Thread by @kikas6652

🧵Today in Hanoi, governments will sign the UN “Cybercrime” treaty—a supposed global cybersecurity pact that in reality empowers authoritarian regimes, erodes human rights, pressures democracies, and criminalizes free speech, ethical hacking, and online dissent

On paper, the UN Cybercrime treaty fights online crime & sharing digital evidence. In reality, it’s a blueprint for digital authoritarianism—drafted by Russia & China, approved in December 2024, & signed in Vietnam, a one-party state where online criticism can land you in prison

The treaty is dangerously vague. Its broad definition of “cybercrime” could criminalize anything a government dislikes. Mutual legal assistance rules would let authoritarian states demand data from democracies, creating legal cover for repression worldwide.

The UN Cybercrime treaty claims to protect human rights, but the language is a trap. Article 6 lets states pick what “applies,” and Article 5 prioritizes local laws over oversight. Dictators can imprison bloggers, label it cybercrime, and claim treaty compliance.

Unlike the Budapest Convention, which narrowly defines cybercrime , the UN treaty caters to authoritarian ambitions. Russia and China refused Budapest, spent years creating a “sovereign internet,” and now the UN treaty cements censorship and surveillance worldwide.

The geopolitics are clear: Russia exports its SORM surveillance system, China promotes a “Community with a Shared Future in Cyberspace,” and both push UN resolutions framing state control of information as a “human right.” This treaty is their legal Trojan horse under the UN flag

Adding insult to injury, the UN’s Special Rapporteur Irene Khan is normalizing censorship under the guise of “human rights.” She urges governments and platforms to control online speech. Freedom, in her framing, becomes something to be constrained in order to “protect” it

Warnings about the treaty have been mounting for over a year. In Jan 2024, 177 tech firms said its broad definitions could criminalize legitimate activity. By Oct, six U.S. senators urged rejection, citing privacy, censorship, and risks to cybersecurity research and AI safety.

Tragically, Washington went along. Fearing isolation, the U.S. voted for the treaty in December 2024, claiming it could “influence implementation.” In reality, this appeasement lets authoritarian regimes gradually capture international law—one compromise, one signature at a time

This weekend’s Hanoi ceremony isn’t about cybersecurity. The UN treaty codifies a world where governments, not individuals, control information, & repression is framed as “cooperation.” It’s not a defense pact—it’s a global surveillance pact.

Full Post: globaldisconnect.substack.com/p/the-uns-cybe…