BRAZIL — With the United States military moving from one Middle Eastern country to another and its president declaring nation after nation variably blessed or cursed on human rights and trade issues, many around the globe are urging that limits be placed on the country’s ability to rule the entire planet – at least via the internet. This week’s Internet Governance Forum (IGF) meeting in Rio de Janiero looks likely to be the latest diplomatic battleground for control of the international communication system, although the supposed purpose for the meeting was to address concerns about spam, less expensive access, and free speech.

Two years ago the world’s leaders agreed to allow the United States to retain its control over the internet. But the attendees of that same United Nations summit in Tunisia also agreed to create an annual forum for addressing developing issues — such as whether the U.S. and a U.S. non-profit should remain in control of distributing internet addresses.

The previous year’s Athenian forum left many, especially China, Iran, Russia, and Brazil, feeling that the topic of U.S. dominance hadn’t been thoroughly dealt with. Thus, the first day of the Rio gathering was devoted to discussing “critical internet resources.”

Although most nations simply want to be more involved in decision making, especially concerning non-English language domains, free speech advocates worry about the motives of nations dedicated to heavy internet censorship.

In addition to such sticky issues, the four-day summit and its 2,000 attendees plan to tackle network security, child pornography, privacy, non-English language access, human rights, and connection costs.

In part due to its early funding status, the United States currently possesses veto power over the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) since it was chosen in 1998.

Given the ability of so many agencies and individuals to share their opinions during the forum, some see it as a poor place for final decision or arriving at any kind of consensus, although its ability to provide a clearing place for ideas is considered of value.

“It’s fine to have a panel,” the Associate Press quotes ICANN vice president Theresa Swinehart as saying, “and it’s fine to have the discussions about it. But for the forum to start going into a direction that ends up coming out with recommendations, it would result in becoming four days of negotiating text. That would defeat the purpose.”

Next year’s forum will be held in India, with Egypt slated for 2009, and both Lithuania and Azerbaijan bidding on 2010.

Both the U.S. government and ICANN officials insist that they are open to discussing their role, provided that no specific actions are expected to be taken.