World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org

Pakistani regime ban of YouTube highlights threat to free
Internet
By John Grais
5 March 2008

On February 22, the Pakistani Telecommunications Authority
(PTA) ordered the country’s Internet service providers (ISPs)
to block access to YouTube, the world’s most popular video
web site. Access was completely restored in Pakistan only after
four days, amid popular opposition and allegations of electoral
fraud.

The case captured media attention because the ban on YouTube
spread far beyond Pakistan, blocking most of the world’s
population from accessing YouTube for a period of two hours.

According to a statement released by YouTube on February 25,
“For about two hours, traffic to YouTube was routed according
to erroneous Internet Protocols, and many users around the world
could not access our site. We have determined that the source
of these events was a network in Pakistan. We are investigating
and working with others in the Internet community to prevent this
from happening again.”

Internet protocols (IPs) are the conventions or standards used
to communicate data across the web. In blocking YouTube, Pakistani
ISPs had been sending out false Internet protocols with respect
to the site, thereby diverting related traffic to a virtual cul-de-sac.

The BBC reported that a false IP address used in Pakistan to
block the site was leaked outside of national borders through
ISP Pakistan Telecom, which had propagated it to one of its partners,
Asian telecom giant PCCW. PCCW in turn broadcast it to ISPs across
the globe, ostensibly unaware that it was false until contacted
by YouTube engineers.

As one Internet engineer explained the situation to the BBC,
“It is exactly like the ‘game of telephone’ that
kids play. For example, Pakistan Telecom says ‘I am responsible
for 1.2.3.4 (some IP address)’ and then they tell PCCW. PCCW
tells Verizon Business and NTT and others. NTT tells us and so
when my customers ask ‘Where is YouTube, we’re just
answering based on what we’ve heard....’ But all we
know is that we heard it from NTT who heard it from PCCW who heard
it from Pakistan Telecom. If Pakistan Telecom was lying (or made
a mistake), we’d have no way to verify it.”

The official rationale for the initial restriction on YouTube
within Pakistan was that the Internet site was being used to propagate
anti-Islamic material considered blasphemous by political and
religious leaders. The ban was initially limited to a single uploaded
video, the trailer for a deliberately provocative film about the
Koran by right-wing Dutch politician Geert Wilders. Wilders is
seeking to have the Koran banned as contrary to Dutch law.

After blocking the Wilders video URL, the Pakistani government
abruptly extended the ban to the entire site. “They asked
us to ban it immediately...and the order says the ban will continue
until further notice,” Wahaj-us-Siraj, convener of the Association
of Pakistan Internet Service Providers, told the Reuters news
agency on February 25. “Users are quite upset. They’re
screaming at ISPs which can’t do anything.”

There are indications, however, that the real reason for the
block on YouTube may have had little to do with the Wilders video.
The Pakistani daily The News pointed out that the Wilders
promotional video had been on YouTube for more than a month, in
addition to being available elsewhere online.

A number of Pakistani bloggers have asserted that the more
likely reason for the ban was the emergence February 21 on YouTube
of secretly filmed videos documenting what appears to be vote-rigging
activity in the recent elections in the country. One such video
claims to show footage of party activists from the pro-Musharraf
MQM stamping ballot papers en masse in the NA-250 constituency
of Karachi.

Whatever the rationale for the blockage, the move highlights
the growing threat to free Internet access in countries throughout
the world. Like all unpopular national governments, Musharraf’s
regime has long viewed the Internet as a potential threat to its
rule.

Pakistan remains widely unconnected via the technology, with
Internet penetration of just over 7 percent of the total population,
according to telecommunications tracker InternetWorldStats.com.
Nevertheless, out of a country of 160 million, this proportion
represents a sizeable number of the Pakistani workers, students,
and intellectuals with access to uncontrolled, uncensored, and
potentially damning information.

The YouTube ban is not the first instance in which the regime
has attempted to quash free speech and independent channels of
information. In March 2006, a Supreme Court action supposedly
aimed against blasphemous material on the net resulted in blocking
access to Google’s popular weblog hosting service, Blogger.com.
This move was also seen by many as an attempt to muzzle criticism
of the Musharraf regime.

The arbitrary way in which the YouTube ban was enforced offers
one more reflection of the extent of control the regime exercises
over the state apparatus and social infrastructure. The PTA, which
enforced the ban, has close ties to the regime via the numerous
military officials who were installed in the agency after Musharraf
came to power in 1999. Typical of this arrangement is PTA head
Shahzada Alam Malik, who is a retired Major General.

The Musharraf regime’s attempt to keep a grip on Internet
speech freedoms is only one facet of a general policy of censorship.
With 80 percent of the population relying on television transmissions
for news, private television networks are also closely monitored
and managed by the state.

Shortly after Musharraf lifted the ban on media ownership in
2000, privately owned networks proliferated. Networks GEO TV and
ARY quickly became extremely popular, at the expense of the state-run
PTV. In order to bring the private stations under state control,
the regime established the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory
Authority (PEMRA) in 2002.

In 2007, PEMRA was given extra powers to suspend the licenses
of broadcasters deemed offensive to the regime, and on this pretext,
GEO TV and ARY were taken off the air later that year for running
reports critical to Musharraf’s Emergency Rule.

Individual news reporters have also been the subject of state
repression and intimidation. According to Human Rights Watch,
following the December 27 assassination of presidential candidate
Benazir Bhutto, many journalists have faced terrorism charges.

In the face of election fraud allegations leveled by both senior
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and PML-N (Nawaz) leaders,
the hasty attempt to clamp down on Internet access points to the
desperate lengths that Musharraf and his backers are willing to
go to cling to power.

Referring to the delay by the election commission in releasing
the ballot results in February, senior PPP member Taj Haider commented
that the regime was “trying to rig the results by holding
the final results of several seats,” and “maximize seats
of their loyalists although they have lost the elections.”
Haider singled out Karachi as an example of this, where he claimed
that the results of five seats were changed in favor of the MQM.

“The MQM has snatched victory by using force, stuffing
ballot boxes in connivance with the police,” said Rafiq Baloch,
a defeated PPP candidate in Karachi. Saleem Zia, the leader of
PML-N in Sindh province, of which Karachi is the capital, said
his party was seven seats ahead before “the result was changed
overnight.”

International observers monitoring the elections noted that
the process was skewed in favor of the MQM against the PPP. Nevertheless,
the PPP garnered a third of the vote, with the PML-N capturing
another quarter. The two entered into a national coalition government
agreement February 21, though Musharraf remains president.

This is not the first time that YouTube has been the subject
of censorship. In March of last year, Turkish courts banned access
to the site citing content that was insulting to Kemal Ataturk,
the founder of modern Turkey. In May, the site was blocked in
Morocco in relation to videos critical of the government policy
in Western Sahara. It was also banned for five months in Thailand
last year, over videos that were seen as insulting the Thai King.

A recent report by the Open Net Initiative, a group dedicated
to identifying and documenting Internet censorship around the
world, identified 25 countries that routinely apply state-mandated
web filtering.

Among the most notorious offenders is the government in China,
which routinely controls Internet traffic and attempts to filter
out political opposition. According to the Committee to Protect
Journalists, 25 reporters and editors in China are currently imprisoned
for their work, more than half of them for Internet-related activities.

Another such country is India, the particularly aggressive
censorship of which is sharply at odds with its efforts to appear
as a progressive democracy. Among other legal and legislative
maneuvers aimed at curtailing speech freedoms, the Indian government
has established a so-called “Computer Emergency Response
Team” for the purpose of monitoring all incoming and outgoing
traffic from the country.

The Sri Lankan government blocked a website sympathetic to
the separatist group the Tamil Tigers in July of last year. In
December, the Australian Communications and Media Authority announced
that it would begin a campaign of censorship against websites
deemed by government intelligence agencies to contain “inappropriate
material.”

The United States government has attempted to rein in Internet
activity in a multitude of ways. The Defense Department, which
has implemented sharp restrictions on Internet use by active duty
rank-and-file military personnel, calling independent information
about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan a “significant vulnerability.”
The Bush administration has implemented large-scale surveillance
online, including collecting e-mail activity of millions of people.
In a general sense, monopolization and attempts to tier web traffic—giving
priority to corporations and military activity—have the consequence
of curtailing independent development and information flows.

The attacks on free speech on the Internet—as in virtually
every other sphere of social life—indicate that ruling national
bourgeoisies are increasingly conscious of the possibilities of
popular revolt.

Under conditions of unprecedented levels of inequality and
exploitation and growing unrest, various ruling elites rightly
see the Internet as a potential vehicle for mobilizing mass opposition
against existing social relations. As a media form, the Internet
is of particular concern because it operates outside the control
of the traditional mass media formats, which are themselves often
under the control of major corporations or national governments.

Ultimately, the development of the Internet as an international,
democratic, mass form of information is incompatible with the
existing superstructure of competing nation states and privately
owned ISPs and telecom companies. It is only within a framework
of rational economic planning on a global scale that humanity
can utilize such technology to its fullest potential.

Copyright
1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved