We're the UN, and we're here to help

HELLO FROM THE EUROSTAR departure lounge in Brussels. I'm Mark Scott, and if you're looking for a realistic representation of what Google is actually like, I give you this. Love it.

Let's get started.

— Global leaders gather this week in New York for the United Nations General Assembly. Little by little, the UN is consolidating its control over digital governance.

— The global battle for AI dominance comes down to two categories: the United States and, way behind, everyone else.

— The European Commission has incoming new leadership. That means a shift in policy focus for Brussels to combine tech with security and defense.

Be wary of those seeking global rules for the internet

THE UNITED NATIONS OFTEN FEELS LIKE that well-meaning friend who says all the right things, but fails to deliver on his/her promises. That's the feeling I can't shake as the great-and-the-good of the political and policy work gather in New York this week for the UN General Assembly, or almost universally known as UNGA. Gradually, different parts of the UN have been nudging their way into discussions on digital policy and internet governance. Groups like the Geneva-based International Telecommunication Union have been doing this for decades. Others, like UNESCO and its recent recommendations on governing digital platforms, are new to the party.

But there are two UN-related policy areas that will get a lot of play this week that you should pay attention to. Both, when viewed together, represent an overt effort by the international body (mostly via the UN's Office of the Secretary General's Envoy on Technology) to take the lead on the next generation of global digital policymaking. That, on first glance, isn't a bad thing. Currently, Western countries dominate those discussions. China does what it can to make itself known, often in obscured areas like international standards bodies. Almost all of the so-called Global Majority are given little, if any, say on topics like artificial intelligence policymaking and data governance. That is an inequality that serves no one's ends.

Yet I'm skipping steps. First, the announcements. The UN published its final report on AI global governance, overseen by the secretary general's tech envoy's office. The basic gist (see chart below, red arrow emphasis are mine): The UN should oversee the overlapping regional/national efforts at corralling this emerging technology. Other recommendations include: 1) creating an international scientific panel on AI akin to what exists for climate change; 2) developing globally-recognized AI standards; 3) supporting Global Majority countries via AI capacity training.

The second announcement, expected at the UN's 'Summit of the Future' event on Sept 22-23, is the long-awaited Global Digital Compact. Again, this effort looks good, from the outside. The aim is to better align the global push on digital to promote a 'trustworthy' internet; give people a greater say on how their data is used; and support Global Majority countries to benefit from the rapid expansion of technology. The final communiqué is here (from page 40.) For a deep dive on how we got here, take a look here. The top line: the UN wants to create shared international principles for the digital world.

Who doesn't want that, amirite? Yet with all UN-sponsored efforts, the devil is in the detail. By opening up digital policy discussions to the widest global audience possible, the body has provided authoritarian regimes — especially China, its surveillance-heavy tech rules and its state-led approach to digital governance — an opportunity to promote their aspirations worldwide. That, as outlined in how the UN operates, is their right.

But what we have progressively seen is that Beijing is more adept at wooing other capitals to its digital authoritarian cause than Washington, Brussels and other democratic capitals. The UN's increased efforts to take over digital policy leadership implicitly empowers such regimes to undermine the decentralized, interoperable and democratic-enabling principles that have made the internet the success that it is today.

A couple of examples. In the build-up to the Global Digital Compact, China teamed up with the so-called G77 group of Global Majority countries to offer a joint position on everything from how to fund connectivity infrastructure (hint: let Chinese telecommunications equipment makers flourish) to the need to include all voices (including those from autocratic regimes) in data governance policy.

The recently-published UN Cybercrime Convention also allowed China (and Russia) to push a vision where states can ask foreign governments for electronic evidence for criminal investigations — so long as that crime is punishable by at least four years in prison. Western governments, global civil society groups and digital companies have cried foul, yet have struggled to respond effectively.

In response, those backing the UN's power grab argue the current system skews too much toward Western countries. That criticism is true. They also argue that a more representative global dialogue around digital governance would both be more inclusive and lead to better outcomes — in terms of incorporating unheard voices. Again, it's hard to disagree with that.

But where the UN missteps is the belief that the UN — and the UN alone – is the right venue for these digital policy discussions. We already have countless venues where these issues are discussed, including even many UN-sponsored efforts with its numerous agencies at a regional or specific policy level.

It would be a mistake to centralize these discussions into lengthy UN negotiations, especially as that would give the likes of China an opportunity to push its state-led approach to digital policy that does not respect democratic values, free speech and other fundamental values. That is not how the internet started — and it definitely should not be how the next iteration of the digital world is created.

Chart of the Week

EVERYONE WANTS TO LEAD ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. But based on 122 different indicators (grouped either by 'implementation,' 'innovation,' or 'investment), there's only one global champion: the US.

China ranks second, though its lack of domestic AI talent pool is a major drawback. Other countries from Singapore and South Korea to the United Kingdom and France are evenly split in the 'also ran' category.

What just happened in Brussels?

THE COMMISSIONERS ARE DEAD. Long live the Commissioners! Well, not quite. Even after Ursula von der Leyen, the incoming president of the European Commission, announced her new executive branch last week, the current political leaders like Denmark's Margrethe Vestager will still be in place until the end of November. One noticeable absence: Thierry Breton, the French-born internal markets commissioner, who quit abruptly last week via throwing shade on von der Leyen through a post on X. Quick explainer: new Commissioners must first face hearings at the European Parliament, slated for October, before officially taking office, almost certainly on or around Dec 1.

OK, it's time to get to know the new political leadership for the European Union that will be tasked with digital rulemaking. <<Cracks knuckles.>>

First on the agenda is Finland's Henna Virkkunen, the expected Commission executive vice-president for tech sovereignty, security and democracy. Her brief includes oversight of so-called DG Connect, or the unit with enforcement powers over the bloc's content rules, known as the Digital Services Act. She also has been tasked with jumpstarting AI innovation within the EU; improving the bloc's digital infrastructure; and shepherding Europe's subsidies around semiconductors. For a full list (and it's a long list) of Virkkunen's duties, read this.

Next, France's Stéphane Séjourné, the presumptive Commission executive vice-president for prosperity and industry strategy. Paris' former foreign minister (and an ally of Emmanuel Macron) is expected to create a "European Competitiveness Fund" that will invest in next-generation technologies to improve the EU's ability to compete globally. The Frenchmen also is tasked with breaking down internal barriers to promote greater consolidation among EU member countries' domestic markets and with leading on the bloc's need for so-called critical raw materials. Again, for the wonks among us, more here.

Spain's Teresa Ribera gets the glitzy competition file. Until recently, that was the only enforcement powers that Brussels had — and Ribera's predecessor, Vestager, used her regulatory powers to go after the likes of Alphabet, Meta and Apple. The climate change expert will continue implementing the bloc's new digital antitrust rules, known as the Digital Markets Act. But in a shift to Commission policy (more on that later), the Spaniard will also oversee a revamp of EU competition policy to help local firms become global players. It follows similar recommendations outlined by former European Central Bank president Mario Draghi. For all the details, click here.

Finally, we have Ireland's Michael McGrath who is expected to become the Commission's executive vice-president for democracy, justice and the rule of law. He has been given control over so-called DG Justice, or the group of Commission officials primarily tasked with policy areas like data protection and consumer rights. For the disinformation aficionados, the Irishman will run point on foreign interference and von der Leyen's proposed 'European Democracy Shield,' or as-yet unclear plan to join up the bloc's efforts to thwart foreign actors from causing harm with EU member countries. Want to know more? Here you go.

For those who want an even more geekier look at how these politicians will oversee the next generation of digital files — everything from the Digital Fairness Act to the European Data Union Strategy — click here. And before the uber-wonks complain, no, I haven't forgotten about Bulgaria's Ekaterina Zaharieva, the proposed Commissioner for startups, research and innovation. I just didn't have the space to go into her remit.

There are three takeaways from the new Commission. First: no one exactly knows how it will all work. Currently, Brussels' rumor mill is in overdrive over who will be picked as these Commissioners' aides, or 'cabinets' in eurocrat parlance. Until that happens — and that will still be weeks off — don't listen to anyone who tells you they know how this will play out.

Second: Virkkunen has a reputation for knowing the digital policy files (she worked on the Digital Services Act as a member of the European Parliament.) She also comes from a country that has been more willing to embrace innovation, global markets and entrepreneurship than other parts of the bloc. Looking at you, France. By including 'tech sovereignty' in her job description, von der Leyen may be tilting the scales toward a more open version of that concept versus one championed by France and its allies that is all about picking legacy industrial giants to take on global rivals from the US and China. For more on that, my colleague Konstantinos Komaitis and I break down what's needed here.

Third: the geopolitics of this Commission is clear, especially on tech. If the last Commission's tenure was dominated by creating new digital rules, this one is about linking technology to security and defense. That includes a focus on industrial policy, including semiconductors and critical raw materials, to position Europe and its digital sector at the center of how von der Leyen views the appropriate response to the global economic battle — currently, mostly between China and the US.

To be clear: that strategy may not work. Ongoing disputes about how to enforce Europe's digital rules and how best to promote European innovation onto the global stage abound. But the new line within the Berlaymont building is, above all, about one thing: Galvanizing tech and digital to reposition the EU on the global stage.

What I'm reading

— The White House announced voluntary commitments from AI model developers and data providers aimed at reducing AI-generated image-based sexual abuse. More here.

— Three children rights experts weigh in on why banning smartphones from minors may not be the panacea that many hope it to be. More via the London School of Economics.

— Stanford University's Internet Observatory details a covert Russian influence operation, known as African Stream, that targeted people across Africa and the US. More here.

— Meta and a number of leading European tech firms wrote an open letter to local policymakers about why the bloc should not be so aggressive in its effort to regulate AI. Read it here.

— Digital ministers from the G20 countries met in Brazil. Here's the readout of what they agreed to.