Iran's Management of Communications During Periods of Unrest

Introduction: State Control of Digital Infrastructure

Governments have the ability to control the flow of information within their borders. Iran has a documented history of implementing restrictions on digital communications during times of internal protest. These measures are a standard part of the state's security protocol. This article describes the nature of these restrictions and notes recent, limited adjustments made by Iranian authorities.

The Infrastructure of Control

Iran's internet is not an open network. The National Information Network (NIN) is a state-controlled intranet. It is designed to allow the government to manage access to the global internet. During periods of civil unrest, authorities can activate a series of technical measures. These include bandwidth throttling, which slows connections to a crawl, and complete blackouts of mobile data. The goal is to limit the organization and visibility of protests.

A Typical Restriction Protocol

A standard restriction protocol involves several layers. First, access to global platforms like Instagram and WhatsApp is blocked. These are popular communication tools in Iran. Second, mobile data networks are shut down. This prevents the use of smartphones for recording or sharing video. Third, SMS messaging is often disrupted. Landline and basic mobile voice calls, which are easier to monitor, sometimes remain operational. This creates a controlled information environment.

Reported Adjustments in Restrictions

In late 2022 and early 2023, during nationwide protests, international observers reported a slight adjustment. Iranian authorities reportedly restored the ability to make standard mobile voice calls to international numbers for some users. However, critical restrictions remained firmly in place. Access to the global internet via mobile data and broadband continued to be heavily filtered or blocked. SMS services also remained disrupted. The change was minor and tactical.

The Rationale from Authorities

The official position from Iranian state media and officials is that restrictions are necessary for national security. They cite the prevention of foreign-led misinformation campaigns and the protection of public order. The restoration of international calling is sometimes framed as a measure to allow citizens to contact family abroad, countering narratives of a total communication blackout. The state maintains that its actions are a sovereign right to manage internal security.

The Impact on Daily Life and Business

The restrictions have effects beyond protest organization. Economic activity that relies on online transactions is disrupted. Students lose access to global educational resources. Families cannot reliably communicate with relatives overseas. The uncertainty of connectivity harms tech startups and remote work. The cost is both social and economic, extending far beyond the immediate political context.

Citizen Countermeasures and Circumvention

In response to restrictions, a segment of the population turns to virtual private networks (VPNs). VPNs can encrypt traffic and route it through servers in other countries, bypassing some filters. However, the government actively works to identify and block VPN protocols. This creates a technical arms race. The use of VPNs is illegal but widely practiced, illustrating the public demand for open communication.

The Role of Satellite Internet Services

The rise of global satellite internet networks, like Starlink, presents a new challenge to state control. These services can provide connectivity directly from space, bypassing ground-based infrastructure. Iranian authorities have declared the unauthorized use of such systems illegal. They represent a potential future front in the struggle between open access and state-managed information spaces.

International Response and Diplomacy

Several Western governments have condemned Iran's internet restrictions. Some have enacted sanctions on officials and entities said to be involved in the censorship and surveillance apparatus. There have also been initiatives to fund anti-censorship technology for Iranian citizens. However, direct intervention in another nation's internet sovereignty is a complex legal and diplomatic issue with limited practical effect on the ground.

Legal and Human Rights Frameworks

United Nations human rights experts have stated that intentional internet shutdowns violate international law. They argue such actions disproportionately restrict rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Iran is a party to international covenants that protect these rights. The government's actions are therefore a subject of legal debate within international institutions, though enforcement mechanisms are weak.

Historical Context of Media Control

The management of information is not a new practice in Iran. Control over traditional media like television and newspapers has long been established. The internet presented a new challenge, leading to the development of the NIN and sophisticated filtering technologies. Current restrictions are a digital extension of a long-standing state policy regarding information flow and public discourse.

The Economic Cost of Shutdowns

A report by the NGO NetBlocks quantifies the economic impact of internet disruptions. Using indicators like network connectivity and GDP per capita, they estimate that a nationwide shutdown can cost Iran tens of millions of dollars per day. The loss stems from halted digital financial services, e-commerce, and general productivity. This cost is weighed by the state against perceived security benefits.

Future Outlook for Digital Policy

Iran's approach is likely to persist and evolve. The state will continue to develop its domestic NIN to provide essential services while maintaining the capability to sever global links. Investment in domestic platforms to replace foreign apps like Instagram will be promoted. At the same time, technological advances in encryption and satellite internet will continue to test the state's control capabilities.

Conclusion: A Persistent Strategy

Iran's management of communications during unrest is a deliberate and multi-layered strategy. The slight easing of certain restrictions, such as allowing some international calls, is a tactical adjustment within a broader framework of control. It does not represent a fundamental policy shift. The dynamic illustrates the central tension in the digital age: the collision between the global nature of information technology and the sovereign power of nation-states to control their internal information space. The situation in Iran remains a key case study in how governments exercise this power during crises.