Pakistan’s government has deployed a national internet firewall using Chinese technology, costing between 20 to 30 billion rupees ($72m to $107m). The system is aimed at enhancing online surveillance and controlling popular apps.
The firewall’s rollout coincides with heightened political tensions, including protests demanding the release of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, which have led to mobile internet suspensions and social media restrictions.
See guys, it’s not just Zimbabwe engaging in stuff like this—governments love restricting social media use. Can’t have you free to discuss their shortcomings now, can they?
The Great Pakistani Firewall
The new Pakistani firewall allows for granular control over internet traffic, enabling authorities to block specific features within apps and monitor user metadata, raising concerns about privacy and freedom of expression.
This is impressive tech because, with URL filtering, they can block certain features of apps without blocking the app itself. For example, they can block WhatsApp’s multimedia functions, ensuring you can’t send photos or videos or place audio and video calls.
In fact, since this firewall has been in testing, there have been times when WhatsApp media functions were down, although people could still send regular texts.
In Zimbabwe, while not implemented by the government, we already have an idea of what this could look like on Econet’s network. You can’t place WhatsApp calls on Econet if you’re using a WhatsApp bundle. Everything else works fine, and calls can be placed if you have a standard data bundle.
Slowdowns, censorship and control
In Pakistan, since mid-July 2024, users have reported significant internet slowdowns and service disruptions, particularly affecting WhatsApp’s multimedia features, which have been attributed to the firewall trials.
Despite widespread complaints about internet issues, government officials have denied that the firewall is responsible, instead blaming excessive VPN use and submarine cable faults.
Critics argue that the firewall represents a significant step towards increased censorship and control over digital discourse in Pakistan, particularly targeting opposition narratives.
If you didn’t know, Pakistan is a deeply Islamic nation and has always tried to block what it deems immoral or blasphemous content.
Crazy fact: in 2008, the country once caused a global YouTube crash while trying to block a link to a video the government thought was blasphemous.
With the new firewall, that won’t be a problem. They will be able to curate what their citizens can watch, like a parent does for their kids.
These governments, man, it’s almost as if they don’t think they are public servants working for the people.
The Great Zimbabwe Firewall?
Zimbabwe is friends with China too, and one wonders how long before some politician seriously works on getting a China-style firewall here. We know some have praised it before, but how long until they actively work to get it?
However, these Chinese Great Firewall-like systems are designed to control internet traffic by filtering and blocking content on traditional terrestrial networks (using equipment on the ground like fiber optic cables and cell towers) and undersea cable networks.
Satellite bypasses all that
Starlink, as a satellite-based system, bypasses much of the traditional infrastructure by providing a direct satellite-to-user connection, making it much harder for a Chinese-style firewall to impose its censorship mechanisms directly on the network.
Starlink operates independently of ground-based internet infrastructure, so it doesn’t rely on in-country ISPs or data centers, which are typically where the Great Firewall operates.
For such a firewall to be effective, it would need access to Starlink’s infrastructure, such as ground stations, or cooperation from SpaceX. Without Starlink hosting servers or gateways in Zimbabwe, Pakistan, or China, the governments cannot directly apply their censorship techniques.
However, don’t think this means Starlink can operate as a maverick in Zimbabwe. Notice I said they could get their censorship or monitoring needs met via cooperation from Starlink. The company would have to decide between complying and being allowed to continue serving the country or refusing and being outlawed.
Knowing Elon Musk’s views on censorship, the service would sooner exit the market than cooperate with heavy censorship campaigns. Hopefully, we never get to that.
What’s your take? Cancel reply