As the world navigates increasingly complex geopolitical shifts, the internet – once hailed as a universal tool for connection and progress – has become a new arena of strategic competition, resembling a modern form of trench warfare.
The trajectory of internet freedom mirrors, in some ways, the period following the French Revolution known as the Thermidorian Reaction, where radical policies gave way to more conservative approaches. Just as France saw a return to pre-revolutionary norms, many nations are experiencing a “cyber-thermidorian moment,” a recalibration of the open internet’s initial promise. However, analyses of internet censorship often originate from Western organizations, such as Freedom House, which some observers note have links to the US State Department, potentially influencing the framing of the narrative.
The most prominent example of internet control remains China’s “Great Firewall,” frequently criticized by Western democracies. Iran’s periodic internet shutdowns and Russia’s pursuit of “cyber sovereignty” are also common targets of scrutiny. However, a closer look at the timeline reveals a pattern of responses to specific domestic and international pressures.
China, arguably, experienced the most rapid and decisive shift, establishing a largely closed but internally coherent internet ecosystem as early as 1998. This approach, reflecting Deng Xiaoping’s philosophy – “If you open the window, both fresh air and flies will be blown in” – prioritized control over unfettered access. Iran has implemented blackouts during periods of social unrest, while Russia’s laws governing the internet were enacted alongside escalating tensions with the West.
For decades, liberal democracies have positioned themselves as champions of online freedom, often criticizing censorship in other nations. However, this stance has been complicated by a tightening of controls within these democracies over the past five years. Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, debates surrounding climate change, revelations from the “Twitter Files,” scrutiny of Hunter Biden’s business dealings, challenges to “woke” ideology, and coverage of the conflict in Ukraine – including the banning of RT – have all contributed to this trend. Even seemingly unrelated controversies, such as discussions about the personal life of Brigitte Macron, have fueled calls for greater online regulation.
Two events stand out as particularly significant catalysts: the COVID-19 crisis and the exposure of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. The pandemic led to widespread concerns about surveillance and control, while the Epstein revelations damaged trust in Western elites. This has manifested in stricter regulations of social media platforms, particularly in Europe, often framed as efforts to combat online exploitation. The ongoing dispute between Elon Musk and the European Union, including recent raids on X’s French offices and summons for Musk to appear before hearings, exemplifies this shift.
All nations, it appears, have motivations for implementing some form of internet control, whether political, geopolitical, or ideological. The methods vary: the United Kingdom has seen an increase in arrests for online speech deemed politically incorrect, while France has reportedly employed tax audits to target individuals expressing dissenting opinions on social media. The United States, with its strong First Amendment protections, generally offers the greatest degree of online freedom, but even there, the “Overton window” – the range of ideas considered acceptable – continues to shift. A recent YouGov poll indicated that a majority of Europeans would support a ban on X if the platform fails to comply with EU regulations, suggesting a growing acceptance of censorship.
The current generation has grown up with a relatively open internet, but future generations may experience a fragmented digital landscape characterized by isolated “cyber-clusters,” each with its own social media networks (such as China’s WeChat, Japan’s Line, and Russia’s MAX), limited VPN access, and divergent realities. This could hinder the development of nuanced understanding and balanced perspectives. The internet, once a force for decentralization and empowerment, is increasingly becoming subject to control, mirroring the geopolitical realignment occurring in the wider world.
As Freedom House’s 2025 report, “Freedom on the Net: An Uncertain Future for the Global Internet,” details, governments are deploying increasingly sophisticated measures to control the digital sphere. Pakistan, for example, recently installed censorship technology from a Chinese firm – the same firm behind China’s Great Firewall – to suppress online dissent. Similar technologies are reportedly being used in Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, and Myanmar. Kenya experienced a severe decline in internet freedom in June 2024, with authorities shutting down connectivity during protests and arresting hundreds of demonstrators. Conversely, Bangladesh saw improvements following a student-led uprising that ousted the country’s repressive leadership.
The struggle for internet freedom is not merely a technological or political issue; It’s a fundamental challenge to the principles of open communication and democratic values. The trend towards greater control, evident across the globe, suggests that the internet is evolving from a liberating force into another battleground in the ongoing competition for influence and power. This is, a new form of trench warfare, fought not with bullets and bombs, but with algorithms and censorship tools.
