[TechSovereignty] New publication: The Internet’s Inevitable Nationalist Turn (Internet Policy Review)

[DANIEL NANGHAKA]

Dear Imad,

Thank you for sharing your essay. I found it both rich in insight and
provocative in how it frames digital sovereignty as a paradoxical project
rather than a stable endpoint. The idea that the pursuit of autonomy
inevitably fragments the relational fabric of the internet raises important
questions for how we conceptualize governance and interdependence in
digital spaces.

Your argument that the internet has become a “state of exception” is
particularly compelling, but it also invites further interrogation. If
exceptionality is now the operating logic, does this suggest that the
internet’s original universalist ethos was always fragile—perhaps even an
illusion—rather than a norm disrupted by geopolitics? In other words, is
what we are witnessing a rupture or simply the revealing of an underlying
reality?

Similarly, your treatment of the freedom/security duality highlights how
cyber conflict reshapes the logic of openness into vulnerability. This
resonates, yet it may be useful to explore whether the “military
vulnerability” framing risks reproducing state-centric perspectives. Might
there also be an analytical space for understanding how non-state actors,
civic networks, or transnational communities navigate and resist this
securitization of the internet?

The Iranian case study serves as a vivid “laboratory of digital tragedy,”
though I wonder if the concept of fragility might be expanded. While
isolation compounds vulnerability, it may also give rise to alternative
infrastructures, shadow economies, or even local forms of resilience that
complicate a linear narrative of decline.

You raise critical issues about the trajectory of internet governance,
especially as digital sovereignty becomes less about the assertion of
independence and more about managing interdependence under conditions of
mistrust. I am left reflecting on whether this nationalist turn is
inevitable—or whether alternative governance models could still emerge to
temper fragmentation.

Warm regards,
Daniel K. Nanghaka
ᐧ

On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 at 16:09, Imad Payande <imad.payande at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear colleagues,
>
> Pleased to share my latest essay with *Internet Policy Review*:
>
> *“The Internet’s Inevitable Nationalist Turn.”*
>
>
> https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/internets-inevitable-nationalist-turn
> <https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/internets-inevitable-nationalist-turn>
>
> The piece argues that digital sovereignty is not a stable end-state but a *paradoxical
> project*—one that seeks autonomy yet fragments the relational fabric of
> the internet.
>
> Among its sharper implications:
>
>
>    -
>
>    The internet has turned into a *state of exception*: *what was once an
>    anomaly is now the operating logic*.
>    -
>
>    The *freedom/security duality* is sharper than ever: *in times of
>    cyber conflict, the very traits that made the internet flexible and open
>    become military vulnerabilities*.
>    -
>
>    Iran stands as a *laboratory of digital tragedy*: *sanctions and
>    cyberattacks push it toward gray equipment and network isolation, yet that
>    very isolation deepens fragility*.
>
> At a moment when many in our field hesitate to write about these painful
> dynamics, this essay is a modest attempt to honor the urgency of what is
> unfolding.
>
> I would be very glad to hear your thoughts.
>
> Warm regards,
> Imad
> --
>
> ____
>
> Imad Payande <https://www.linkedin.com/in/imadpayande/>
>
> --
> mailinglist mailing list
> mailinglist at techsovereignty.org
> http://techsovereignty.org/mailman/listinfo/mailinglist_techsovereignty.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://techsovereignty.org/pipermail/mailinglist_techsovereignty.org/attachments/20250820/69c3448b/attachment.htm>