Does Shutting Down the Internet Actually Work in 2025? Is It a Successful Tool for Regime Preservation and Its Geopolitical Ripples

The Silence Switch: Internet Blackouts as Authoritarian Lifelines

TL;DR:

• Myanmar’s 85 internet shutdowns in 2025 highlight a global surge in digital repression to prevent regime change, using tactics like BGP route withdrawals and DPI throttling.

• Historical cases (Egypt 2011, Iran 2019) and current examples (India, Russia, Ethiopia, Cuba) show varied approaches—total blackouts to targeted censorship—triggered by protests, coups, or conflicts.

• Technical methods include ISP throttling, DNS blocking, and physical sabotage, often aided by state telecoms and foreign firms, aiming to disrupt coordination, control narratives, and intimidate populations.

• Geopolitically, shutdowns strain neighbors with refugee flows and trade losses, disrupt global supply chains, erode investor confidence, and deepen East-West divides with sanctions versus support from China and Russia.

• Effectiveness is mixed: Myanmar and Iran delay unrest, but Egypt and Cuba show failures as offline resistance and global backlash amplify dissent; economic self-harm and radicalization are key risks.

• Human costs are severe—stalled aid, crippled healthcare, fragmented communities, disrupted education, and obscured atrocities hinder intervention, as seen in Myanmar and Ethiopia.

• Countermeasures like VPNs, mesh networks, and Starlink, alongside UN/NGO advocacy and sanctions, resist shutdowns, but 2025’s record year raises fears of normalization versus a push for digital rights.

• The strategy’s high stakes—economic ruin, diplomatic fallout, and technological fragmentation—demand global cooperation to protect connectivity, as shutdowns delay but may ignite fiercer resistance.

And now the Deep Dive…

Introduction

The year 2025 has etched itself into the annals of digital history with Myanmar’s staggering 85 internet shutdowns, a figure that crowns it the global leader in a year already dubbed a record-breaking nadir for internet freedom by organizations like Access Now. This statistic, drawn from a February 23, 2025, Voice of America report, paints a vivid picture of a nation plunged into digital darkness, severing millions from the world amid escalating protests against its military junta. These blackouts, often coinciding with airstrikes and human rights abuses, exemplify a chilling trend where regimes wield internet shutdowns as a blunt instrument to stifle dissent and cling to power. Far from an isolated incident, Myanmar’s example reflects a broader global surge in state-orchestrated digital repression, a phenomenon that has surged in the 21st century as governments grapple with the double-edged sword of connectivity—empowering citizens while threatening entrenched authority. As authoritarian regimes increasingly turn to this tactic, the ripple effects extend beyond national borders, destabilizing economies, straining diplomatic ties, and redefining the geopolitics of information control.

Internet shutdowns, in technical terms, encompass a spectrum of deliberate interventions: from complete network blackouts achieved by severing Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) announcements to selective throttling via Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) that slows data to a crawl, rendering real-time communication impossible. Censorship complements these measures, often through Domain Name System (DNS) blocking or Internet Protocol (IP) address filtering, targeting platforms like X or encrypted services like Signal. Myanmar’s military junta, since its 2021 coup, has refined this arsenal, with 2025 marking an apex of sophistication and scale. A January 9, 2025, Radio Free Asia article details how the junta’s rolling shutdowns across over 100 townships—spanning conflict zones like Sagaing and Rakhine—disrupted not just dissent but daily life, crippling access to healthcare and education. Globally, this mirrors tactics seen elsewhere: India’s 84 shutdowns in 2024, often in Kashmir, leveraged DPI to choke mobile data, while Russia’s throttling of Western platforms since 2022 relies on state-controlled ISPs. The strategic intent is clear—disrupt the Command, Control, and Communications (C3) capabilities of opposition forces, a military doctrine repurposed for the digital age. Yet, as Myanmar’s case reveals, this comes at a cost: isolating populations fosters resentment, potentially galvanizing offline resistance networks that prove harder to monitor or suppress.

The geopolitical ramifications of this digital repression are profound, radiating outward like shockwaves from a seismic event. Myanmar’s 2025 shutdowns, as noted in a January 23, 2025, Fulcrum analysis, have exacerbated regional instability, driving refugee flows into Thailand and Bangladesh while disrupting trade routes critical for rare earth minerals—an economic lifeline for Southeast Asia. This echoes Ethiopia’s Tigray blackout, where, per a July 15, 2024, Progressive Voice Myanmar report, prolonged internet cuts intensified a humanitarian crisis, straining Horn of Africa relations and prompting Western sanctions. Economically, the toll is staggering: Myanmar’s three-year service-blocking spree, tracked by the Internet Society’s Pulse platform on February 5, 2024, has hemorrhaged $232 million in GDP, a figure dwarfed only by the broader destabilization of investor confidence across digitally volatile regions. Diplomatically, shutdowns deepen global fractures—China and Russia back Myanmar’s junta with tech and tacit approval, per a January 16, 2025, Human Rights Watch report, while the U.S. and EU counter with sanctions and calls for digital rights, polarizing the international order. This tug-of-war extends to cyberspace itself, where shutdowns spur a race for countermeasures—Starlink’s satellite internet, though illegal to import via Thailand, hints at a future where digital sovereignty battles escalate into proxy conflicts.

Yet, the efficacy of internet shutdowns as a regime-saving tool remains a double-edged sword, with Myanmar’s 2025 experience offering a cautionary tale. While the junta’s 85 disruptions—31 tied to documented abuses, per Access Now—bought time by fracturing resistance coordination, they also ignited a backlash. A January 15, 2025, Borgen Project piece underscores how Myanmar’s $2.8 billion economic loss from 2021 shutdowns persists, with 2025’s blackouts further eroding livelihoods, pushing populations toward radicalization rather than submission. Globally, historical parallels abound: Egypt’s 2011 blackout failed to halt Mubarak’s ouster as offline networks adapted, while Iran’s 2019 cuts delayed but didn’t extinguish unrest. The technical limits are equally telling—Myanmar’s VPN ban, enacted January 1, 2025, per Fulcrum, struggles against resilient users wielding mesh networks and smuggled satellite receivers, as noted in a February 5, 2024, Internet Society report. Geopolitically, this cat-and-mouse game signals a shift: as shutdowns normalize, they risk not just economic self-harm but a redefinition of power, where regimes trade short-term control for long-term instability, and the world grapples with a fragmented, contested digital frontier.

Myanmar: The Model of Digital Repression in 2025

Myanmar’s descent into a model of digital repression in 2025 finds its roots in the military coup of February 1, 2021, when the Tatmadaw ousted the democratically elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi, sparking widespread civil unrest. What began as peaceful protests quickly escalated into a multifaceted resistance, blending civilian demonstrations with armed opposition from ethnic groups like the Kachin Independence Army and the newly formed People’s Defense Forces (PDFs). By 2025, this resistance had grown into a formidable challenge to the junta’s authority, fueled by a populace unwilling to accept military rule and bolstered by defections within the armed forces. The junta, officially the State Administration Council (SAC), faced mounting pressure as protests morphed into sustained guerrilla campaigns, particularly in regions like Sagaing and Chin, threatening its grip on power. This escalation set the stage for an unprecedented clampdown on digital infrastructure, as the military sought to sever the lifelines of communication that sustained the opposition.

The scale and frequency of internet shutdowns in 2025 have catapulted Myanmar to the forefront of global digital repression, a grim distinction underscored by a Voice of America report dated February 23, 2025, which labeled it the leader in a record-breaking year for such disruptions. The junta’s tactics are technically sophisticated and ruthlessly systematic: complete blackouts sever entire regions from the global internet by suspending Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) routing announcements, effectively isolating network autonomous systems. Targeted mobile data cuts, achieved through precise throttling via Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), disrupt real-time coordination on platforms like Telegram and Signal, while a nationwide VPN ban—enforced January 1, 2025—blocks circumvention tools by filtering IP addresses and blacklisting known VPN protocols like OpenVPN and WireGuard. Access Now documented 85 such shutdowns in 2025 alone, a staggering figure that reflects the junta’s reliance on digital isolation to choke dissent, often timed with military offensives to maximize disruption.

These shutdowns have proven a double-edged sword for regime stability, offering short-term tactical gains at the cost of long-term resilience. By severing internet access, the junta has disrupted the opposition’s ability to coordinate via encrypted messaging or share footage of atrocities, temporarily stalling protest momentum and buying time for troop redeployments. A January 23, 2025, Fulcrum analysis notes how outages in over 100 townships crippled resistance networks reliant on Starlink and smuggled Thai SIMs, forcing a shift to slower, less secure methods like radio relays. Yet, this isolation has a flip side: it has deepened public resentment, as families endure prolonged separation and businesses collapse under the weight of inaccessibility. Underground resistance, less dependent on digital grids, has adapted by decentralizing operations, suggesting that while the junta gains breathing room, it may be sowing seeds of fiercer, less visible opposition.

Domestically, the consequences of these shutdowns ripple through every facet of Myanmar’s society, tearing at its already fragile fabric. Communication breakdowns have left families unable to contact loved ones, with mobile networks—once a lifeline in a nation with minimal fixed-line infrastructure—rendered useless in conflict zones. Emergency services, reliant on real-time data for coordination, falter as ambulances and aid workers navigate blackouts without updates on safe routes, a crisis detailed in a January 9, 2025, Radio Free Asia report. Economically, the toll is catastrophic: the Internet Society estimated in 2024 that prior shutdowns cost $232 million in GDP, a figure likely dwarfed by 2025’s intensified disruptions, which have halted e-commerce, disrupted supply chains, and exacerbated inflation already spiraling from years of conflict. Poverty deepens as digital payment systems like Wave Money grind to a halt, leaving rural populations cash-starved.

The human rights implications of Myanmar’s digital blackout are equally dire, cloaking the junta’s actions in a shroud of silence. With internet access severed, citizen journalists and human rights monitors struggle to document abuses—extrajudicial killings, airstrikes, and village burnings—that have intensified in 2025. A January 16, 2025, Human Rights Watch report ties at least 31 shutdowns to documented atrocities, noting how the absence of connectivity delays evidence collection, hindering global accountability mechanisms like the International Criminal Court’s ongoing investigations. The junta’s ban on VPNs, criminalizing their use with up to six months’ imprisonment, further isolates victims, as even encrypted backchannels vanish. This opacity not only shields the military from scrutiny but also complicates humanitarian responses, leaving displaced populations—over 1.4 million by late 2024, per UN estimates—cut off from aid coordination.

Myanmar’s 2025 model of digital repression stands as a stark blueprint for authoritarian regimes worldwide, illustrating both the power and peril of internet control. Technologically, it showcases a layered approach: BGP disruptions for broad strokes, DPI for precision cuts, and legislative bans to close loopholes, all underpinned by a willingness to sacrifice economic stability for political survival. A July 15, 2024, Progressive Voice Myanmar analysis highlights how this strategy echoes China’s Great Firewall but adapts it for acute crisis management, offering a playbook for nations like Ethiopia or Iran facing similar unrest. Yet, its limits are evident: the junta’s $2.8 billion economic loss from prior shutdowns, cited by the Borgen Project in 2022 and likely compounded in 2025, underscores the self-inflicted wounds of such tactics, while resilient resistance networks hint at diminishing returns.

Geopolitically, Myanmar’s approach reverberates beyond its borders, influencing regional and global dynamics. Neighboring Thailand and Bangladesh grapple with refugee surges and disrupted trade, while China’s tacit support—supplying surveillance tech and telecom gear—deepens Sino-Western rifts, as noted in a February 5, 2025, Myanmar Now piece. The international community’s response remains fractured: Western sanctions target junta-linked firms like Mytel, but enforcement lags, and alternative connectivity solutions like Starlink face logistical and legal hurdles in reaching resistance zones. Myanmar thus serves as a litmus test, exposing the tension between digital authoritarianism’s immediate efficacy and its broader destabilizing effects, a lesson not lost on other regimes watching closely.

Ultimately, Myanmar’s 2025 experiment in digital repression underscores a grim paradox: while shutdowns fortify the junta’s immediate control, they erode the very systems—economic, social, and informational—that sustain long-term governance. The military’s gamble hinges on crushing dissent before adaptation outpaces suppression, but history suggests otherwise: Egypt’s 2011 blackout failed to save Mubarak, and Myanmar’s own resistance grows more ingenious, from mesh networks to smuggled satellite dishes. As a model, it offers authoritarian peers a potent toolset, but also a warning—digital darkness may delay reckoning, but it rarely prevents it, leaving Myanmar a crucible for both repression’s reach and its breaking point.

(Pictured above: Aung San Suu Kyi)

A Global Trend: Internet Censorship and Shutdowns in Times of Upheaval

Internet censorship and shutdowns have emerged as a pervasive global trend during times of upheaval, with governments deploying sophisticated technical measures to suppress dissent and control narratives, a pattern that spans decades and continents. One of the earliest prominent examples unfolded in Egypt during the Arab Spring in 2011, when the Mubarak regime orchestrated a brief but sweeping internet blackout to disrupt protest coordination. On January 27, 2011, the government ordered major Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like Telecom Egypt and Vodafone to sever Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) routes, effectively dropping Egypt from the global internet for five days. This drastic measure, detailed in a Rest of World retrospective from April 26, 2022, aimed to throttle the flow of information on platforms like Twitter and Facebook, which had galvanized the Tahrir Square uprising. Yet, the shutdown backfired—protesters adapted via satellite phones and offline networks, and the regime fell within weeks, underscoring the limits of digital repression against a determined populace.

Rewind to November 2019, and Iran provides another historical precedent, this time with a nationwide blackout during the fuel price riots that erupted after a sudden 200% price hike. The Islamic Republic’s response was technically precise: the National Internet Information Center ordered ISPs to block international traffic while maintaining the domestic intranet, a move tracked by NetBlocks and reported by The Guardian on November 24, 2019. This involved severing international BGP routes and employing Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) to filter encrypted traffic, cutting off access to WhatsApp and Instagram for over a week. The blackout partially succeeded, obscuring a brutal crackdown that killed over 300, according to Amnesty International’s October 12, 2022, investigation. However, smuggled footage and satellite uplinks eventually pierced the silence, revealing the regime’s violence and suggesting that while shutdowns can delay information, they rarely erase it entirely.

Turning to contemporary examples beyond Myanmar’s 2025 model, India stands out for its frequent and localized internet shutdowns, particularly in Kashmir and during the 2020-2021 farmer protests. In Kashmir, the government has leaned on Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to justify throttling mobile data to 2G speeds or enacting total blackouts, as Freedom House documented in its October 3, 2023, report. By 2025, India’s tally of shutdowns exceeds 200 since 2019, often using DPI to target specific apps like Telegram, with Kashmir’s 18-month blackout from August 2019 to February 2021 being the longest recorded. During the farmer protests, authorities in Haryana and Delhi disrupted 4G services to halt viral protest coordination, yet this sparked backlash from the UN and tech coalitions like #KeepItOn, highlighting a trade-off: narrative control at the expense of international credibility.

Russia’s approach since the Ukraine war began in 2022 offers a hybrid blueprint, blending censorship with throttling rather than total shutdowns, a strategy persisting into 2025. The Roskomnadzor agency has deployed System for Operative Investigative Activities (SORM) hardware to monitor and throttle traffic to Western platforms like Twitter/X and YouTube, as outlined in a February 28, 2023, Guardian report on 2022’s shutdown trends. By 2025, Russia’s “sovereign internet” infrastructure, including the RuNet backbone, filters dissent via DNS poisoning and IP blocking, targeting anti-war voices with surgical precision. This method preserves economic functionality while stifling digital opposition, though circumvention tools like Tor and VPNs—despite bans—keep dissent alive, illustrating the resilience of adaptive technologies against state control.

Ethiopia’s Tigray blackout, stretching from November 2020 into 2025, represents one of the most prolonged shutdowns on record, aimed at obscuring a devastating ethnic conflict. Initiated after the Tigray People’s Liberation Front attacked federal forces, the government severed mobile and broadband connections across the region, a move tracked by Access Now and reported by Al Jazeera on March 3, 2021. By 2025, this blackout—spanning over four years—relies on physical disconnection of Ethio Telecom’s fiber optic lines and cellular towers, cutting off 6 million people. The intent is clear: conceal alleged atrocities amid a war that displaced millions, per Human Rights Watch’s January 16, 2025, update. Yet, sporadic satellite internet leaks and diaspora networks have kept the crisis in global view, exposing the shutdown’s incomplete success.

Cuba’s 2021 internet shutdowns during anti-government protests offer a contrasting case, where limited digital penetration shapes the outcome. On July 11, 2021, as thousands protested economic hardship and political repression, the state monopoly ETECSA blocked WhatsApp, Telegram, and Facebook, a disruption confirmed by Fortune on July 12, 2021. The government throttled bandwidth via DPI and suspended mobile data in Havana, aiming to limit global visibility of the unrest. Unlike Ethiopia’s total blackout, Cuba’s approach reflects its nascent digital infrastructure—only 68% of citizens had internet access by 2021. While the shutdown curtailed live-streamed dissent, offline organizing and international solidarity via VPNs ensured the protests’ message endured, revealing digital control’s fragility in partially connected societies.

These cases share common triggers—protests, elections, coups, and ethnic strife—that prompt governments to wield internet clampdowns as a first resort. In Egypt, the 2011 protests catalyzed a shutdown; in Iran, fuel riots did the same; India’s farmer unrest and Kashmir’s insurgency followed suit; Russia’s war dissent, Ethiopia’s ethnic war, and Cuba’s economic discontent all align with this pattern. A February 15, 2022, DW article on Iran noted how regimes fear social media’s amplification of public outrage, driving preemptive digital strikes. These triggers often coincide with moments of regime vulnerability, where the stakes of losing narrative control outweigh economic or diplomatic costs, a calculus that technical tools like BGP hijacking and DPI enable with alarming efficiency.

Variations in approach underscore the adaptability of digital repression: Myanmar and Ethiopia favor total shutdowns, severing all connectivity to create information vacuums; Russia and India opt for targeted censorship, using DPI and DNS filtering to excise specific threats while sparing broader access; Iran and Cuba lean on throttling, slowing data to disrupt real-time dissent without fully unplugging. A November 10, 2022, ACM study of Iran’s 2019 shutdowns highlights how regimes tailor tactics to infrastructure and goals—total blackouts for acute crises, selective measures for sustained control. This spectrum reflects not just technical capacity but strategic intent, balancing suppression with the need to maintain domestic functionality, a tightrope that shapes both efficacy and backlash in an increasingly connected world.

(Pictured above: how Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) are used to filter encrypted traffic)

Mechanisms and Motivations Behind Internet Shutdowns

The mechanisms behind internet shutdowns hinge on a suite of technical methods wielded with precision to sever or manipulate digital connectivity, reflecting a blend of sophistication and brute force tailored to a regime’s resources and intent. Internet Service Provider (ISP) throttling, for instance, employs Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) to scrutinize and slow data packets, targeting specific protocols like those used by encrypted apps such as Signal or WhatsApp, rendering them sluggish or unusable—a tactic seen in Iran’s 2022 throttling during Mahsa Amini protests, as reported by NetBlocks on September 22, 2022. DNS blocking, another cornerstone, involves manipulating the Domain Name System to return false IP addresses or null responses for domains like twitter.com, effectively barring access without disrupting the broader network, a method India frequently deploys in Kashmir, per Freedom House’s October 3, 2023, analysis. Physical infrastructure sabotage takes this further, with Myanmar’s junta in 2025 cutting fiber optic lines in conflict zones like Sagaing, as noted by Radio Free Asia on January 9, 2025, a crude yet effective approach that obliterates connectivity at its source. State-controlled telecoms amplify these efforts, with entities like Myanmar’s Mytel—partly owned by the military—executing shutdowns on command, while international tech compliance, such as Telenor’s reluctant acquiescence under junta pressure, bridges gaps in local capability, per a February 1, 2025, Myanmar Now report.

These technical maneuvers serve strategic goals rooted in disrupting the sinews of modern resistance—real-time coordination via digital platforms. By throttling bandwidth to 2G speeds or severing mobile data entirely, regimes like Ethiopia’s during the Tigray conflict (2020-2025) dismantle the Command, Control, and Communications (C3) framework opposition groups rely on, a disruption Human Rights Watch tied to obscured atrocities in its January 16, 2025, update. In Myanmar, the junta’s 85 shutdowns in 2025, detailed in the Voice of America report from February 23, 2025, crippled protest logistics by blocking encrypted channels like Telegram, forcing reliance on slower, riskier alternatives like radio or couriers. This not only hampers tactical agility but also fragments organizational cohesion, as real-time updates—vital for mobilizing crowds or evading crackdowns—vanish. The precision of DPI allows targeting of specific apps, ensuring broader economic networks remain intact while choking dissent, a balancing act that reflects both technical prowess and strategic foresight in maintaining regime stability amidst unrest.

Beyond disruption, controlling narratives drives these shutdowns, as regimes seek to blind external eyes to internal abuses. By blocking citizen journalism—think live-streamed videos of military violence—governments limit evidence that could fuel global outrage or legal accountability. Myanmar’s 2025 VPN ban, enforced via DPI and IP filtering, slashed uploads of junta atrocities to platforms like YouTube, a trend Access Now linked to 31 specific blackout-abuse incidents in its February 24, 2025, coverage. Ethiopia’s Tigray blackout similarly shrouded war crimes, with diaspora networks struggling to relay smuggled reports, per Al Jazeera’s March 3, 2021, mapping. This digital curtain not only protects perpetrators but also distorts public perception within the country, replacing diverse voices with state propaganda—a tactic honed by Russia’s throttling of Western media since 2022, rerouting users to Kremlin-approved RuNet portals, as The Guardian reported on February 28, 2023. The result is a controlled information ecosystem where truth becomes a casualty of connectivity.

Intimidation forms the third pillar, with shutdowns signaling omnipotence to deter opposition through enforced isolation. When Myanmar’s junta plunged entire regions into digital silence in 2025, it projected unassailable power, a psychological blow amplified by the sudden loss of contact with family or allies, as Radio Free Asia documented. This echoes Iran’s 2019 blackout, where a week-long disconnection during fuel riots—tracked by NetBlocks—left citizens disoriented and fearful, amplifying the regime’s aura of control. The technical execution, whether via BGP route withdrawals or physical cable cuts, matters less than the message: resistance is futile against a state that can unplug society at will. Yet, this intimidation often backfires, as isolation breeds resentment; Myanmar’s underground networks, forced offline, pivoted to clandestine methods, hinting at a resilience that undercuts the junta’s intended deterrence.

The authoritarian playbook ties these mechanisms together, with Myanmar’s 2025 tactics offering a stark contrast to China’s Great Firewall, a long-term censorship juggernaut. China’s system, reliant on DPI-equipped middleboxes from firms like Huawei, filters traffic proactively at internet exchange points (IXPs), blocking entire swathes of the global web—think Google or Wikipedia—while allowing controlled domestic access, as Top10VPN’s January 1, 2025, report on shutdown costs explains. Myanmar, facing acute crises post-2021 coup, opts instead for reactive, blunt-force shutdowns—85 in 2025 alone—severing BGP routes and banning VPNs to quash immediate threats, per VOA’s data. Where China’s firewall is a permanent fortress, Myanmar’s approach is a siege tactic, adaptable to spiking unrest but lacking the sustained infrastructure of Beijing’s model, which integrates real-time surveillance and content whitelisting.

This adaptability highlights a key motivation: flexibility in crisis. China’s Great Firewall, while effective, demands vast resources—thousands of censors, AI-driven monitoring, and a national intranet—beyond the reach of cash-strapped regimes like Myanmar’s junta, reeling from a $2.8 billion shutdown hit since 2021, per Myanmar Now. Instead, Myanmar leverages state telecoms like Mytel and foreign firms’ compliance to enact rapid, if temporary, blackouts, a strategy that trades economic stability for short-term survival. Russia’s hybrid model—throttling via SORM hardware while building RuNet—sits between these poles, suggesting a spectrum of authoritarian control calibrated to both capability and context, as The Guardian noted.

The role of international tech firms underscores a darker motivation: outsourcing repression. In Myanmar, Telenor and Ooredoo, under junta edicts, throttled or cut services, their BGP withdrawals tracked by NetBlocks, aligning with local telecoms like Mytel to enforce blackouts. This compliance, often coerced by threats of license revocation or legal action, bridges technical gaps—Myanmar lacks China’s indigenous DPI capacity—while amplifying shutdown reach, a dynamic Freedom House critiqued in India’s context too. It’s a symbiotic yet fraught relationship, as firms risk reputational damage or market exit, yet their involvement ensures regimes can punch above their technological weight, a pattern likely to persist as digital geopolitics evolve.

Ultimately, these mechanisms and motivations reveal a calculated trade-off: regimes wield shutdowns to preserve power, but at costs that ripple outward. Myanmar’s 2025 playbook—disrupting coordination, controlling narratives, and intimidating foes—mirrors global trends but lacks China’s finesse, relying on raw disruption over refined control. The technical arsenal, from ISP throttling to physical sabotage, serves strategic ends, yet the collateral damage—economic collapse, international censure, and festering resistance—hints at a Pyrrhic victory. As Top10VPN’s data suggests, 2024’s $7.69 billion global shutdown toll underscores this paradox: digital repression buys time, but rarely permanence.

Geopolitical Impacts: A Ripple Effect

The geopolitical impacts of internet shutdowns extend far beyond national borders, creating a ripple effect that destabilizes regional stability in profound and often unpredictable ways. Myanmar’s unprecedented 85 internet blackouts in 2025, as reported by Voice of America on February 23, 2025, have strained its neighbors—Thailand, India, and Bangladesh—with cascading consequences. The shutdowns, often timed with military offensives, have driven waves of refugees across porous borders, with Thailand alone hosting over 100,000 displaced persons from Myanmar by early 2025, according to a January 23, 2025, Fulcrum analysis. Trade routes, particularly those carrying Myanmar’s jade and timber, have faltered as digital payment systems and logistics coordination collapse, leaving regional economies reeling. Similarly, Ethiopia’s prolonged Tigray blackout, persisting into 2025 per Human Rights Watch’s January 16, 2025, report, has escalated tensions in the Horn of Africa. The severed connectivity has disrupted humanitarian aid flows—UN convoys reliant on real-time GPS tracking flounder—while diplomatic efforts between Ethiopia, Sudan, and Eritrea fray as misinformation fills the vacuum, amplifying border skirmishes and threatening a fragile regional balance.

Global economic consequences amplify these regional tremors, as internet shutdowns disrupt supply chains and erode investor confidence with technical precision. Myanmar’s mineral exports, critical for rare earths used in electronics, have plummeted due to blackouts that disable blockchain-based trade platforms and halt real-time market updates, a loss pegged at $232 million since 2021 by the Internet Society’s February 5, 2024, estimate—likely dwarfed by 2025’s intensified disruptions. India’s tech hubs, like Bengaluru, face parallel woes; frequent shutdowns in Kashmir and protest zones throttle cloud-based operations, with DPI-enforced throttling cutting data speeds to below 256 kbps, per Freedom House’s October 3, 2023, findings, though 2025 data suggests an uptick in frequency. This digital instability has spooked investors, redirecting capital flows to more stable nodes like Singapore or Dubai. A January 1, 2025, Top10VPN report notes that 2024’s global shutdown costs hit $7.69 billion, a figure poised to rise as Myanmar and others double down, signaling a broader retreat from digitally volatile regions and reshaping global economic geography.

International relations fracture further under the weight of these shutdowns, deepening global divides with a mix of condemnation and complicity. Western powers, led by the U.S. and EU, have decried Myanmar’s 2025 blackouts as human rights violations, imposing sanctions on junta-linked telecoms like Mytel, as detailed in a February 1, 2025, Myanmar Now piece. Yet, China’s tacit support—supplying DPI hardware and routing tech—bolsters the junta, per the same report, while Russia’s backing of Belarus’s censorship mirrors this alignment, widening the East-West rift. Ethiopia’s Tigray blackout draws similar fault lines: Western aid cuts clash with Chinese infrastructure loans, straining bilateral ties. Sanctions, like the U.S.’s targeting of Ethiopian officials in 2024, escalate tensions, but enforcement lags, leaving diplomatic fallout unresolved and global blocs more entrenched, a dynamic The Guardian’s February 28, 2023, analysis foresaw in Russia’s case and which 2025 bears out.

Cybersecurity emerges as a battleground in this geopolitical maelstrom, with states countering shutdowns through a surge in cyber warfare tools like VPNs and satellite internet. Myanmar’s VPN ban, enacted January 1, 2025, and enforced via IP filtering, has sparked a clandestine boom in smuggled Starlink terminals—debated fiercely in Thai border zones by early 2025, per Fulcrum—bypassing BGP blackouts with low-earth-orbit uplinks. Ethiopia’s resistance similarly pivots to satellite leaks, though government jamming of Ku-band frequencies complicates access, as Human Rights Watch notes. This cat-and-mouse game elevates cybersecurity stakes, with state actors hacking VPN providers or spoofing DNS to regain control, a trend Freedom House flags in India’s shutdown playbook. The technical arms race pits authoritarian precision against decentralized resilience, redefining digital conflict in real time.

Digital sovereignty takes center stage as regimes preempt upheaval with national internet frameworks, epitomized by Russia’s RuNet. Since 2019, Russia has built a parallel internet backbone, routing traffic via state-controlled IXPs and throttling foreign domains with SORM hardware, a system stress-tested during 2022 Ukraine war dissent and refined by 2025, per The Guardian. Myanmar lacks such infrastructure but mimics the intent with total blackouts, while Ethiopia’s Ethio Telecom monopoly mirrors the model on a smaller scale. Top10VPN’s 2025 data suggests this trend—national nets as digital fortresses—gains traction, with 2024’s $7.69 billion shutdown toll pushing states to prioritize sovereignty over connectivity. The result is a fragmented cyberspace, where global internet ideals erode under the weight of preemptive control.

These shifts carry technical underpinnings that amplify their geopolitical heft. Myanmar’s reliance on physical sabotage—severing fiber optic trunks—contrasts with India’s DPI-driven precision, yet both disrupt TCP/IP flows critical for trade and communication, per Internet Society metrics. Ethiopia’s blackout, by disabling cellular base stations, achieves similar ends with less finesse, while Russia’s RuNet reroutes BGP announcements to isolate dissent. Each method, crude or sophisticated, throttles data packets to below usable thresholds—often sub-50 kbps—crippling real-time systems from banking to logistics. The ripple effect is a global network strained by localized fractures, with latency spikes and packet loss cascading across continents.

Economically, the redirection of capital flows reflects a flight to digital stability, with tangible impacts on development. Myanmar’s mineral sector, once a magnet for Chinese FDI, sees investment dry up as shutdowns render contracts unenforceable via smart ledgers, a loss Myanmar Now ties to Beijing’s cautious pivot. India’s tech hubs, despite resilience, face a brain drain as firms relocate to Singapore, where 5G uptime exceeds 99.9%, per Freedom House contrasts with India’s spotty record. Ethiopia’s isolation deters aid-dependent growth, with Horn of Africa trade corridors stagnating. This capital flight, quantifiable in billions redirected annually, per Top10VPN, redraws economic maps, favoring nations with uninterrupted digital arteries.

The interplay of cybersecurity and sovereignty fuels a broader geopolitical reorientation, where internet shutdowns catalyze proxy conflicts and ideological showdowns. Starlink’s 2025 Myanmar debate—pitting U.S. tech against junta censorship—echoes Cold War tech races, with China’s Great Firewall as a rival template. Russia’s RuNet, buffering Belarus and eyeing Central Asia, challenges Western digital norms, while Ethiopia’s blackout tests African Union unity against external meddling. These dynamics, rooted in technical disruptions, signal a world where connectivity becomes a weapon, stability a casualty, and sovereignty a prize fiercely contested across physical and virtual frontiers.

The Double-Edged Sword: Effectiveness vs. Backlash

The effectiveness of internet shutdowns as a tool for regime preservation reveals a double-edged sword, where short-term gains often clash with long-term backlash, as Myanmar’s experience in 2025 vividly illustrates. The military junta, facing relentless protests and armed resistance following its 2021 coup, escalated its digital repression to an unprecedented 85 shutdowns in 2025, a figure reported by Voice of America on February 23, 2025. By severing Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) routes and throttling mobile data with Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), the junta disrupted real-time coordination on platforms like Telegram, stalling opposition momentum and allowing troop redeployments to regain control over contested regions like Sagaing. Despite battlefield losses and economic hemorrhaging, this digital isolation—complemented by a January 1, 2025, VPN ban—enabled the junta to retain power into late 2025, a testament to the tactical utility of cutting digital lifelines. Yet, this success is tempered by a simmering undercurrent of offline resistance, hinting at the limits of such measures against a determined populace.

Iran’s 2019 internet blackout during the fuel price riots offers another lens on this partial success, where a nationwide shutdown delayed existential threats to the regime, though it failed to extinguish unrest entirely. On November 16, 2019, as protests erupted over a 200% fuel price surge, the Iranian government blocked international BGP routes and used DPI to sever access to WhatsApp and Instagram, a move tracked by NetBlocks and detailed by The Guardian on November 24, 2019. This week-long blackout obscured a crackdown that killed over 300, per Amnesty International’s October 12, 2022, investigation, buying the regime time to regroup and suppress immediate dissent. However, smuggled satellite footage and diaspora networks pierced the digital veil, sustaining anti-regime sentiment that flared again in 2022 during the Mahsa Amini protests. The technical precision of Iran’s shutdown—maintaining a domestic intranet while isolating global access—proved effective in the short term, yet the persistence of unrest underscores that such measures merely postpone, rather than resolve, underlying tensions.

In stark contrast, Egypt’s 2011 internet shutdown during the Arab Spring exemplifies a failure where digital repression backfired spectacularly, accelerating regime collapse. From January 27 to February 2, 2011, the Mubarak government ordered ISPs like Telecom Egypt to withdraw BGP announcements, plunging the nation offline to disrupt Tahrir Square protests, as Rest of World recounted on April 26, 2022. Rather than quelling dissent, this five-day blackout—reducing connectivity to below 100 kbps—pushed protesters to adapt via satellite phones and offline networks, escalating demonstrations to levels that toppled Mubarak within weeks. Researcher Navid Hassanpour, cited in Carnegie Endowment’s March 30, 2022, analysis, argues this shutdown radicalized rather than pacified, as physical gatherings swelled without digital distraction. Egypt’s case reveals a critical flaw: when technical controls sever communication, resilient offline systems can outmaneuver state intent, turning a tool of suppression into a catalyst for upheaval.

Cuba’s 2021 shutdown during anti-government protests further illustrates how digital isolation can fail by amplifying dissent through unintended global resonance. On July 11, 2021, as thousands protested economic woes, the state monopoly ETECSA throttled mobile data and blocked WhatsApp and Telegram via DPI, a disruption Fortune reported on July 12, 2021. This 176-hour blackout aimed to limit live-streamed evidence of unrest, yet its partial reach—given Cuba’s 68% internet penetration—allowed VPN users and diaspora networks to relay footage worldwide, galvanizing solidarity from Miami to Madrid. Carnegie’s analysis notes the $33 million economic hit, but the greater cost was reputational: global outrage amplified the protests’ message, undermining the regime’s narrative control. Cuba’s limited digital infrastructure constrained the shutdown’s scope, exposing how technical overreach can boomerang when resistance finds external amplifiers.

The unintended economic self-harm of shutdowns emerges as a stark consequence, with Myanmar’s commerce collapse serving as a cautionary tale. The junta’s 2025 blackouts, alongside prior disruptions, have cost $2.8 billion since 2021, per a January 15, 2025, Borgen Project estimate, as e-commerce platforms like Shopee and digital payments like Wave Money ground to a halt amidst BGP severance and VPN bans. This economic toll—compounded by inflation and supply chain breakdowns—has deepened poverty, with rural vendors and small businesses bearing the brunt, unable to sync with urban markets or global suppliers. Top10VPN’s January 1, 2025, report pegs 2024’s global shutdown costs at $7.69 billion, suggesting Myanmar’s losses are part of a broader pattern where regimes trade short-term control for long-term fiscal ruin. The technical precision of DPI and physical cable cuts achieves isolation, but at the expense of paralyzing the digital economy that modern states rely upon.

Radicalization emerges as another unintended consequence, with Ethiopia’s Tigray blackout breeding clandestine opposition that defies regime goals. From November 2020 into 2025, Ethiopia’s government severed mobile and broadband connections, disabling cellular base stations and fiber optics across Tigray, a move Al Jazeera mapped on March 3, 2021. This four-year blackout aimed to obscure a conflict that displaced millions, yet isolation fostered underground networks using smuggled satellite receivers and offline couriers, per Human Rights Watch’s January 16, 2025, update. Carnegie’s research highlights how such shutdowns, by cutting connectivity below 50 kbps, turn predictable dissent into volatile, radicalized resistance—mirroring Egypt’s escalation. Ethiopia’s case suggests that technical suppression, while tactically sound, can ignite fiercer opposition when digital silence forces adaptation beyond state surveillance.

The interplay of effectiveness and backlash hinges on technical execution and societal response, as Myanmar’s 2025 shutdowns reveal both strengths and fissures. The junta’s layered approach—BGP withdrawals, DPI throttling to sub-256 kbps, and physical infrastructure sabotage—disrupted opposition C3 (Command, Control, Communications) frameworks, per VOA’s data, yet the $2.8 billion economic hit and offline resistance growth signal diminishing returns. Iran’s 2019 success in delaying unrest contrasts with Egypt’s 2011 failure, where offline adaptation outpaced digital cuts, and Cuba’s 2021 misstep, where global backlash amplified dissent. The economic self-harm in Myanmar and radicalization in Ethiopia underscore a broader truth: shutdowns leverage advanced tools like DPI and BGP manipulation to isolate, but their collateral damage—quantifiable in billions lost and untraceable opposition networks—often undermines the very stability they seek to enforce.

This double-edged nature poses a strategic dilemma for regimes: digital shutdowns can buy time, but rarely secure permanence. Myanmar’s junta clings to power in 2025, yet its economic collapse and radicalized foes echo Egypt’s 2011 lesson—technical control falters against human ingenuity. Iran’s delayed unrest and Cuba’s global blowback suggest partial victories shadowed by persistent threats. The unintended consequences—commerce crippled by severed TCP/IP flows, radicalization fueled by isolation—highlight a paradox: the more precise the technical repression, the greater the risk of backlash outstripping gains. As Top10VPN’s global tally warns, regimes wield this sword at their peril, balancing fleeting dominance against a tide of economic ruin and clandestine defiance.

The Human Cost: Beyond Politics

The human cost of internet shutdowns transcends political maneuvering, plunging populations into humanitarian crises that exacerbate suffering far beyond the intended targets of regime control, as seen starkly in Myanmar and Ethiopia in 2025. In Myanmar, the military junta’s 85 internet blackouts, meticulously documented by Voice of America on February 23, 2025, have severed digital lifelines critical for aid delivery, leaving humanitarian organizations like the International Rescue Committee (IRC) struggling to coordinate food and medical supply drops amidst escalating conflict. This digital chokehold, often executed via Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) withdrawals and physical sabotage of fiber optic cables, has worsened hunger for 18.6 million people—nearly a third of the population—facing acute food insecurity, per the IRC’s December 16, 2024, Watchlist update. Ethiopia mirrors this bleak reality, where the Tigray blackout, persisting into 2025 according to Human Rights Watch’s January 16, 2025, report, has crippled aid efforts for over 20 million in need. The absence of real-time data—throttled to below 50 kbps—has stalled UN convoys reliant on GPS, intensifying displacement and famine risks in a region already reeling from conflict and drought.

Health impacts compound these crises, as internet shutdowns dismantle telemedicine and emergency coordination systems vital for survival in conflict zones. In Myanmar, the junta’s DPI-enforced throttling and VPN bans, enacted January 1, 2025, have obliterated telehealth platforms that once connected rural patients to urban doctors, a loss detailed by Radio Free Asia on January 9, 2025. With hospitals under attack and water infrastructure crumbling, as the IRC notes, diseases like cholera surge unchecked—over 46,800 cases reported in Ethiopia by May 21, 2024, per the IRC’s May 21, 2024, update—yet emergency responses falter without digital backbones. Paramedics, unable to sync via mobile networks reduced to sub-256 kbps speeds, miss critical updates on safe routes or patient locations, leaving preventable deaths to mount. This technical strangulation not only isolates the sick but also erases early warning systems, amplifying the human toll in regions where every minute of connectivity counts.

The social fabric of affected communities frays under this digital isolation, as shutdowns fragment families and erode trust in institutions meant to protect them. In Myanmar, where 3.5 million are displaced by 2024 per the IRC, families separated by blackouts—often lasting weeks—lose contact, with mobile data cuts severing encrypted apps like Signal, leaving no trace of loved ones amid chaos. Trust in government collapses as state telecoms like Mytel execute these shutdowns, aligning with junta repression rather than public welfare, a dynamic Myanmar Now exposed on February 1, 2025. Communities, once knit by digital threads, splinter into isolated pockets, with local leaders powerless against a regime that controls the digital spigot. This erosion of social cohesion breeds despair, as collective resilience—once bolstered by shared information—dissipates into silence.

Education, a cornerstone of social stability, suffers devastating disruption, with India’s Kashmir shutdowns offering a chilling parallel to Myanmar and Ethiopia’s plight. Freedom House’s October 3, 2023, report, still relevant in 2025 trends, details how India’s frequent throttling of Kashmir’s mobile data to 2G speeds—below 256 kbps—has crippled online learning, leaving over 1.5 million students disconnected since 2019. Schools reliant on cloud-based platforms like Google Classroom falter, while rural students, lacking broadband alternatives, face permanent setbacks. In Myanmar, the junta’s 2025 shutdowns have similarly halted educational initiatives for Rohingya children, with UNICEF’s Myanmar Curriculum rollout stalling in Cox’s Bazar camps, per their December 29, 2024, update. This digital blackout not only denies access but also risks creating a “lost generation,” as adolescents turn to survival over study, their futures dimmed by technical barriers.

Global awareness of these crises dims as shutdowns obscure atrocities, delaying intervention and accountability, a pattern echoing from Myanmar’s Rohingya crisis into 2025. The 2017 Rohingya exodus, where 700,000 fled genocide, saw limited real-time coverage due to internet cuts, a tactic refined in 2025 to shield junta airstrikes and village burnings, as Human Rights Watch notes. With citizen journalism throttled—upload speeds dropping below 100 kbps during BGP blackouts—evidence of abuses struggles to reach the International Criminal Court, stalling cases like The Gambia’s ICJ filing. The 2025 shutdowns, tied to 31 documented atrocities per VOA, repeat this playbook, cloaking violence in digital darkness and hampering UN verification efforts, leaving the world blind to suffering that demands urgent response.

The humanitarian fallout in Ethiopia mirrors this obfuscation, where the Tigray blackout’s persistence into 2025 has hidden the scale of displacement—3.5 million IDPs by February 2024, per the IRC—and malnutrition crises from global scrutiny. Humanitarian agencies, reliant on satellite uplinks throttled by government jamming of Ku-band frequencies, struggle to relay data, delaying donor mobilization and intervention, as the IRC’s May 21, 2024, report laments. This technical suppression—reducing connectivity to near-zero throughput—ensures atrocities linger in shadows, with aid agencies like UNICEF unable to scale responses to cholera or hunger without real-time metrics. The human cost mounts as international apathy grows, fed by an absence of visceral, immediate evidence.

The ripple effects on social trust extend beyond immediate victims, as communities perceive institutions—both local and global—as impotent or complicit. In Myanmar, the junta’s use of foreign telecoms like Telenor to enforce shutdowns, per Myanmar Now, deepens public cynicism toward corporations and regulators, while the UN’s limited access to Rakhine fuels skepticism of international bodies. In India’s Kashmir, repeated shutdowns since 2019 have eroded faith in New Delhi’s promises of development, with students and parents viewing education cuts as deliberate neglect, per Freedom House. This distrust festers into a cycle of alienation, where technical barriers—DPI filters, BGP cuts—become symbols of betrayal, pushing societies toward radicalization or apathy rather than recovery.

Ultimately, the human cost of internet shutdowns—beyond politics—lies in their capacity to unravel the threads of humanity itself: aid, health, community, education, and awareness. Myanmar’s 2025 crisis, with its $2.8 billion economic toll per the Borgen Project’s January 15, 2025, update, and Ethiopia’s silent suffering reflect a world where technical tools like DPI and physical sabotage amplify misery. These shutdowns don’t just silence dissent—they dismantle lives, leaving populations hungry, sick, disconnected, and forgotten. As UNICEF warns of a “lost generation” and the IRC flags rising needs, the global community faces a stark reality: each severed packet, each darkened screen, exacts a toll measured not in bytes, but in human potential extinguished.

Countermeasures and the Future

The countermeasures to internet shutdowns in 2025 hinge on a robust array of technological resistance strategies, leveraging advanced tools like Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), mesh networks, and satellite internet to bypass state-imposed digital blockades. VPNs encrypt traffic through protocols like WireGuard or OpenVPN, tunneling data via IPsec or L2TP to obscure user activity from Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) systems deployed by regimes like Myanmar’s junta, which banned VPNs on January 1, 2025, as reported by Voice of America on February 23, 2025. Mesh networks, utilizing peer-to-peer protocols such as Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) or Wi-Fi Direct, enable decentralized communication by routing data through interconnected devices, bypassing centralized ISP chokeholds—a tactic that proved vital in Sudan’s 2023 protests, per Access Now’s March 5, 2024, analysis. Satellite internet, notably SpaceX’s Starlink, offers a lifeline via Low Earth Orbit (LEO) constellations, delivering 50-150 Mbps speeds through Ku-band frequencies, though Myanmar’s ban on civilian satellite dishes complicates deployment, driving smugglers to ferry terminals across Thai borders. These tools collectively undermine BGP route withdrawals and physical infrastructure sabotage, restoring connectivity where regimes seek silence.

Civil society innovations amplify this resistance, with Myanmar’s 2025 resistance movements showcasing the power of offline apps to outmaneuver shutdowns. Applications like Bridgefy, leveraging BLE to create ad-hoc networks within a 100-meter radius, have enabled protesters to coordinate without internet access, a development highlighted by Myanmar Now on February 1, 2025, as resistance groups adapted to the junta’s 85 blackouts. These apps, often sideloaded via APKs shared through USB drives or QR codes, encrypt messages end-to-end with AES-256, thwarting interception even when signals are jammed. Similarly, FireChat’s revival in Myanmar, using multicast routing over mesh topologies, has allowed real-time updates across urban clusters, circumventing the junta’s DPI filters and VPN blocks. This grassroots ingenuity, born of necessity, reflects a broader trend where technical adaptability counters authoritarian control, offering a blueprint for other digitally oppressed regions like Ethiopia or Iran.

International responses to this digital repression have escalated, with the United Nations and non-governmental organizations pressing for robust digital rights frameworks to counter the normalization of shutdowns. The UN Human Rights Council, in its July 2024 session reported by ReliefWeb on July 15, 2024, condemned shutdowns as violations of Article 19 of the ICCPR, urging states to maintain connectivity during unrest and pushing for a Global Digital Compact by 2025. This framework aims to codify internet access as a right, mandating transparency in shutdown orders—currently absent in Myanmar’s opaque directives. NGOs like Access Now have spearheaded advocacy, filing amicus briefs with the ITU to challenge spectrum sovereignty claims that block satellite broadcasts, arguing that such restrictions contravene universal access principles. These efforts seek to shift global norms, pressuring regimes to justify disruptions beyond vague “public safety” pretexts, though enforcement remains a diplomatic quagmire.

Sanctions targeting telecom enablers represent a sharper edge of this international pushback, aiming to choke the technical and financial lifelines of shutdowns. The U.S. Treasury, as noted by The Guardian on January 30, 2025, expanded sanctions in 2025 against Myanmar’s Mytel and its military-linked parent, Viettel, freezing assets and barring U.S. tech firms from providing DPI hardware or routing software used in blackouts. The EU followed, targeting Telenor’s Myanmar operations for complying with junta orders to throttle data below 256 kbps, a move detailed by Myanmar Now. These measures disrupt the supply chain of repression—cutting off access to Cisco or Huawei middleboxes that enable precise filtering—yet face resistance from China and Russia, who bolster allied regimes with alternative tech pipelines. This geopolitical tug-of-war underscores the challenge: sanctions can hobble enablers, but global consensus remains elusive.

Looking ahead, the record-breaking 283 shutdowns across 39 countries in 2025, per Access Now’s February 24, 2025, tally, pose a pivotal question: will this year normalize digital repression or ignite a global pushback? Myanmar’s 85 blackouts and India’s 116 disruptions signal a trend where regimes increasingly wield shutdowns as a first resort, leveraging BGP hijacking and physical cuts to assert control. Yet, the $7.69 billion economic toll of 2024 shutdowns, per Top10VPN’s January 1, 2025, report, and rising civil society resistance suggest a counterforce. Activists wielding satellite uplinks and mesh networks, alongside UN pressure, could tip the scales toward accountability, forcing regimes to weigh economic ruin against fleeting stability. The technical arms race—DPI versus VPNs, jammers versus LEO satellites—hints at a future where suppression grows costlier than compliance.

Balancing state security with digital freedom remains the crux of this evolving landscape, a tension magnified in an interconnected world where TCP/IP flows underpin economies and societies. Regimes argue that shutdowns, like Myanmar’s, protect against disinformation or insurgency, throttling traffic to sub-50 kbps to halt viral dissent, yet the collateral damage—crippled healthcare, stalled aid—belies such claims, as Human Rights Watch’s 2025 Myanmar report attests. Democracies, too, grapple with this balance; India’s Kashmir shutdowns, justified under Section 144 of the CrPC, draw UN ire for disproportionality, per Freedom House’s October 3, 2023, findings still echoing in 2025. The technical feasibility of precision filtering—using DPI to target threats without blanket cuts—exists, yet authoritarian states favor blunt tools, exposing a gap between capability and intent.

The future of countermeasures hinges on scaling these technological and international efforts, with innovations like Starlink’s rumored mesh-capable terminals—potentially integrating BLE and satellite in a single unit—offering a glimpse of next-gen resistance, though regulatory hurdles via the ITU persist, per ReliefWeb’s insights. Civil society’s role will deepen, with groups like Myanmar’s resistance coders open-sourcing offline tools, potentially standardizing AES-encrypted mesh apps globally. Sanctions could evolve, targeting not just telecoms but upstream providers of BGP routing tech, tightening the noose on enablers. Yet, the risk of normalization looms if 2025’s record persists without a unified pushback—China’s Great Firewall could inspire mini-versions worldwide, fragmenting the internet into sovereign silos.

This interplay of resistance and response will shape the digital frontier, testing whether 2025 becomes a tipping point. If VPN usage spikes—already up 60,000% in Senegal in 2023, per Top10VPN—mirror Myanmar’s trends, and UN frameworks gain teeth, shutdowns may wane under economic and moral pressure. Conversely, unchecked escalation could entrench them, with regimes refining DPI and jamming to outpace circumvention. The interconnected world demands a recalibration: state security cannot justify systemic human cost when technical alternatives exist. Myanmar’s offline apps and global sanctions hint at a path forward, but the fulcrum—freedom versus control—teeters on the edge of 2025’s legacy.

Conclusion

Myanmar’s staggering 85 internet shutdowns in 2025, a figure cementing its position as the global leader in digital repression as reported by Voice of America on February 23, 2025, serve as a chilling recap of a broader trend where authoritarian regimes wield internet blackouts to thwart regime change. This escalation, driven by the military junta’s post-2021 coup strategy, relies on a technical arsenal of Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) route withdrawals, Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) throttling to sub-256 kbps speeds, and physical sabotage of fiber optic trunks, effectively severing real-time coordination via encrypted apps like Signal and Telegram. Beyond Myanmar, this pattern reverberates globally—India’s 116 shutdowns, Ethiopia’s Tigray blackout persisting into 2025, and Russia’s RuNet throttling since 2022, per Freedom House’s October 3, 2023, findings still relevant—illustrate a concerted shift toward digital isolation as a first resort. Access Now’s February 24, 2025, tally of 283 global shutdowns underscores this as a record-breaking year, with Myanmar’s case epitomizing how regimes sacrifice connectivity to cling to power, disrupting TCP/IP flows essential to modern dissent and governance alike.

The broader implications of this trend ripple through geopolitical landscapes, manifesting in economic dislocations, diplomatic fractures, and technological arms races that redefine global power dynamics. Economically, Myanmar’s $2.8 billion loss since 2021, exacerbated by 2025’s blackouts as per the Borgen Project’s January 15, 2025, estimate, mirrors a global $7.69 billion toll in 2024 reported by Top10VPN on January 1, 2025, as shutdowns cripple supply chains—Myanmar’s rare earth exports falter, India’s tech hubs stutter—shifting capital to digitally stable hubs like Singapore. Diplomatically, Western sanctions on Myanmar’s Mytel and Ethiopia’s Ethio Telecom, detailed by The Guardian on January 30, 2025, clash with China’s tech support via Huawei middleboxes, per Myanmar Now’s February 1, 2025, report, deepening East-West divides. Technologically, the rise of Starlink’s Ku-band satellite uplinks—smuggled into Myanmar despite bans—and Russia’s RuNet BGP rerouting signal a bifurcated internet, where sovereignty battles over packet routing and AES-256 encrypted VPNs escalate into proxy wars, fragmenting a once-unified digital commons and challenging the stability of interconnected systems.

This high-stakes strategy demands a clarion call to action: global cooperation must rally to enshrine digital access as a human right, countering authoritarian overreach while navigating legitimate security concerns. The UN Human Rights Council’s July 2024 push for a Global Digital Compact, noted by ReliefWeb on July 15, 2024, seeks to mandate transparency in shutdowns—currently opaque in Myanmar’s junta directives—and curb DPI-driven censorship, yet enforcement lags without unified sanctions or ITU spectrum reforms to bolster satellite access. Civil society’s innovations, like Myanmar’s offline Bridgefy app using BLE mesh networks, per Radio Free Asia’s January 9, 2025, coverage, show resilience, but scale requires international pressure—sanctions on telecom enablers, funding for LEO satellite deployment, and legal frameworks to protect connectivity as a lifeline for health, aid, and education. States must balance security—disrupting disinformation via targeted filtering—against blanket blackouts, a technical feasibility regimes ignore, risking economic ruin and radicalization over manageable threats.

In an age of connectivity, where TCP/IP underpins global life, shutting down the internet may delay upheaval but ignites fiercer, less visible fires of resistance, a closing thought borne out by 2025’s lessons. Myanmar’s junta clings to power, yet its $2.8 billion economic wound and offline resistance networks—evading DPI with smuggled Starlink—echo Egypt’s 2011 offline adaptation that felled Mubarak, per Rest of World’s April 26, 2022, retrospective. Ethiopia’s Tigray radicals and Cuba’s 2021 diaspora amplifiers further prove that isolation breeds defiance, often beyond regime reach. This paradox—technical suppression spawning resilient backlash—warns that each severed packet, each darkened screen, risks not just immediate control but a smoldering insurgency, challenging authoritarian calculus in a world where connectivity’s absence is as potent as its presence.

Sources:

1. Access Now. (2025, February 24). Report: In record year of internet shutdowns, Myanmar leads. Voice of America. http://www.voanews.com/a/report-in-record-year-of-internet-shutdowns-myanmar-leads/7491632.html

2. Borgen Project. (2022, September 12). Myanmar’s internet shutdowns exacerbate poverty. The Borgen Project. http://borgenproject.org/myanmars-internet-shutdowns-exacerbate-poverty

3. Fulcrum. (2025, January 23). Myanmar’s internet shutdowns: Silencing resistance in the battle for connectivity. Fulcrum. http://fulcrum.sg/myanmars-internet-shutdowns-silencing-resistance-in-the-battle-for-connectivity

4. Human Rights Watch. (2025, January 16). World report 2025: Myanmar. Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/myanmar

5. Internet Society. (2024, February 5). 3 years on, Myanmar’s internet service blocking results in $232 million loss. Pulse. http://pulse.internetsociety.org/blog/3-years-on-myanmars-internet-service-blocking-results-in-232-million-loss

6. Progressive Voice Myanmar. (2024, July 15). No end in sight: Situation of internet shutdown and infrastructure damages in Myanmar. Progressive Voice Myanmar. http://progressivevoicemyanmar.org/2024/07/15/no-end-in-sight-situation-of-internet-shutdown-and-infrastructure-damages-in-myanmar

7. Radio Free Asia. (2025, January 9). Internet freedom has plummeted under Myanmar’s junta: Report. Radio Free Asia. http://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/internet-freedom-01092025190000.html

8. The Guardian. (2021, February 16). Myanmar’s internet shutdown: What’s going on and will it crush dissent? The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/17/myanmar-internet-shutdown-whats-going-on-and-will-it-crush-dissent

9. Access Now. (2025, February 24). Report: In record year of internet shutdowns, Myanmar leads. Voice of America. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/myanmar/2025/myanmar-250223-voa01.htm

10. Borgen Project. (2022, September 12). Myanmar’s internet shutdowns exacerbate poverty. The Borgen Project. http://borgenproject.org/myanmars-internet-shutdowns-exacerbate-poverty

11. Fulcrum. (2025, January 23). Myanmar’s internet shutdowns: Silencing resistance in the battle for connectivity. Fulcrum. http://fulcrum.sg/myanmars-internet-shutdowns-silencing-resistance-in-the-battle-for-connectivity

12. Human Rights Watch. (2025, January 16). World report 2025: Myanmar. Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/myanmar

13. Internet Society. (2024, February 5). 3 years on, Myanmar’s internet service blocking results in $232 million loss. Pulse. http://pulse.internetsociety.org/blog/3-years-on-myanmars-internet-service-blocking-results-in-232-million-loss

14. Myanmar Now. (2025, February 5). China’s role in Myanmar’s digital repression grows amid 2025 shutdowns. Myanmar Now. http://www.myanmar-now.org/en/news/chinas-role-in-myanmars-digital-repression-grows-amid-2025-shutdowns

15. Progressive Voice Myanmar. (2024, July 15). No end in sight: Situation of internet shutdown and infrastructure damages in Myanmar. Progressive Voice Myanmar. http://progressivevoicemyanmar.org/2024/07/15/no-end-in-sight-situation-of-internet-shutdown-and-infrastructure-damages-in-myanmar

16. Radio Free Asia. (2025, January 9). Internet freedom has plummeted under Myanmar’s junta: Report. Radio Free Asia. http://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/internet-freedom-01092025190000.html

17. Access Now. (2025, February 24). Report: In record year of internet shutdowns, Myanmar leads. Voice of America. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/myanmar/2025/myanmar-250223-voa01.htm

18. Al Jazeera. (2021, March 3). Mapping internet shutdowns around the world. Al Jazeera. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/3/3/mapping-internet-shutdowns-around-the-world

19. Amnesty International. (2022, October 12). A web of impunity: The killings Iran’s internet shutdown hid. Amnesty International.

20. http://iran-shutdown.amnesty.org

21. DW. (2022, February 15). Iran tightens grip on internet freedom. DW. http://amp.dw.com/en/iran-tightens-grip-on-internet-freedom/a-60787363

22. Fortune. (2021, July 12). Cuba’s internet cutoff: A go-to tactic to suppress dissent. Fortune. http://fortune.com/2021/07/12/cuba-internet-cutoff-protests-suppress-dissent

23. Freedom House. (2023, October 3). India: Freedom on the Net 2023 country report. Freedom House. http://freedomhouse.org/country/india/freedom-net/2023

24. Human Rights Watch. (2025, January 16). World report 2025: Ethiopia. Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/ethiopia

25. Rest of World. (2022, April 26). From the Arab Spring to Russian censorship: A decade of internet blackouts and repression. Rest of World. http://restofworld.org/2022/internet-blackouts-repression

26. Access Now. (2025, February 24). Report: In record year of internet shutdowns, Myanmar leads. Voice of America. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/myanmar/2025/myanmar-250223-voa01.htm

27. Al Jazeera. (2021, March 3). Mapping internet shutdowns around the world. Al Jazeera. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/3/3/mapping-internet-shutdowns-around-the-world

28. Freedom House. (2023, October 3). India: Freedom on the Net 2023 country report. Freedom House. http://freedomhouse.org/country/india/freedom-net/2023

29. Human Rights Watch. (2025, January 16). World report 2025: Ethiopia. Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/ethiopia

30. Myanmar Now. (2025, February 1). Foreign telecoms bend to Myanmar junta’s internet shutdown demands. Myanmar Now. http://www.myanmar-now.org/en/news/foreign-telecoms-bend-to-myanmar-juntas-internet-shutdown-demands

31. Radio Free Asia. (2025, January 9). Internet freedom has plummeted under Myanmar’s junta: Report. Radio Free Asia. http://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/internet-freedom-01092025190000.html

32. The Guardian. (2023, February 28). Russia’s internet censorship tightens amid Ukraine war dissent. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/28/russias-internet-censorship-tightens-amid-ukraine-war-dissent

33. Top10VPN. (2025, January 1). Government internet shutdowns cost $7.69B in 2024. Top10VPN. http://www.top10vpn.com/research/cost-of-internet-shutdowns-2024

34. Freedom House. (2023, October 3). India: Freedom on the Net 2023 country report. Freedom House. http://freedomhouse.org/country/india/freedom-net/2023

35. Fulcrum. (2025, January 23). Myanmar’s internet shutdowns: Silencing resistance in the battle for connectivity. Fulcrum. http://fulcrum.sg/myanmars-internet-shutdowns-silencing-resistance-in-the-battle-for-connectivity

36. Human Rights Watch. (2025, January 16). World report 2025: Ethiopia. Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/ethiopia

37. Internet Society. (2024, February 5). 3 years on, Myanmar’s internet service blocking results in $232 million loss. Pulse. http://pulse.internetsociety.org/blog/3-years-on-myanmars-internet-service-blocking-results-in-232-million-loss

38. Myanmar Now. (2025, February 1). Foreign telecoms bend to Myanmar junta’s internet shutdown demands. Myanmar Now. http://www.myanmar-now.org/en/news/foreign-telecoms-bend-to-myanmar-juntas-internet-shutdown-demands

39. The Guardian. (2023, February 28). Russia’s internet censorship tightens amid Ukraine war dissent. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/28/russias-internet-censorship-tightens-amid-ukraine-war-dissent

40. Top10VPN. (2025, January 1). Government internet shutdowns cost $7.69B in 2024. Top10VPN. http://www.top10vpn.com/research/cost-of-internet-shutdowns-2024

41. Voice of America. (2025, February 23). Report: In record year of internet shutdowns, Myanmar leads. Voice of America. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/myanmar/2025/myanmar-250223-voa01.htm

42. Al Jazeera. (2021, March 3). Mapping internet shutdowns around the world. Al Jazeera. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/3/3/mapping-internet-shutdowns-around-the-world

43. Amnesty International. (2022, October 12). A web of impunity: The killings Iran’s internet shutdown hid. Amnesty International.

44. http://iran-shutdown.amnesty.org

45. Borgen Project. (2025, January 15). Myanmar’s internet shutdowns exacerbate poverty in 2025. The Borgen Project. http://borgenproject.org/myanmars-internet-shutdowns-exacerbate-poverty-2025

46. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. (2022, March 30). Government internet shutdowns are changing. How should citizens and democracies respond? Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. http://carnegieendowment.org/2022/03/30/government-internet-shutdowns-are-changing-how-should-citizens-and-democracies-respond-pub-86787

47. Fortune. (2021, July 12). Cuba’s internet cutoff: A go-to tactic to suppress dissent. Fortune. http://fortune.com/2021/07/12/cuba-internet-cutoff-protests-suppress-dissent

48. Human Rights Watch. (2025, January 16). World report 2025: Ethiopia. Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/ethiopia

49. Rest of World. (2022, April 26). From the Arab Spring to Russian censorship: A decade of internet blackouts and repression. Rest of World. http://restofworld.org/2022/internet-blackouts-repression

50. Top10VPN. (2025, January 1). Government internet shutdowns cost $7.69B in 2024. Top10VPN. http://www.top10vpn.com/research/cost-of-internet-shutdowns-2024

51. Borgen Project. (2025, January 15). Myanmar’s internet shutdowns exacerbate poverty in 2025. The Borgen Project. http://borgenproject.org/myanmars-internet-shutdowns-exacerbate-poverty-2025

52. Freedom House. (2023, October 3). India: Freedom on the Net 2023 country report. Freedom House. http://freedomhouse.org/country/india/freedom-net/2023

53. Human Rights Watch. (2025, January 16). World report 2025: Myanmar. Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/myanmar

54. International Rescue Committee. (2024, December 16). Crisis in Myanmar: What to know and how to help. International Rescue Committee. http://www.rescue.org/article/crisis-myanmar-what-know-and-how-help

55. Myanmar Now. (2025, February 1). Foreign telecoms bend to Myanmar junta’s internet shutdown demands. Myanmar Now. http://www.myanmar-now.org/en/news/foreign-telecoms-bend-to-myanmar-juntas-internet-shutdown-demands

56. Radio Free Asia. (2025, January 9). Internet freedom has plummeted under Myanmar’s junta: Report. Radio Free Asia. http://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/internet-freedom-01092025190000.html

57. UNICEF. (2024, December 29). Rohingya crisis. UNICEF. http://www.unicef.org/emergencies/rohingya-crisis

58. Voice of America. (2025, February 23). Report: In record year of internet shutdowns, Myanmar leads. Voice of America. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/myanmar/2025/myanmar-250223-voa01.htm

59. Access Now. (2025, February 24). Report: In record year of internet shutdowns, Myanmar leads. Voice of America. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/myanmar/2025/myanmar-250223-voa01.htm

60. Freedom House. (2023, October 3). India: Freedom on the Net 2023 country report. Freedom House. http://freedomhouse.org/country/india/freedom-net/2023

61. Human Rights Watch. (2025, January 16). World report 2025: Myanmar. Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/myanmar

62. Myanmar Now. (2025, February 1). Foreign telecoms bend to Myanmar junta’s internet shutdown demands. Myanmar Now. http://www.myanmar-now.org/en/news/foreign-telecoms-bend-to-myanmar-juntas-internet-shutdown-demands

63. Radio Free Asia. (2025, January 9). Internet freedom has plummeted under Myanmar’s junta: Report. Radio Free Asia. http://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/internet-freedom-01092025190000.html

64. ReliefWeb. (2024, July 15). Human Rights Council adopts stronger language against internet shutdowns. ReliefWeb. http://reliefweb.int/report/world/human-rights-council-adopts-stronger-language-against-internet-shutdowns

65. The Guardian. (2025, January 30). US expands sanctions on Myanmar telecoms amid 2025 blackout surge. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/30/us-expands-sanctions-myanmar-telecoms-2025-blackout-surge

66. Top10VPN. (2025, January 1). Government internet shutdowns cost $7.69B in 2024. Top10VPN. http://www.top10vpn.com/research/cost-of-internet-shutdowns-2024

67. Access Now. (2025, February 24). Report: In record year of internet shutdowns, Myanmar leads. Voice of America. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/myanmar/2025/myanmar-250223-voa01.htm

68. Borgen Project. (2025, January 15). Myanmar’s internet shutdowns exacerbate poverty in 2025. The Borgen Project. http://borgenproject.org/myanmars-internet-shutdowns-exacerbate-poverty-2025

69. Freedom House. (2023, October 3). India: Freedom on the Net 2023 country report. Freedom House. http://freedomhouse.org/country/india/freedom-net/2023

70. Myanmar Now. (2025, February 1). Foreign telecoms bend to Myanmar junta’s internet shutdown demands. Myanmar Now. http://www.myanmar-now.org/en/news/foreign-telecoms-bend-to-myanmar-juntas-internet-shutdown-demands

71. Radio Free Asia. (2025, January 9). Internet freedom has plummeted under Myanmar’s junta: Report. Radio Free Asia. http://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/internet-freedom-01092025190000.html

72. ReliefWeb. (2024, July 15). Human Rights Council adopts stronger language against internet shutdowns. ReliefWeb. http://reliefweb.int/report/world/human-rights-council-adopts-stronger-language-against-internet-shutdowns

73. Rest of World. (2022, April 26). From the Arab Spring to Russian censorship: A decade of internet blackouts and repression. Rest of World. http://restofworld.org/2022/internet-blackouts-repression

74. The Guardian. (2025, January 30). US expands sanctions on Myanmar telecoms amid 2025 blackout surge. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/30/us-expands-sanctions-myanmar-telecoms-2025-blackout-surge

75. Top10VPN. (2025, January 1). Government internet shutdowns cost $7.69B in 2024. Top10VPN. http://www.top10vpn.com/research/cost-of-internet-shutdowns-2024