I HAD to join Facebook, Twitter and Slack when I started graduate school in 2016 — for different messaging purposes. I thought all of this could be done on WhatsApp but then, it was not a popular app in the US. My Chinese classmates, meanwhile, found all the apps ‘primitive’ as they could do so much more back home on WeChat — from messaging to gaming to paying utilities to live streaming.

But you don’t have internet freedoms like we do, American students would say, oblivious to Mark Zuckerberg’s attempts to chip away at their privacy or how platforms were acquiescing in authoritarian governments’ requests to take content down. The few discussions I witnessed in class came off as some sort of nationalism, years of being taught their country was the good guy keeping the bad guy out.

In case you didn’t know, the US military paved the way for the internet to be built when the US defence department set up Advanced Research Projects Agency, which created Arpanet in the late 1960s, to allow research institutes to communicate with armed institutes’ agencies through a large-scale computer network. That was born from a fear of Soviet attack. The Soviets were attempting to create what we now refer to as the internet, roughly a year after Arpanet, but could not.

Technology has long been used to keep ‘enemies’ out. Someone or something is always trying to be the gatekeeper of information but the internet has disrupted everything since its birth in 1983. The more it has evolved, the more the attempts to clamp down on it, almost always in the name of security.

An entire country is being made to pay for the ‘sins’ of one party.

Techno-nationalism — how countries link innovations to identity, stability and national interests — aims to influence global power. Donald Trump, for example, blacklisted Huawei Technology over spying concerns in 2019 but thanks to Chinese government support, the company made a remarkable comeback. The US is reportedly thinking of co-opting US allies in a “broader containment campaign” and exploring additional sanctions, reports Bloomberg.

When China created the great firewall in 2000 that is being referenced in conversations about the reported Rs30 billion firewall in place here, it did so to keep foreign influence out, it says. Its techno-nationalism led it to hold an advantage over others (though at the cost of civil liberties). Technological innovations, for example, increase job opportunities, investment and economic growth, maybe even exports if other countries become reliant on your country’s technology. This can also lead to global competition as we’re witnessing in the China-US rivalry.

In the decade since it created the Made in China 2025 plan, the country may just be able to achieve what it set out to do: reduce dependency on foreign supply chains in industries like AI, robotics and self-driving cars. China’s plan is viewed as a threat by, and to, the West.

I’m sure it led to Joe Biden passing the Chips and Science Act, 2022, which gave $280bn in new funding to boost domestic research and manufacturing of semiconductors in the US. It also gave billions in subsidies for chip manufacturing, billions to public sector research in the sciences, and many incentives aimed at strengthening the country’s supply chain with the aim of countering China.

And now, onto our techno-nationalism which, in a word, is ‘cringe’, irrespective of who is in charge. It aims to globally isolate us, without giving us tools to enable us to build or empower. We don’t have a Chinese superapp like Weibo. We have Vigos and we all know their purpose.

An entire country is being made to pay for the so-called sins of one political party. This is essentially what this firewall is about. This wall’s creators, imp­lementers and def­e­nders have never had to worry about making ends meet.

At the time of writing, the Pakis­tan Software Housing Association warned the country could lose at least $300 million due to disruptions caused by the firewall. Businessmen are warning of dire consequences. Freelancers have complained of lost opportunities on sites like Fiverr. My friend Mohsin, a fashion designer, told me he has not received an order online in 10 days which is highly unusual. I won’t even bother about civil liberties because they have never mattered in the country but I hope they will matter now that the internet has slowed for everyone.

Anything grounded in nationalism produces greater harm because it prioritises security over civil liberties, and favours the wealthy (corporates) who influence policymaking to suit their interests. It clashes with Pakistan’s diverse population. Another solution is needed, one grounded in sense and sensibilities. We can’t afford the isolation and chaos this firewall is going to bring. Someone explain this to the men in charge, who have much to lose if they go ahead with this firewall.

The writer is a journalism instructor.

X: LedeingLady

Published in Dawn, August 18th, 2024