What are the general lines of arguments of the ITU's member states in these policy controversies?

I definitely agree that new form of governance is necessary.

New-cyber debate is relevant for the following reasons (that makes it very different compared to the old-real approach):

1. Cyberspace is a 5th domain of warfare; the cyber battleground can have enormous and grave implications - both on human lives, human rights, rights, economic consequences, etc.
2. The fact that cyberspace is used for military purposes makes the governance of cyberspace complicated (and perplexed) due to the difficulty of attribution of cyberattacks.
3. Compared to the old-real debate, cyberspace affects directly people's lives (e.g. attacks on hospitals during Covid-19, timely delivery of health care)
4. Governance of cyberspace urgently need more actors involved; the traditional state-entered approach is not sufficient to deal with the complexity of issues.

Isn't cyberspace the 5th domain of warfare? NATO's domains should be the following: Land, Maritime, Air, Space, and Cyberspace

Personally, I see this aspect (and differentiation in approaches) as a major hindrance when it comes to the discussion between private x public sector, not to say when the technical experts are involved in these kind of discussions. It is often very difficult to grasp the problematic about digital issues if one is missing some technical understanding and background behind.

test comment