From video and satellite to Starlink; Examining a failed policy in the face of technology

Hamed Bedi believes that Starlink is no exception to this rule. This technology, like the previous examples of cassette interception and dish collection, challenges the existing ways of governing the Internet and, as a result, is countered.

Hamed Bedi, an activist in the field of free access to the Internet, believes that the confrontation with Starlink cannot be seen as a technical issue only, and to understand it, one should pay attention to the macro-governance approach in the Internet field, policy priorities and how to define security.

According to Ambassador Arjan's report, Bedi says about why with the arrival of new technology, the first approach is to deal with it: "I think there is a macro view of the Internet that is in conflict with the current way of governance. This conflict is not only limited to the Internet, but also related to the way of governance in various areas, from the policy of technology and the digital economy to freedom of expression and the recognition of different and plural voices of society. Indeed, either the way of governance must change or the Internet must be dealt with. Naturally, people like Mr. Aghamiri and other officials who are in such positions do not have an idea to change this way of governance, nor do they show any motivation or will for it. Therefore, what remains is spending resources and facilities to deal with the phenomenon of the Internet; Regardless of what the desired technology is, how much it costs and what consequences it will have."

He also says about whether it is not possible to use its capacities to develop Internet access instead of confronting Starlink and why such a view is not prominent in policies: "As I said, our current governance method is not compatible with the existing global order and does not recognize it. At the international level, we are witnessing various confrontations. Inside the country, the main priority is to manage protesting voices and ensure internal security based on official definitions; Even if this approach is accompanied by contradictions and unconventional methods in practice. On the other hand, issues such as justice in internet access, universal access and technology growth are placed in the next priorities. For this reason, under the pretext of providing security, both internal and external security, and using concepts such as independence, restrictions are imposed on the Internet, which in the end does not even affect the access to various forms of this technology.

Also, in response to the question that specifically about Starlink, what methods can be imagined to deal with this technology and what are the consequences of these actions, he says: "About Starlink, we talk about methods such as disrupting the network and trying to detect the possible location of users to using tools and equipment to identify the installation location of this network equipment. There have even been reports of case inspections and arrests of people who were active in the field of the right to free access to the Internet."

"The important point is that such actions must be analyzed in the context of the current governance," he explains. It seems that the social and economic costs of this approach are not a serious obstacle for its continuation. Since the 1960s, any technology or phenomenon that has challenged media monopoly and narrative monopoly, especially in the field of media, has faced coercive, negative and exclusionary approaches. Dealing with Starlink can also be seen as a continuation of the same process."

In response to the question that economic interests may play a role in the continuation of Starlink's ban, this activist says: "It is possible that, among other consequences of such policies, the ground for the formation of informal markets and earning income outside of transparent mechanisms will be provided. We have seen examples of this situation in informal markets related to media receiving equipment in the past decades, as well as the filter market in recent years."

According to him, an informal market may also be formed in the case of Starlink, which provides the basis for informal activities due to the ban, the lack of transparent mechanisms and the difficulty of determining a specific rate. However, a distinction must be made between the reason for adopting a policy and its economic consequences. Any policy decision, be it a ban or a freedom to use a technology, can create different economic stakeholders. We should not reverse this cause and effect relationship and assume that the existence of economic interests alone was the main reason for making that decision.

He says: "If it were possible to officially interact with Starlink and conclude legal agreements and memoranda, it would be possible to create an official market while using global standard mechanisms and procedures. Such a situation could bring significant benefits to companies with official representation and economic activists in this field. However, the formation of informal markets should be considered one of the possible consequences of policy decisions, not necessarily their main cause.

Hamed Bedi, an activist in the field of free access to the Internet, finally says: "To understand this issue, we need to go beyond the purely technical examination of Starlink and pay attention to the governance and policy priorities. Unless open access to the Internet, technological development, and equity in access are accepted as top priorities, the same pattern of confrontation and restriction will probably be repeated with the arrival of new technologies."