Solving the Web of Issues Related to Digital Sovereignty

The internet is not a physical space but a digital one that allows citizens and other types of actors of different nations to communicate.

In Athens of ancient Greece, the laws that had been voted by the assembly of free citizens were carved in the stone walls of the city. This made changes to the law nearly impossible without being noticed. Controlling the sovereignty of the wall was then primarily a physical security measure.

Setting rules on that communication space would require a sovereign of sovereigns. But no such agent exists. There are non-sovereign institutions such as the European Union and the United Nations that attempt to coordinate and harmonize communication rules, but these are not sovereign. Their existence relies on the existence of sovereign nations.

The concept of digital sovereignty can be generally summarized as a country’s push to regain control over its own and its citizen’s data. From an economic perspective, it encompasses issues ranging from taxation of multinational big tech to the creation of local startups that rely on foreigners for software coding. From the military perspective, the issues include the ability to develop cyber security measures without relying on a foreign-made technology.

The concept of digital sovereignty in a highly interconnected and porous web of nations and citizens creates a dilemma. How can a country have digital sovereignty if the nature of the “internet” rests upon the fundamental concept of “INTERconnected NETworks”? 

The skillful use of fake news as a recruitment tool for terrorists, to influence an election, or to scam a consumer clearly is bad for national security, informed consent, and commerce.

Our political leadership struggles with a dilemma similar to the one Socrates contemplated as he walked along the wall of Athens. What is the proper justification for our beliefs and actions?