The core reality is striking: as protests erupt across Iran, the government has dramatically severed the nation’s connection to the outside world. But here's where it gets controversial—this move to cut off communication isn't new for Iran, and it raises serious questions about the lengths a government will go to control information and suppress dissent.
On Thursday evening, shortly after 8 p.m., Iran's ruling theocracy essentially pulled the plug on digital connectivity for its 85 million citizens. They shut down the internet and disconnected landline and mobile networks, following a familiar playbook used in previous crises, including protests and even wartime scenarios. This tactic aims to prevent Iranians from sharing images, videos, and firsthand accounts of the widespread demonstrations that are challenging the regime — protests that have gained momentum over Iran’s economically strained conditions and have become the most significant challenge to the government in years.
Until now, despite heavy sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, many Iranians still managed to access international web services and communicate via virtual private networks (VPNs), which allowed them to bypass government-imposed restrictions. But Thursday’s shutdown significantly hampers this capability, making it much more difficult for ordinary citizens to express their dissent or report what’s happening on the ground. This act of digital blackout also potentially shields authorities from scrutiny and could make violent crackdowns more opaque — especially after warnings from the U.S. that Iran might face consequences if security forces continue to harm protesters.
As Iran falls silent, families and friends abroad are anxious, desperately seeking any updates about loved ones inside the country. The situation is dire enough that Iran’s attorney general ominously warned that any protest participants would be considered 'enemies of God,' a charge that could carry the death penalty.
For those who oppose the regime from outside Iran, the mood is one of deep concern and frustration. Azam Jangravi, a cybersecurity specialist based in Toronto and vocal critic of the Iranian government, expressed how unable she was to focus on her work due to constant worry. She recounted her anxiety about her relatives and friends who might be at risk, emphasizing that the violence inflicted by Iran’s security forces leaves many people injured or dead—yet the full scope of the tragedy remains hidden.
Historically, Iran has taken such drastic steps before. The first significant internet shutdown happened in 2019 during mass protests against fuel price hikes, which reportedly resulted in over 300 deaths. Later, in 2022, following the death of Mahsa Amini—who was detained by morality police for allegedly not wearing her hijab properly—the government imposed a crackdown that claimed more than 500 lives. During those protests, the use of satellite internet services like Starlink played a crucial role in enabling communication and documentation, despite being unauthorized and technically illegal.
Today, Starlink receivers, a form of satellite internet technology, are much more widespread in Iran — despite the government’s efforts to block such services. An estimate from a year ago suggested tens of thousands of these devices were in circulation inside the country. While many users employ them for routine communication or business activities, increasing numbers are now being used specifically to document protests and share information globally.
But the situation isn’t straightforward. Iran has been actively interfering with GPS signals, possibly to disable or disrupt satellite services like Starlink. Since a conflict with Israel last June, Iranian authorities have been jamming signals that satellites rely on for positioning, making it harder for the devices to connect accurately. Experts warn that the government may be employing jamming techniques similar to those used in other conflicts — for example, Russia’s attempts to disrupt Ukraine’s satellite internet. These actions make it more difficult for satellite devices to operate normally and severely hinder the flow of information.
The United Nations agency responsible for telecommunications, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), has previously urged Iran to cease this jamming, but Iran has also pushed for restrictions on services like Starlink at the ITU, adding political tension to the technical issue.
For now, most of the information escaping Iran appears to be transmitted via Starlink, making the technology both a lifeline for protesters and a risky commodity for its users. Possessing or using these devices in Iran is illegal and can lead to severe punishment, including execution — so many who do rely on them face incredible dangers.
Yet, stopping the use of Starlink would mean even less reliable information from inside Iran, which concerns activists and observers worldwide. As Mehdi Yahyanejad, an advocacy expert, points out, without immediate external help or intervention, these protests—mainly peaceful—could quickly diminish if violent crackdowns continue and no support arrives.
In the end, the question remains: How long can Iran sustain its blackout without losing control or inviting international pressure? And more provocatively—are we witnessing the beginning of a new frontier in internet suppression, or is this the fragile death knell of Iran’s recent wave of protests? The debate is open, and your perspectives are just as vital. Do you believe cutting off digital communication is effective repression or a dangerous move that could backfire, fueling even greater unrest? Share your thoughts below.
