Congress has under 90 days to renew the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) of 2015 and avoid a regulatory setback. The law protects companies from liability when they share cyber threat indicators with the government or other firms, fostering collaboration.
Before CISA, companies hesitated due to antitrust and data privacy concerns. CISA removed ambiguity by offering explicit legal protections. Without reauthorisation, fear of lawsuits could silence private sector warnings, slowing responses to significant cyber incidents across critical infrastructure sectors.
Debates over reauthorisation include possible expansions of CISA’s scope. However, many lawmakers and industry groups in the United States now support a simple renewal. Health care, finance, and energy groups say the law is crucial for collective defence and rapid cyber threat mitigation.
Security experts warn that a lapse would reverse years of progress in information sharing, leaving networks more vulnerable to large-scale attacks. With only 35 working days left for Congress before the 30 September deadline, the pressure to act is mounting.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Since the launch of its Digital Kazakhstan initiative in 2017, the country has shifted from resource-dependent roots to digital leadership.
It ranks 24th globally on the UN’s e‑government index and among the top 10 in online service delivery. Over 90% of public services, such as registrations, healthcare access, and legal documentation, are digitised, aided by mobile apps, biometric ID and QR authentication.
Central to this is a Tier III data-centre-based AI supercluster, launching in July 2025, and the Alem.AI centre, both designed to supply computing power for universities, startups and enterprises.
Kazakhstan is also investing heavily in talent and innovation. It aims to train up to a million AI-skilled professionals and supports over 1,600 startups at Astana Hub. Venture capital surpassed $250 million in 2024, bolstered by a new $1 billion Qazaqstan Venture Group fund.
Infrastructure upgrades, such as a 3,700 km fibre-optic corridor between China and the Caspian Sea, support a growing tech ecosystem.
Regulatory milestones include planned AI law reforms, data‑sovereignty zones like CryptoCity, and digital identity frameworks. These prepare Kazakhstan to become Central Asia’s digital and AI nexus.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
A Turkish court has issued a nationwide ban on Grok, the AI chatbot developed by Elon Musk’s company xAI, following recent developments involving the platform.
The ruling, delivered on Wednesday by a criminal court in Ankara, instructed Turkey’s telecommunications authority to block access to the chatbot across the country. The decision came after public filings under Turkey’s internet law prompted a judicial review.
Grok, which is integrated into the X platform (formerly Twitter), recently rolled out an update to make the system more open and responsive. The update has sparked broader global discussions about the challenges of moderating AI-generated content in diverse regulatory environments.
In a brief statement, X acknowledged the situation and confirmed that appropriate content moderation measures had been implemented in response. The ban places Turkey among many countries examining the role of generative AI tools and the standards that govern their deployment.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
At the WSIS+20 High-Level Event 2025 in Geneva, global leaders and experts gathered to reflect on the two-decade legacy of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) and chart a course for the future of digital cooperation. Moderated by Anriette Esterhuysen of the Association for Progressive Communications, the panel underscored how the WSIS process helped connect over 5.6 billion people to the internet and solidified the importance of multistakeholder governance.
Speakers lauded successes in infrastructure and inclusion but were clear-eyed about persistent gaps, especially the 2.5 billion people who still lack connectivity.
He expressed concern over the drift from WSIS’s original vision of a global information society toward digital sovereignty, urging participants to stay true to a collaborative global model.
Experts emphasised the need for future frameworks to evolve without duplicating efforts. Professor Kathleen Kramer of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers highlighted the urgency of strong STEM education and technical standards to scale emerging technologies like AI and quantum computing responsibly.
The session closed with a renewed commitment to WSIS’s people-centred, inclusive values, even as the digital landscape becomes increasingly complex. With reflections on past achievements and a unified call for non-duplicative, collaborative governance, panellists offered a hopeful yet pragmatic vision for the next chapter of global digital development.
Track all key events from the WSIS+20 High-Level Event 2025 on our dedicated page.
xAI, Elon Musk’s AI company, has secured permits to operate 15 natural gas turbines at its Memphis data centre, despite facing legal threats over alleged Clean Air Act violations.
The Shelby County Health Department approved the generators, which can produce up to 247 megawatts, provided specific emissions controls are in place.
Environmental lawyers say xAI had already been running as many as 35 generators without permits. The Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), acting on behalf of the NAACP, has accused the company of serious pollution and is preparing to sue.
Even under the new permit, xAI is allowed to emit substantial pollutants annually, including nearly 10 tons of formaldehyde — a known carcinogen.
Community concerns about the health impact remain strong. A local group pledged $250,000 for an independent air quality study, and although the City of Memphis carried out its own tests, the SELC questioned their validity.
The tests missed ozone levels and were reportedly conducted in favourable wind conditions, with equipment placed too close to buildings.
Officials previously argued that the turbines were exempt from regulation due to their ‘mobile’ status, a claim the SELC refuted as legally flawed. Meanwhile, xAI has recently raised $10 billion, split between debt and equity, highlighting its rapid expansion, even as regulatory scrutiny grows.
Would you like to learn more aboutAI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
For years, a few US tech giants have dominated Europe’s digital infrastructure, threatening both its economy and democracy. Despite talk of ‘tech sovereignty,’ leaked reports suggest EU enforcement may be weakened in trade talks, risking public backing.
Surveys show strong support across the EU for tougher regulation of Big Tech, even at the cost of US tensions. The Digital Markets Act provides tools to challenge monopolies like Google, but enforcement remains slow and under-resourced.
Europe must take coordinated action: break up monopolies harming local media and jobs, strengthen enforcement, and invest in homegrown digital platforms. Redirecting funds from tech giants could empower startups and businesses dependent on these platforms.
Decisive political will is essential to turn tech sovereignty from rhetoric into reality. Effective regulation and strategic investment can restore Europe’s control over its digital future.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
On the final day of the Internet Governance Forum 2025 in Lillestrøm, Norway, stakeholders from governments, civil society, technical communities, and the private sector gathered to launch the new work cycle of the Policy Network on Internet Fragmentation (PNIF). Now entering its third year, the PNIF unveiled a structured framework to analyse internet fragmentation across three dimensions: user experience, internet governance coordination, and the technical infrastructure layer.
The session emphasised the urgent need for international cooperation to counter growing fragmentation threats, as enshrined in paragraph 29C of the Global Digital Compact. Speakers raised alarm over how political and economic forces are re-shaping the global internet.
With internet shutdowns and digital censorship increasingly normalised as tools of state control—highlighted by Iran’s recent 90-million-person shutdown—concerns about sovereignty overriding openness were prominent. Michel Lambert described this shift as a ‘political normalisation of network control.’
Marilia Maciel, Director of Digital Trade and Economic Security at Diplo, emphasised how trade and investment policies fuel economic fragmentation. Cuts to internet freedom funding were highlighted by both Lambert and Joyce Chen, who noted severe consequences for underserved regions like the Pacific.
Marilia Maciel, Director of Digital Trade and Economic Security at Diplo
From the technical community, Dhruv, representing the Internet Architecture Board, stressed the importance of safeguarding the internet’s interoperability by including technical experts in regulatory processes. Joyce Chen also pointed to successful coordination initiatives such as the Technical Community Coalition on Multi-Stakeholderism (TCCM).
Naim Gjokaj, State Secretary in Montenegro, offered a government perspective, advocating for stronger legal frameworks and regional coordination to avoid inadvertent fragmentation while supporting connectivity in rural areas.
The session concluded with a call to action: PNIF will focus its upcoming work on developing concrete, risk-based recommendations to implement the Global Digital Compact. Co-facilitators Sheetal Kumar and Bruna Santos encouraged broad community participation, aiming to deliver a final report by 1 November.
Despite the challenges, the atmosphere remained collaborative and forward-looking, reinforcing the importance of inclusive dialogue to ensure the internet remains a unified, accessible, and resilient resource for all.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
At the 2025 Internet Governance Forum in Lillestrøm, Norway, experts gathered to discuss how to involve diverse communities—especially indigenous and underrepresented groups—better in the technical governance of the internet. The session, led by Niger’s Anne Rachel Inne, emphasised that meaningful participation requires more than token inclusion; it demands structural reforms and practical engagement tools.
Central to the dialogue was the role of multilingualism, which UNESCO’s Guilherme Canela de Souza described as both a right and a necessity for true digital inclusion. ICANN’s Theresa Swinehart spotlighted ‘Universal Acceptance’ as a tangible step toward digital equality, ensuring that domain names and email addresses work in all languages and scripts.
Real-world examples, like hackathons with university students in Bahrain, showcased how digital cooperation can bridge technical skills and community needs. Meanwhile, Valts Ernstreits from Latvia shared how international engagement helped elevate the status of the Livonian language at home, proving that global advocacy can yield local policy wins.
The workshop addressed persistent challenges to inclusion: from bureaucratic hurdles that exclude indigenous communities to the lack of connections between technical and policy realms. Panellists agreed that real change hinges on collaboration, mentorship, and tools that meet people where they are, like WhatsApp groups and local capacity-building networks.
Participants also highlighted UNESCO’s roadmap for multilingualism and ICANN’s upcoming domain name support program as critical opportunities for further action. In a solution-oriented close, speakers urged continued efforts to make digital spaces more representative.
They underscored the need for long-term investment in community-driven infrastructure and policies that reflect the internet’s global diversity. The message was clear: equitable internet governance can only be achieved when all voices—across languages, regions, and technical backgrounds—are heard and empowered.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
At the Internet Governance Forum 2025 in Lillestrøm, Norway, Jovan Kurbalija launched the eighth edition of his seminal textbook ‘Introduction to Internet Governance’, marking a return to writing after a nine-year pause. Moderated by Sorina Teleanu of the Diplo, the session unpacked not just the content of the new edition but also the reasoning behind retaining its original title in an era buzzing with buzzwords like ‘AI governance’ and ‘digital governance.’
Kurbalija defended the choice, arguing that most so-called digital issues—from content regulation to cybersecurity—ultimately operate over internet infrastructure, making ‘Internet governance’ the most precise term available.
The updated edition reflects both continuity and adaptation. He introduced ‘Kaizen publishing,’ a new model that replaces the traditional static book cycle with a continuously updated digital platform. Driven by the fast pace of technological change and aided by AI tools trained on his own writing style, the new format ensures the book evolves in real-time with policy and technological developments.
The new edition is structured as a seven-floor pyramid tackling 50 key issues rooted in history and future internet governance trajectories. The book also traces digital policy’s deep historical roots.
Kurbalija highlighted how key global internet governance frameworks—such as ICANN, the WTO e-commerce moratorium, and UN cyber initiatives—emerged within months of each other in 1998, a pivotal moment he calls foundational to today’s landscape. He contrasted this historical consistency with recent transformations, identifying four key shifts since 2016: mass data migration to the cloud, COVID-19’s digital acceleration, the move from CPUs to GPUs, and the rise of AI.
Finally, the session tackled the evolving discourse around AI governance. Kurbalija emphasised the need to weigh long-term existential risks against more immediate challenges like educational disruption and concentrated knowledge power. He also critiqued the shift in global policy language—from knowledge-centric to data-driven frameworks—and warned that this transformation might obscure AI’s true nature as a knowledge-based phenomenon.
As geopolitics reasserts itself in digital governance debates, Kurbalija’s updated book aims to ground readers in the enduring principles shaping an increasingly complex landscape.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
Their work yielded four starkly different future scenarios, ranging from intensified geopolitical rivalry and internet fragmentation to overregulation and a transformative turn toward treating the internet as a public good. A central takeaway was the resurgence of state power as a dominant force shaping digital futures.
According to Pohler, geopolitical dynamics—especially the actions of the US, China, Russia, and the EU—emerged as the primary drivers across nearly all scenarios. That marked a shift from previous foresight efforts that had emphasised civil society or corporate actors.
The panellists underscored that today’s real-world developments are already outpacing the scenarios’ predictions, with multistakeholder models appearing increasingly hollow or overly institutionalised. While the scenarios themselves might not predict the exact future, the process of creating them was widely praised.
Panellists described the interviews and collaborative exercises as intellectually enriching and essential for thinking beyond conventional governance paradigms. Yet, they also acknowledged practical concerns: the abstract nature of such exercises, the lack of direct implementation, and the need to involve government actors more directly to bridge analysis and policy action.
Looking ahead, participants called for bolder and more inclusive approaches to internet governance. They urged forums like the IGF to embrace participatory methods—such as scenario games—and to address complex issues without requiring full consensus.
The session concluded with a sense of urgency: the internet we want may still be possible, but only if we confront uncomfortable realities and make space for more courageous, creative policymaking.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
