Fifth Episode of “Global Canvas” from JOI
Imagine a messaging platform with over 900 million users, designed to promote free speech but often misused for illegal activities. That’s the paradox of Telegram, a platform at the heart of debates surrounding freedom, security, and geopolitics. With its founder Pavel Durov arrested on 24th August 2024 at Le Bourget airport, Telegram has become a case study in how non-state actors like digital platforms shape global politics. This blog explores the geopolitical implications of Telegram’s rise and why students of geopolitics should closely monitor its role in world affairs.
What is Telegram?
Telegram is a widely used messaging app that stands apart from competitors like WhatsApp due to its capacity for one-to-one , group & even large “channel” conversations and enhanced privacy features. It allows up to 200,000 participants in a group, dwarfing the 1,024 limit set by Meta’s WhatsApp. It also offers end-to-end encryption, making it nearly impossible for outsiders to access conversations, which positions it as a haven for free speech advocates in authoritarian regimes. Telegram supports massive group conversations, making it a hub for sharing information—both legitimate and illicit. With strong encryption and a focus on privacy, Telegram claims it cannot access users' messages, promoting itself as a platform for free speech. However, this very feature also attracts criminals, facilitating illegal activities, including cybercrimes and exploitation.
Key Players and Stakeholders
At the heart of this case is Pavel Durov, the CEO of Telegram, who has positioned the platform as a champion of free speech. A Russian born entrepreneur with dual citizenship in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and France has sparked significant diplomatic tensions following his arrest in France over allegations that Telegram facilitated illegal activities. This incident led to the UAE cancelling a $20 billion Rafale deal with France.
Durov has previously claimed that various governments pressured him regarding similar issues, asserting that Telegram should remain neutral and not become a “player in geopolitics”. This position raises critical questions about the balance between freedom of speech and the responsibilities of digital platforms in preventing cybercrime.
According to Telegram's privacy policy, conversations on the app are end-to-end encrypted, stating, “there is no way for us or anybody else without direct access to your device to learn what content is being sent in those messages.” While this encryption symbolizes free speech, it has also raised concerns about the types of content being shared in these large groups. Durov has consistently defended this feature, which has been upheld even as Telegram has been used to disseminate unfiltered and sometimes misleading information during events like the war in Ukraine.
In the backdrop of these controversies, Durov has accused U.S. law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI, of attempting to create a backdoor into the platform. This comes in the backdrop of the company's policy, which states that Telegram is an app “without local restrictions on freedom of expression. For example, if criticising the government is prohibited in the country, Telegram will never participate in such political censorship”. Because of such reasons, various countries have banned Telegram. Some of these countries are Spain (banned in March 2023), Thailand (banned since 2020), Russia (banned from 2018 to 2020), Iran (banned since 2018), China (banned since 2015).
The complexities of Telegram’s situation illustrate the growing challenges that non-state actors face in navigating the intersections of digital freedom, security, and international relations.
Major Concerns and Consequences
Telegram’s growing popularity, combined with its ability to host large groups, makes it a hotspot for criminal activity. In addition to drug trafficking and cyber-attacks, cases like the “nth room” reveal the dark reality of digital exploitation on the platform. The lack of moderation on Telegram has made it a refuge for criminals who operate in plain sight, yet shielded by the app’s privacy policies.
The global fallout of Durov’s arrest extends beyond his company—it touches on key geopolitical relationships, particularly as governments scramble to balance the right to free speech with the need for security. The diplomatic tensions between the UAE and France further emphasize how non-state actors, such as Telegram, are deeply embedded in international political struggles.
Political Perspectives and Understanding
Telegram's rise as a global communication platform presents a complex challenge to governance and international relations in the digital age. Its commitment to unfiltered free speech, championed by founder Pavel Durov, has positioned it as a key player in struggles over information control and national security.
From a realist perspective, states like France and the UAE view Telegram's strong encryption as a threat. This encryption, while protecting user privacy, allows criminal activity to thrive by providing a secure space for illicit communication and coordination, hindering law enforcement efforts and potentially destabilising national security.
However, a constructivist lens reveals a more nuanced picture. Durov's framing of Telegram as a defender of free speech has cultivated a distinct platform culture where users prioritise open communication and challenge censorship. This has empowered individuals and fueled social movements, particularly in countries with oppressive regimes seeking to control information flow. This highlights the "double-edged sword" of Telegram: it enables citizens to bypass censorship and access independent news, but also allows those same governments to spread propaganda and monitor dissidents.
Furthermore, critical theory exposes how Telegram, like other unregulated digital spaces, can exacerbate existing inequalities. The tragic "nth room" case in South Korea serves as a stark reminder of how the platform's lack of oversight can enable powerful actors to exploit vulnerable populations. This reinforces the need to critically examine the social consequences of seemingly neutral technologies.
The war in Ukraine further underscores Telegram's complex role in global politics. Both sides have utilised the platform to disseminate information, often unverified or misleading, highlighting its potential to shape narratives and influence public opinion in modern conflicts. This raises crucial questions about the ethical responsibilities of platforms like Telegram and the urgent need for international cooperation to address the challenges of online disinformation.
Ultimately, understanding Telegram's political implications requires moving beyond technological determinism. It necessitates acknowledging the platform's role within specific socio-political contexts and recognizing that its features, while designed with specific values in mind, can be appropriated for diverse and sometimes harmful purposes. This calls for a nuanced approach to regulation—one that balances the legitimate concerns of national security and public safety with the fundamental rights of free expression and access to information. This delicate balance will require ongoing dialogue and collaboration between governments, tech companies, and civil society to navigate the evolving landscape of digital governance.
Takeaways
The case of Telegram reveals the complex relationship between technology, politics, and society. While the app serves as a powerful tool for free speech, it has also become a platform for cybercriminals and illicit activity. For students of geopolitics, this case provides an opportunity to examine how non-state actors like Telegram influence international relations, how they challenge state sovereignty, and the need for global governance of digital platforms.
As platforms like Telegram grow in prominence, the global community must navigate the fine line between protecting individual rights and ensuring collective security. Telegram’s story serves as a critical case study in understanding how non-state actors can alter the geopolitical landscape, making it a topic to watch closely in global politics.
Compiled by Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal (with support from Ms Kashmira Juwatkar and Ms Supriya Mishra)
Stay Tuned for More!
As the Global Canvas series continues, we’ll explore more pivotal moments where technology and geopolitics intersect. For those interested in contributing or learning more about the influence of non-state actors on global politics, visit us at www.johnsonodakkal.com or email us at ceo@johnsonodakkal.com . Stay engaged with us as we delve deeper into the ever-evolving digital landscape and its role in shaping global politics.
References and Sources
BARBARA ORTUTAY. (2024, August 29). What is Telegram and why was its CEO arrested in Paris?. AP News
Priyan Sampath. (2024, July 7). Cybercriminal Activity on Telegram Surges by 53% in 2024.
Melander, I. Faulconbridge, G. (2024, August 26). Telegram messaging app CEO Durov arrested in France. Reuters
Telegram.org - Telegram Privacy Policy
Telegram.org - FAQ
Times of India. (2024, August 29). Countries which have banned Telegram; from China, U.K. to Thailand
DE SOUZA, N. (2020, April 20). The Nth Room case and modern slavery in the digital space.
Comments