The Case for Digital Solidarity • Pablo Chavez

Adjunct Fellow at CNAS and Founder of Tech Policy Solutions, Pablo Chavez joins Niki in the studio to explain digital solidarity and digital sovereignty, swap campaign convention memories, and discuss US policy when it comes to the global internet. They talk State Dept. footnotes, the TikTok ban, and the future of the open internet. 

“ ...the United States, increasingly as a matter of foreign policy on digital matters is a little bit in a defensive crouch.” -Pablo Chavez

• Connect with Pablo on LinkedIn
• Nerd out and read the US International Cyberspace & Digital Policy Strategy
• Read Pablo's article on digital solidarity

• Learn More at www.techedup.com
• Check out video on YouTube
• Follow Niki on LinkedIn

Transcript

Copy

 Niki: I'm Niki Christoff and welcome to Tech’ed Up. Today in the studio I'm joined by Pablo Chavez in the studio. We met as staffers for Senator John McCain back in 2006 and then worked together as colleagues at Google. 

Pablo has led US public policy efforts at Microsoft and global public policy for LinkedIn. He's an expert on national security and cloud computing and today we're talking about the shifting international digital landscape.

Pablo, thank you for coming into the studio. 

Pablo: Thanks so much for having me, Niki. It's great to see you. And by the way, for those listening, the expert part was in, quotes. So, just to be very clear. [chuckling]

Niki: It absolutely wasn't!And in fact, I was going to say, like, thanks for bringing your brain onto the podcast, dragging your big brain up here. [Pablo: laughs] 

It's true! ‘Cause you, we've worked together for years. We actually met - you were the chief counsel for Senator John McCain over on the Hill [Pablo: yeah] when I was working on the campaign, which I started in 2006. 

Pablo: God, I know. I, y'know, it's funny. I am really, really bad at reminiscing in part because I have a terrible memory, but I have very specific memories of having these email exchanges with you about incoming from, like, conservative bloggers against McCain.

So, McCain had this bill, he introduced this bill about like reporting images of child sexual abuse to SNCMEC, [Niki: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children] Missing and Exploited.  [Niki: Yeah] And these bloggers were kind of coming out basically saying that these were violations of their First Amendment rights, et cetera.

You were dealing with that for the campaign and I, like, very much remember you very expertly addressing this with like talking points and talking to the press about it. It was an interesting preview of things to come. [chuckling]

Niki: Yes. And this is actually how we always work together.

So, you were on the Senate side crafting the policies.  [Pablo: yeah] And then my job was to try to build the messaging for surrogates and to talk to the press. And we ended up then shifting to Google. [Pablo: Yup] We both went to Google before the campaign was over, before that election ended. And I feel like we became bros in Minneapolis [chuckling] in 2008 during the Republican National Convention.

So, we had to bring in all the Google executives to [Pablo: Yes], your job was to introduce them to future and current policymakers and talk about those issues. My job was to get them the right passes and get them into the right rooms and onto the convention floor. 

Pablo: That was quite an interesting experience. The other thing that I remember about the campaign is that you worked, I think, with Doug Holtz-Eakin.

Oh yes. He's a wonderful, wonderful guy. 

Niki: Fantastic economist.

Pablo: And when you were looking for a gig after the campaign, he was such a great advocate for you, um, and I was very happy to know that you joined Google. Again, I think that like, I mean, just my life is like, y'know, a series of emails. [Niki: chuckling] 

I remember that you, you moved to California, right?

Niki: I did, right!  Doug Holtz-Eakin had been, he had the unfortunate experience of laying off most of the policy staff first. He was eating Twizzlers. [chuckling]  

Pablo: Oh, poor guy. [laughing]

Niki: I know. And after that, he was an incredible advocate for landing us places.

Pablo: Yeah. One of the things that I've kind of realized  in my kind of older age is just how deeply important these relationships are for everything, right? For your sanity, for your paycheck it's great. This is one of the reasons why I'm so happy to be here.

Niki: Yes, and I think you're right. We built these really strong friendships in these jobs. And I, I fear that there's sort of a demonization of work. 

[both laugh] 

And I feel like, sorry, I mean, that's a whole other podcast. 

But I feel like these have been places, not just that I've had colleagues, but friends. [Pablo: Yeah] And so part of the reason we were at the RNC, I'm going to turn this into a pivot, but it's going to be tricky. [Pablo: Go for a pivot] Okay, I think I can do it. 

The reason we were there is they couldn't find that many Republicans. Um, everybody wanted to be in Denver with Barack Obama and Jay Z.

Pablo:  I remember that! God, you have a great memory.

Niki:  And they were like, who? I know, an elephant. That was a terrible pun and I hate puns. [Pablo: laughs] Ugh, groan. 

So, they had to find the Republicans, and it was me, you, and Lee Dunn. [Pablo: Yeah] The only McCain people. [Pablo: That's right] And so, then we had to go do the convention. Now, we are taping this during the current, quote unquote, Republican National Convention. [Pablo: Right]  

This this is my pivot. I'm going to try to do it. 

Pablo: Yeah

Niki: it's related to what you're working on now, because it's showing a shift in some of our national politics and then there is an undercurrent of people who want to maintain our allies engagement internationally.

And so, it is related, I think, to what we're seeing with the shifting sands with digital international policy. 

Pablo: Politics is such a funny thing. Your political life is punctuated by these moments of great hope and, but most of it is just kind of like just despair and just disappointment. Right. [chuckles] 

Niki: [chuckling] I remember our pollster crying. 

Pablo: Yeah. And so, that was a really interesting one because, y'know, whatever you think about Sarah Palin, at that moment, one of the things that really kind of jumped out at me was that she, one of her children has Down Syndrome and, at the time, it seemed that she was going to be very vocal for the disabilities community.

And you know that one of our, one of our kids has some pretty significant disabilities. And so, there was this kind of like weird moment where like all these friends that I had who had kids with special needs were kind of emailing each other and texting each other and saying like, “Wow, this could be, y’know, so great.”

And I even like looked at Jim Inhofe who was, like, sitting or standing next to me, and I was like, “Oh, this is going to be amazing.” And then, {raspberry sound] 

Niki: Right, right. I mean, It's just, it's crazy.

Pablo: It's just so interesting to see these things. We are in this moment and that moment is reflected in our tech policy. My personal view is that there are and will continue to be remnants of, y'know, this notion of global free expression all around the world, but I do think that it's going to be and is already being coupled with ideas of nationalism and building walls instead of bridges.

That, that's one of the things that, that I've been really, really focused on in my work since leaving Google in, in February of 2022. I believe in the, obviously, in the idea of national security, and certainly national security in the digital space, and I've heard you express that you're a hawk on, on a lot of this stuff.

But I think that as you're thinking about national security, you need to think about what that you're protecting. And I think that what we're protecting is kind of like this open, rule-bound democratic system that is merging and evolving more into the digital space.

Niki: So let's talk about some specifics around a general new trend that we're seeing. So, State Department put out a framework.

Pablo: Mm-hmm. 

Niki: Tell us about it. 

Pablo: Yeah, so the National Defense Authorization Act of 2023, Congress did a couple of things. First, it restated the United States policy on the global internet.

And so, essentially what it said, which is what every administration from Clinton through Trump and now to, to Biden has said, which is that the United States stands for a global internet that is open. And it's evolved a little bit because now it's about secure, reliable, and so forth.

But, but the first word is open. So free and open that supports free expression and other human rights and that supports innovation and, and commerce. Some of the evolution of, of our policy has been more of a focus on the idea of making sure that the internet protects against kind of incitements to violence, protects against disinformation and in other areas that have become pretty serious over the last several years.

That NDAA also called on the State Department to develop a strategy for the Internet for the broader digital space and specifically it called on the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy to come up with a strategy and kind of deliver it to Congress and to the public.

And that happened some weeks ago. It's a great document. I would really encourage folks to, to take a look at it because I think that it is the first time that the US government has, y'know, really kind of used strategic empathy to look out into the world and really understand what the dynamics and what the context is in, in other countries around internet freedom. 

Essentially what I think is, has happened is that, the Biden administration, by the way, I think I would expect this of any administration. I think there's been a lot of consistency around this. They basically put forward this idea of digital solidarity to counter notions of digital sovereignty. And, and to really kind of encourage more kind of digital partnerships between the United States, allies, and partners, and, and other countries. And so, it is really almost a roadmap for how to meet other countries in the middle in this new digital space.

Niki: Okay. So, I love the term strategic empathy. I would say that nuance is not really something - I'm like, “Might makes right when it comes to the internet.”

[both laugh] 

And I think actually we've sort of bulldozed the world in that way [Pablo: Yeah]  in some ways because we had, you and I were there for this, right? [Pablo: Yup] We watched the unfolding of, of these tech companies and not just with content and apps, but infrastructure with undersea cables, [Pablo: Yup]  with data centers, with making sure that you had stability and security of these systems globally. [Pablo: Yup] 

And so, we did basically dominate. And I think you're right. We're in a moment where that's just not going to hold. And so being sympathetic to especially what I think you're saying is kind of our allies [Pablo: Yeah] and people who are aligned with our values. Think of it more like partnerships.

Pablo: Yes, that's exactly right.

And I mean, just to back up a little bit, I mean, basically what what has been happening for the last 25 years or so, is this debate essentially between open and enclosed. You can kind of think about the internet and the digital space as a spectrum.

On one side of the spectrum, you have this idea of internet freedom. And again, from the second Clinton term, all the way through the current Biden administration the United States government has supported kind of a dual notion of internet freedom. The first, again, is It's the idea that, that people should be allowed to communicate online, so receive information and deliver information.

And the second plank of that is that we should be able to conduct commerce and create economic opportunity online. And again, very, very consistent with nuances here and there, but very consistent since the late nineties. 

That's one end of the spectrum. On the other end of the spectrum is something called digital sovereignty. And this is basically the idea that, y'know, instead of having this kind of open system, that countries, national governments specifically, should have the right to block foreign content, block foreign internet companies, and so forth. And since the beginning, the canonical example of this has been China which roughly 25 years ago launched the Great Firewall of China.

It has really been kind of the example of restricting the flow of information, restricting foreign competitors from entering into, into the country. Using that control to control the behavior of citizens through censorship and arrest. And so that's kind of been, essentially, the debate for the last quarter century.

The challenge to your point has been that over the last few years, really countries that are democratic, open, rule-bound, that were on the freedom side of, of the spectrum have started to move more towards sovereignty. And candidly, they've done this for some legitimate reasons. 

This movement kind of accelerated during COVID when, y’know, there was this kind of like one, two punch of COVID and this idea of, “Oh my God, we depend on foreign sources, right? Foreign providers. And we have to fix that.”That really got countries thinking much, much more seriously, I think, about this idea of digital sovereignty and in adopting at least components of it. 

Niki: I want to again break down and we'll talk more about this [Pablo: Yup], but there is digital sovereignty and the idea that you need some protectionism.

It is sort of digital protectionism [Pablo: Yes], when you think about the infrastructure side of it. And so, you don't want to be reliant on other countries for your infrastructure and your critical infrastructure in a moment where so many things are going wrong. Whether that's global dynamics, [Pablo: Exactly] ,or just logistics, right, during COVID. So supply chain logistics. [Pablo: Yup]

It's interesting, we had Senator Mark Warner come in and he talked about TikTok, which we're going to talk about. 

Pablo: Yeah. Let's talk about TikTok. 

Niki: We'll talk about TikTok! But when he came on, he said, “Well, I don't want to say industrial policy.” That was about a year ago. And Biden invoked industrial policy last week. 

And so, I think that you can apply this to the digital realm. I understand why countries don't want to be completely reliant on, not even adversaries, allies potentially, but they're, they're sort of trapped in other people's systems. And then you have, y'know, on top of that, the content.

And we've always looked at, you mentioned China, but also, like, Iran. 

Pablo: A hundred percent. 

Niki: Right? They've been blocking content for their citizens, and we've always seen that as the opposite end of the spectrum of what we want. 

Pablo: Exactly. 

Niki: But then if you're Germany, or France, or the United States, and you're looking at misinformation or incitements to violence, you can start to see why we, the Free Expression crew, also have concerns.

Pablo: Definitely. The United States has implemented a number of policies that could be called digital sovereignty, but, by the way, often for really good reason. So, I think that this is, this is a very kind of like fluid environment. The United States government, as a matter of policy, as a matter of kind of our economic interests, our societal interests, we will, for the foreseeable future, embrace the idea of a free and open internet.

From a national security perspective, it is a core kind of part of, of our economy and our society. But more and more of these ideas of kind of nationalism, national control, et cetera, are going to, be part of that, of that broader policy. 

Niki: And what you're talking about or what you're advocating for is solidarity. [Pablo: Yes] It’s solidarity. Where we find like minded countries and create almost like trade partnerships but in the digital realm.  [Pablo: Yes]

 Wait, and I also want to know what was in your footnote. 

Pablo: Oh, oh, oh! Hah! 

Niki: Tell me about this because I know you're excited about it. 

Pablo: So, yeah. This is embarrassing to admit. 

Niki: [encouragingly] No! It's so DC to be excited about your footnote. 

Pablo: So I got a call from a friend right after this State Department policy was released and my friend said, “Hey, did you notice footnote one?” And I was like, “What are you talking about?” So, I looked at it and, yeah, the State Department's authors were kind enough to credit my 2022 paper on digital solidarity as kind of like the, the thing that kind of prompted them to think about this, this idea.

So that was, that was really wonderful. Another friend noted that it's an end-note. 

[both laugh] 

Niki: Oh, my God. I love all of It's, like, so DC.

Pablo: [ jokingly] So, I, I'm blocking that person. 

Niki: This is not necessarily related to this exactly, but I recently served on a jury, and I thought I'd be dismissed  [Pablo: Yeah] because I'm an attorney. [Pablo: Right]  And the judge said to me, they did have some questions, but she said to me, “We can't dismiss every attorney. There are 70,000 attorneys. [Pablo: Totally] In the DMV.” [Pablo: Totally] 

 Anyway, the end note point. [Pablo: Wow] Yeah. But I It is So, to So, to take this footnote and not joke about it, the concept of solidarity versus sovereignty.

Let's talk about that. 

Pablo: Yeah. In the French case specifically, it mentioned France a lot in this, really that's kind of out of respect, because I think actually think that, that whether you agree with their policies or not, they've been kind of the most aggressive and creative actors in this space.

But, y'know, they're concerned about. US government surveillance on US owned infrastructure. They're concerned about getting cut off from cloud resources if the United States decides to, y'know, impose sanctions on a customer that has something to do with France.

They're concerned about their economic competitiveness, and that makes sense because increasingly we're moving to, to this digital world.  I've mentioned this before, but y'know, in my kind of last tour at Google we chatted with European government officials and one of them said, “Hey, y'know, you have Boeing, um, and we have Airbus. That's kind of like what we're, what we're trying to do.”  

Niki: [interrupts laughing] Let's trade by the way. 

Pablo: Yeah, exactly. I was going to say, it's a little bit before Boeing was having its issues. 

[cross talk] 

Niki: Doors blowing off of Boeing but not Airbuses… 

Pablo: And at the time I was like, “There is the opportunity to build Airbus on top of American infrastructure. You, you can collaborate and you can build partnerships.” And there's a lot of precedent for this. Google itself, right, was, y'know, built on cloud infrastructure over time. As it grew and it succeeded, it built its own. Ultimately ended up renting that infrastructure out to third parties.

And so, y'know, just occurred to me at the time, and I thought about it more after I left Google that there was this opportunity to really promote more partnership than competition. Now, There will always be competition, and that balance between partnership and competition, I think, is a, from a policy perspective, a tough thing to, to develop.

I think it's also important to, to emphasize that, y'know, just because you're using American infrastructure, or you're partnering with American, that should be a partnership of choice, not a forced partnership. And there should be mechanisms to port your data out, to ensure that there's interoperability, and so forth.

I think that this is also reflected in the State Department's strategy, it is about meeting our allies, our partners, kind of halfway, meeting them where they are and, and not, y'know, trying to kind of pretend like we are living in 2000 because we're not.

This is a different world. 

Niki: We're not anymore. Things have changed. Including the United States  [Pablo: Yes], even on content is starting to change. Have some of these trends. So let's talk TikTok. 

Pablo: Not to put words in your mouth, but I think that for you, the TikTok legislation, the divestment legislation, I think as you would characterize it, is a no-brainer, and it makes a lot of sense.

I actually, in a lot of ways, agree. I think that, had we been thinking about this in terms of media ownership from the get-go, there wouldn't have been, y'know, that much of a debate. The truth of the matter is that there are so many alternative platforms that, y'know, I'm sorry, if we're concerned about TikToker's speech, they can move to Reels, they can move to YouTube Shorts, [Niki: Right!] or to a startup, right?

Niki: I don't think that they have a great First Amendment argument.

Pablo: I agree! 

Niki: And because we just need to build a better mousetrap. [Pablo: I agree] If we are not going to use TikTok, because you're right, I do think it's a no-brainer. I think it's very dangerous as a platform, but it doesn't mean we can't invent something competitive and cool. 

Pablo: Yeah. No First Amendment issue, and I have basically zero interest in, y'know, protecting the Chinese Communist Party's First Amendment rights in the United States, right?

Niki: Same! Hard agree! 

Pablo: Right. So, I think the, the, the problem that, that I have with the, the legislation. Is, y'know, perhaps kind of a communications issue, perhaps kind of a branding issue. 

I think that the TikTok app will go away, and that will be understood and characterized as a ban. As a consequence, the United States will join a club of app-banning countries that I don't want us to join: China, Iran, and others. It seems to me that, that we need to address that and we need to talk about it. One kind of silver lining, to me, on this legislation, is that effectively what it does is it requires app stores to essentially delist the TikTok app. 

But as far as I can tell from the bill, you can still type in www.tiktok.com and see on the open internet what TikTok is, is offering just like I can go and check out China Daily or any other kind of propaganda outlet of, of the Chinese government to kind of have an understanding of what they're saying. 

I think that this is more about making sure that, that Americans aren't using the service on a regular basis and perhaps a little bit less about censorship and maybe I think that we should be kind of emphasizing that point, and making it clear that at the end of the day, this is information that is still accessible, that it is still out there, but the US government is just simply not going to endorse it. 

Niki: So I think your, your quibble with me is that I kept saying, “It's not a ban, it's not a ban.” [Pablo: Yeah]  You’re saying,“It is a ban.”

Pablo: I think it's a ban! 

Niki: But it's a ban, but you can still get to this content. No one is, like in Iran, we're not throttling completely or blocking completely your access to TikTok. [Pablo: yes] 

We're just going to make it a bigger speed bump to get there because we don't want American app stores holding it. But what you're saying is don't pretend that's not what we're doing. 

Pablo: I think that's right. This issue about whether it's a ban or not is actually very well taken because it's actually, if you, if you pull that thread a little bit. Why do people think that it's a ban? Because ultimately the assets that can be sold to an American buyer  the core, the crown jewels are essentially the algorithm, but for the algorithm to be sold, you need Chinese government approval.

Whether you think it's a ban or not, ultimately kind of behind the scenes, there is this kind of Chinese government element to the equation and that kind of tells you a little bit about what's really going on.

Having said all that, I do think that,y'know, one thing that, that I've noticed a little bit in the last few years is that the United States, increasingly as a matter of foreign policy on, on digital matters is a little bit in a defensive crouch. You're seeing kind of these companies, these Chinese, China-based companies, re-domiciling, or moving their headquarters to places like Singapore.

The United States government as a matter of principle, of general policy, I think, has basically taken the position that, “Well, these are just kind of tricks that, that these companies are playing.”

 I actually wonder if we shouldn't be more focused on being outward facing and outward reaching and essentially trying to kind of, like, pull more and more of these companies out of the gravitational pull of China through a series of of incentives. And I think that that's just a great opportunity again to kind of broaden this world of Internet freedom enabled by digital solidarity. I just think that, that, that we, y'know, as we become more inward focused, I think we, we miss a number of opportunities that are out there to make the world kind of, like, a freer, more rule-bound, more democratic place.

Niki: And maybe this is an inaccurate analogy, but I do sort of think China's not being precious about where they're willing to build roads and bridges. [Pablo: yeah] They're just looking for any opportunity to embed themselves in other countries. And to your point, by being looking only inward and writing off, y'know, these re-domiciled companies, where we think, “Okay, so China's just moving them there, there's still a problem for us.”

You're saying this is an opportunity and we shouldn't write it off. 

Pablo: Absolutely. And I do think, I mean, to, exactly to your point about the Belt and Road Initiative and, and the Digital Silk Road, this is the kind of thing that we should be doing to compete with China, to demonstrate that the United States, it's allies and partners, can provide 5G networks, 6G networks that are trustworthy that are reliable in contrast with whatever Huawei is providing.

And that I think is a great field of competition throughout the world. I think that, that this is important in Africa and Latin America and other parts of, of the world. I personally, as an American, would be excited to, to be enabling that building culture. I think it would be good for our economy.

I think that it would be good for our soft power abroad and many, many other things. 

Niki: And I love a term you've used. I've heard you say it before. Swing states [Pablo: Yeah] for some of those countries, right? They're up for grabs. [Pablo: Yeah] And if we can, sort of like we've done before with culture, if we can do that with digital infrastructure, then we might be -It is a soft power move. 

Pablo: A hundred percent! I should say that I think that I need to credit Richard Fontaine with, with that. [Niki: Aww. Another McCain friend!]  Yeah, yeah, yeah, another, yeah, CEO of the Center for New American Security where I happily am an adjunct fellow. There is a lot that we can be doing with the swing states.

I think in this age of AI, that opportunity is, at least in my mind, becoming clear. And so, I think there's just a lot that the US government could be doing. 

Niki: And let's end on AI. Taiwan is constantly under threat, digital threat, well all kinds of threat, from China.

And I've heard you refer to chatbots and how they're thinking about it, and then you have an idea for how America could play in that space. 

Pablo: Yeah, 100%. Taiwan in the last several months has invested in developing what is called, it's TAIDE Large Language Model, which is Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine.

And one of the reasons why the Taiwanese government did this was because Mainland China chat AI chatbots are becoming more and more popular in Taiwan. So one example is Baidu's Ernie chatbot. If you were to go to Ernie and ask, “Who is the new president of Taiwan?” It would give you the right answer, but then it would go on to say, “but it doesn't matter anyway, because Taiwan and China are, are one country.”

And so this is the kind of thing, it's a really good example of how democracy, governance, technology, all kind of come together. And where it actually makes a lot of sense for some countries to start kind of thinking about this idea of AI sovereignty. Now, I would like to think that it's more AI solidarity. [Niki: mm-hmm] 

In this case, in Taiwan's case, they actually fine tuned Meta's LLAMA 2. They probably  trained the model on American infrastructure. And that's great. And so, the US, and US companies, enabled that kind of national AI technology. And I think that we will see kind of more and more of that, and ultimately, I think that in, in most cases, certainly with respect to our allies and our partners, that will be, that will be a good development.

Niki: And just to sort of wrap this all up, what you're explaining with that example is Taiwan, instead of banning Baidu or the Ernie app [Pablo: Yeah] applications for their citizens, is building a counter model and building it on top of American infrastructure, but with their own interests in mind. [Pablo: Correct] 

So, it's an alliance digitally between our technology, their needs and technology, and instead of app banning, they're building a better application for their citizens and that’s what you would like to see more of.  

Pablo: And it's really consistent with how the Taiwanese government, with how Taiwanese civil society have addressed issues like disinformation. They're just very, very good about digital literacy, about countering disinformation. And in this case, again, they're building this, this model that is based largely on Taiwanese media, outlet data, Taiwanese government data, and, and they're, they're exploring this, this notion of providing an alternative, which is really exciting.

Niki: I think it is, too! And I appreciate you coming on and holding me accountable for saying, “It's not a ban!” [laughs] Which is a little bit of Fahrenheit 451. It is a ban. It's a ban, and I'm for the ban, and I should just say that.

And you call out the idea that you can still find things on the open internet, but that's really where we should be is think about first principles, which is we care about access for everyone, openness. We want to support democracies. We want to support human rights and that means engagement, it doesn't mean building walls around every single country. We want to think about this as partnerships. 

Pablo: I totally agree. We, we should kind of find ways to secure our open, rule bound, democratic society in a way that's consistent with, with our principles and that's good for our economy and our national security and so forth. 

Niki: I am so glad you came onto the podcast to talk about this. We actually bumped into each other. I've moved to the Burbs. [Pablo: Yes]  I've moved to the Burbs. We bumped into each other at a coffee shop. I asked what you were doing. You said, “I'm writing all these papers,” and I'm like, “You should come on the pod and talk about it so that people can hear about your papers.” 

[both laugh] 

And so we had the opportunity to do it and this was really fun to reconnect.

Pablo: Super appreciate it, Niki. Thank you.