The splinternet: is this the end of the world wide web?
The age of the global internet may be coming to an end as mistrust between East and West mounts. Rising protectionism, nationalism and security fears could see the internet split into separate parts, so countries can control what they regard as its negative aspects. This potential outcome, which has become known as the splinternet, could put globalisation into reverse, damage world trade and cut off Western technology companies from growth markets.
Eric Schmidt, the former Google CEO, thinks such an outcome is likely within the next 10 to 15 years. What will happen if he is right?
As well as unleashing a wave of creative destruction in industries from retail to print publishing to broadcasting, the internet as developed in the West included aspects that governments in other parts of the world are keen to control, be they political or religious.
Different countries have different priorities, so a one-size-fits-all internet was never going to work. One solution could be to pull the plug on the open, global internet and instead create a series of independent networks. Schmidt talks about a bifurcated internet — one US-led and one Chinacentric.
However, some think that a Europe-based network is also possible, as the continent appears keener on data protection and regulation that anyone in Washington DC.
Indeed, earlier this year, Europe introduced the General Data Protection Regulation, which supports privacy in a world where companies can benefit from using and misusing personal information harvested from individuals.
The balkanisation of the internet is already under way. The open, free-speech model does not work for China, where censorship and surveillance are widespread. The country has already raised what is known as the Great Firewall of China, which blocks access to a selection of foreign websites and slows cross-border traffic.
In 2010, this blocked Google’s search engine in the country. As a result, Google has been developing a censored search engine for China in a project known as Dragonfly.
Giving testimony this week to a congressional committee, Sundar Pichai, Google’s CEO, said the project would not be implemented any time soon. This raises the question as to why it is being developed in the first place.
The internet is primarily built on US technology and infrastructure.
The Made in China 2025 policy, a 10-year plan to update China’s manufacturing base by rapidly developing 10 hi-tech industries, is likely to see an upgrade of the country’s internet infrastructure that will put in place data centres and servers built in China that it can easily control.
Iran has already done this on a smaller scale. Dubbed the Halal Net, the “walled-garden intranet” allows the theocratic country to control what its citizens see and monitors their every online move. India has also introduced laws that require user information to be stored only on servers in India.
Technology transfer — or theft — has been a big issue for President Donald Trump in his trade war with China. It is obvious the US seeks to derail Made in China 2025 and its “Belt and Road” initiative that aims to build infrastructure in its neighbouring countries to boost its influence.
Chinese-made technology is no longer being used in key infrastructure in the West, with the BT Group, the British telecoms company, due to remove Huawei technology from its 3G and 4G networks amid fears that the Chinese government could use it for spying. New Zealand and Australia have also stopped telecom operators using Huawei’s equipment.
Meng Wanzhou, Huawei’s CFO, has been arrested in Canada, sparking Chinese outrage. Though the arrest is not tied to technology directly — the charges relate to sanctions-busting actions with Iran —
Huawei remains under suspicion.
Should the splinternet become a reality, global consequences are likely, especially for e-commerce as the ability to service a global market will be reduced drastically.
Businesses such as Amazon and Google could lose their global dominance as the growth markets in Asia are moved out of their sphere of influence. It could lead to the segregation of supply chains, which is likely to increase business costs. It could result in less competition in segregated markets, which could push up prices for consumers. It is also likely to allow authoritarianism to prosper.
It is unclear whether Schmidt’s vision of a digitally divided world will ultimately come to pass, but steps in this direction are being made.
We may already be witnessing the end of the world wide web as the era of virtual borders dismantles its global reach.