The US Can Put People on the Moon. Why Can’t It Get Iranians Online?
The US Can Put People on the Moon. Why Can’t It Get Iranians Online?
In the aftermath of a recent conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran, characterized by widespread confusion and global economic repercussions, one group remains largely unheard: the Iranian people. A prolonged, nationwide internet blackout imposed by the Iranian regime stands as a primary barrier, stifling voices and concealing the brutal realities of life under an oppressive government. This critical disconnect raises a profound question: In an era of advanced technology where nations can send humans to the moon, why does the global community struggle to maintain basic internet access for millions caught in conflict zones?
For Jason Rezaian, a journalist who served as The Washington Post's Tehran bureau chief before being imprisoned for nearly two years by the Iranian regime on espionage charges, the silence is deafening. Now the director of press freedom initiatives at The Washington Post, Rezaian offers a firsthand perspective on the regime's tactics, the distorting impacts of information warfare, and the urgent need for external support to help Iranians stay connected. His insights highlight a technological paradox where immense capabilities exist, yet political will and strategic deployment often fall short.
The Human Cost of Digital Darkness
The internet, often described as "oxygen" in the modern world, is a lifeline for communication, information, and the organization of dissent. Its absence in Iran has profound implications for its 93 million inhabitants. While the US and Israel celebrated successful strikes that reportedly took out top layers of Iranian leadership, the regime itself continued to function, a testament to its deeply entrenched power structure. However, the ordinary Iranian citizen is left isolated, unable to communicate freely with the outside world or even with each other.
Rezaian recounted his experiences navigating Iran's state-sanctioned media and the oppressive government during his time in the country. He emphasizes the critical role of internet access, noting that an aerial campaign, no matter how successful in targeting leadership, cannot empower a populace that is unarmed and cut off from the global information network. This digital darkness prevents meaningful civic action and ensures the regime maintains its stranglehold on information flow, effectively silencing any potential for a popular uprising.
A Conflict's Shifting Sands and Elusive Goals
The animosity between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran dates back to 1979, making the current conflict merely the latest chapter in a decades-long struggle. A fragile ceasefire is now in place, yet questions linger about its sustainability. Former President Trump’s statements suggest a shift in his desire for further attacks, potentially influenced by the economic pain felt domestically. However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains a wild card, seemingly intent on continuing the fight.
Despite significant losses to its leadership, including the Supreme Leader and former Speaker of Parliament, the Iranian regime has demonstrated remarkable resilience. This resilience underscores a fundamental miscalculation in Washington's analysis of Iran. Many foreign policy experts had predicted the regime's collapse upon the death of the Supreme Leader, failing to recognize the sophisticated, multi-layered power structure built with Iranian ingenuity. This system, characterized by internal jockeying for influence and backed by substantial armed forces, ensures control for the foreseeable future, regardless of individual losses.
The Promise of Technology vs. Political Will
Rezaian critically points out the disparity between technological capability and political action. The United States, a nation that can put people on the moon and boasts unparalleled technological advancements, possesses the means to help Iranians stay online. Technologies like Starlink and direct-to-cell satellite internet access are readily available and significantly more affordable than the missiles and bombs that American taxpayers subsidize.
The internet cutoff by the Islamic Republic is not new; it first occurred during the contested 2009 reelection of President Ahmadinejad. At that time, the US vowed not to let it happen again, promising to do whatever possible to keep Iranians connected. Yet, nearly two decades later, the same problem persists on an even larger scale. The challenge isn't necessarily whether the technology can put people online, but whether the political will and strategic foresight exist to deploy these tools effectively. The cost-effectiveness of these digital solutions compared to military expenditures highlights a stark imbalance in priorities.
Soft Power and Missed Opportunities
Beyond direct military intervention or technological deployment, the United States possesses immense soft power – cultural influence, educational opportunities, and resources to support burgeoning civil societies. However, Rezaian argues that this vital asset is often underutilized or undermined by contradictory policies. He cites the travel ban instituted during the Trump administration, which disproportionately affected Iranians, preventing them from studying in US universities and engaging with American culture.
Such policies, while ostensibly aimed at national security, paradoxically make the lives of ordinary Iranian people harder and contradict any stated goal of supporting Iranian aspirations for democracy. A coherent, long-term national policy towards Iran, rather than one that shifts every two to four years with domestic elections, is desperately needed. The current approach, at times appearing "quixotic and kind of ridiculous," as suggested by reports of considering former President Ahmadinejad to lead a post-regime Iran, underscores a profound lack of understanding and strategic planning.
The Brutality of the Regime and the People's Desire for Change
Having endured 544 days in an Iranian prison, Rezaian possesses an intimate understanding of the regime's brutality. He emphasizes that while the regime is capable of meting out chaos both domestically and abroad, it is not a conventional match for the United States and its allies. Its strength lies in asymmetric warfare, a tactic born of necessity rather than preference.
Crucially, Rezaian stresses that the future of Iran must ultimately rest in the hands of its people, whose desires for change have been consistently expressed over decades. From the late 1990s, when they elected reformer Mohammad Khatami, Iranians have repeatedly chosen leaders who advocated for a more open society. Yet, their path towards success is continually blocked by a repressive regime that uses force and information control to maintain power. The challenge, therefore, is not merely to defeat the regime militarily, but to empower the Iranian populace to realize their long-held aspirations for freedom and openness.
The global community faces a critical juncture.
While the complexities of geopolitics and regime change are undeniable, the fundamental right to information and communication remains paramount. If the United States can put people on the moon, then fostering accessible internet for a repressed population should be well within its grasp. The question isn't about technological capacity, but about a focused strategy and a commitment to leveraging digital tools as instruments of freedom and self-determination for the Iranian people, rather than simply standing by as their digital lifeline is severed.
