To all Permanent Representatives and Permanent Observers to the United Nations in New York: „I would like the members of this Group to consider a new timeline for completion of its work. For this new timeline to be adopted, the OEWG needs to pass a formal decision to be adopted through a silence procedure in accordance with GA decisions 74/544 of 27 March 2020 and 74/ 555 of 18 May 2020. I intend to circulate a draft decision shortly. Such an OEWG decision shall: a. while continuing the current Group’s work, postpone its third substantive session to a date in early spring 2021 and b. invite the General Assembly to extend the deadline for the submission of a report by the OEWG requested in operative paragraph 5 of resolution 73/27 to the seventy sixth session of the Assembly. The decision by the OEWG will be transmitted to the President of the General Assembly w ith a request that in line with decision 74/544 of 27 March 2020 and 74/555 of 1 5 May 2020 he circulate a short procedural General Assembly decision for adoption through a silence procedure, in order for this extension of the deadline to take effect. Assuming that the above proposals enjoy consensus, my plan would be to schedule, between September 2020 and January 2021, a second and a third round of informal virtual meetings, whose topics would be international law, regular institutional dialogue, confidence building measures, and capacity building. These sets of informal virtual meetings would complement the first round of informal virtual meetings scheduled to take place later this month and will thus ensure that delegations have the opportunity to provide further f eedback on all substantive aspects of the OEWG mandate.“ Siehe: https://www.un.org/disarmament/open-ended-working-group/