I came across it when I was learning english




The author of this speech is Christopher H. Smith who is the United States Representative of New Jersey. He has been reelected for this position since 1981. He is a member of the United States delegations to the United Nations, first nominated by President Barack Obama in 2015, and in 2017 by President Donald Trump. Smith is known for promoting human rights legislation in America and human rights missions to nations all over the world.

Read the excerpts from this speech concerning the freedom of the internet. Then, choose the best answers. (Use a dictionary or other resource, if necessary.)


____________________________________________________________________________

HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, April 26, 2018
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey.

1Mr. Speaker, today we held a hearing on China’s digital authoritarianism. China has the world’s largest number of internet users as well as the world’s most sophisticated and aggressive internet censorship and control regime. The Chinese government, under the leadership of Xi Jinping, views digital controls as necessary for its political stability and control of core digital technologies as necessary for its economic future. The Chinese government spends $10 billion on maintaining and improving their censorship apparatus. The U.S. government has an annual internet freedom budget of $55 million and Congress still has little idea how this money is spent.

***

2China gathers and exploits data on an unrivaled scale and spreads features of its authoritarian system, including corruption and the use of surveillance. The Chinese government and Communist Party want to shape a world antithetical to U.S. values and interests and to export its economic, political, and censorship models globally. In response, the U.S. and like-minded allies must stand resolutely for the freedom of religion, fairer and freer trade, labor rights, freedom of navigation, the rule of law, and the freedom of expression—including online. A coherent and engaged internet freedom strategy must be a critical part of the U.S. diplomatic toolbox. This strategy should have at its core a commitment to protect fundamental freedoms, privacy, and promote the free flow of news and information. But it is not a matter of just having a strategy; it should be the right one.

3The Bush and Obama Administrations pursued cyber diplomacy; yet internet freedom has declined around the world, privacy is increasingly under threat, and the free flow of information has become more endangered. The right strategy must start with some humility. Cyberspace is a place to spread democratic ideals and a place where criminals, extremists, corporations, traffickers, and governments exploit vulnerabilities with impunity. Online communication can convey our highest ideals and our worst fears. It can shine a light on repression and be the source of hatred, manipulation, fake news, coercion, and conflict. It can bring people together or push us apart. Despite all this, I agree with the NSS’s conclusions which says, ‘‘The Internet is an American invention, and it should reflect our values as it continues to transform the future for all nations and all generations. A strong, defensible cyber infrastructure fosters economic growth, protects our liberties, and advances our national security.’’ Central to a revitalized U.S. internet freedom strategy should be a priority to open gaping holes in China’s Great Firewall.

4Right now, I’m just not confident that this is the policy of the Broadcasting Board of Governors or the State Department right now. I think there are certain goals we should prioritize in our internet freedom strategy regarding China. First, China’s netizens require easy, reliable and free access to uncensored information through anti-censorship technologies, so that anybody can freely access information regardless of their technical ability. Reliable solutions should work all the time, regardless of intensified crackdowns or major events (Party Congress, June 4th anniversary) taking place in country.

5Second, solutions should also present difficult choices for the Chinese authorities—if the authorities want to disrupt these solutions, then they must disrupt many online services which they would normally be hesitant and unlikely to block. Third, Access to solutions should also come at no cost for Chinese netizens, the Chinese authorities often block access to payment providers so even if Chinese can afford a circumvention solution, they cannot get past censorship by their payment provider.

6Fourth, holistic anti-censorship solutions should be encouraged, including not just technical circumvention but also distribution of those tools (getting around Google Play being blocked, and censorship in the Apple App Store) as well as helping users share anticensorship tools, as well as content, through messaging apps, social networks and QR codes. These are just a few starting principles.

7I am open to a conversation about these goals with experts and allies. But given the stakes and possible outcomes, moving quickly to fund and distribute anti-censorship technologies should be a priority. The future of our grandchildren—in the U.S. and China alike—may very well depend on open, interoperable communications online, with minimal barriers to the global exchange of information, data, ideas, and services.