by Shahla AHMED
In our interconnected digital era, the ability to access information is no longer merely a luxury but an essential component critical to security, governance, education, and human dignity. However, in areas engulfed by war or occupation, digital infrastructure frequently becomes a primary target. Fiber-optic cables are cut, cell towers are destroyed, and communication channels are subjected to censorship. Within these environments, the internet acts as both a tool of oppression and a means of resistance.
This article argues that rebuilding digital infrastructure in conflict-affected areas is not just a moral duty but also a crucial factor in the broader geopolitical landscape. During wartime, connectivity transcends technical issues—it becomes a fundamental element of resistance, survival, and societal reconstruction. As contemporary conflicts have progressed, it has become clear that disrupting or seizing control of digital access can be as potent a weapon as any military equipment. The capability to communicate, witness events, and organize efforts is vital to a community’s resilience, making the restoration of these links a key factor in the conflict’s resolution.
The collapse of connectivity in Gaza and Ukraine exemplifies this truth. In Gaza, continuous airstrikes have decimated telecommunications infrastructure and buried cables in debris, isolating families from the outside world and hindering emergency responders’ ability to save lives. In Eastern Ukraine, occupying forces have extended their reach beyond physical domination, substituting local mobile and internet services with Russian-operated ones. This transition is more than just a server switch—it signifies an effort to alter the information landscape, isolate communities from outside narratives, and silence any resistance.
These occurrences are not random or incidental. Analogous trends have been witnessed in Afghanistan and Myanmar, where regimes or occupying entities have deliberately restricted internet access or imposed digital blackouts, complicating the efforts of activists to rally support, journalists to report on atrocities, and everyday individuals to remain in touch with the global community. In every instance, digital disruption has served as a continuation of military aggression—a strategic method employed to dominate information realms as thoroughly as the physical territory. It reveals a harsh reality about modern warfare: the control of digital infrastructure is increasingly one of the primary objectives of conflict.
The implications of digital blackouts extend well beyond mere inconvenience. The capability for emergency medical response, access to educational materials, and even the organization of humanitarian assistance are severely hampered. When a child is unable to join virtual classes due to internet disruptions, or a healthcare worker cannot receive vital information because of fears of surveillance, the impact is felt both immediately and over generations. For those displaced, maintaining contact with family members becomes impossible, exacerbating psychological distress. For journalists and activists, a digital blackout equates to a loss of the ability to document events and rally global awareness.
In spite of these obstacles, local communities continue to resist through innovative solutions. In Syria, activists have created makeshift mesh networks powered by car batteries and solar energy to evade government interception. In Ukraine, community organizations have utilized portable Star link devices to restore connectivity during sieges. These systems do more than link gadgets—they reestablish communities, identities, and aspirations. Digital innovation has also been instrumental in documenting war crimes and human rights abuses, exemplified by block chain technology, which preserves evidence in conflict areas.
The implementation of decentralized technologies in war-affected regions reveals a significant reality: connectivity equates to autonomy. Web networks, satellite internet, and mobile Wi-Fi nodes empower individuals not just to survive but also to communicate, organize, and oppose. They provide a sense of agency in the absence of conventional governance and facilitate platforms for solidarity. These networks aid in preserving cultural heritage, offering real-time safety notifications, and allowing populations affected by conflict to remain engaged in global discussions.
Reconstructing infrastructure is always a loaded issue. In territories under occupation, the choice of who manages the routers and servers can lead to either liberation or oppression. The question arises: do local communities control their networks, or are they subjected to the systems enforced by foreign entities? The infrastructure becomes intertwined with political agendas; access to the internet symbolizes either independence or domination. Frequently, systems supported by foreign powers are employed to monitor and manipulate public opinions, embedding occupation not only in the physical realm but also within the collective digital awareness.
This politicization is heightened by security threats. Civilian networks risk being hacked, surveilled, or weaponized against certain individuals. Establishing secure channels is as essential as constructing educational and health facilities. Without digital security, communication can itself pose a danger. Tools such as encryption, anonymity, and digital literacy need to be integral to humanitarian efforts rather than merely supplementary. In countries like Iran and Belarus, monitoring of online communications has resulted in arrests, disappearances, and even fatalities.
Conflict erodes human resources. Numerous skilled IT workers seek refuge elsewhere, leaving communities short on technical expertise. Access to equipment is often limited or excessively priced. Supply chains suffer disruptions due to blockades and damaged infrastructure. Although there may be significant funding immediately after a crisis, long-term support for resilience is uncommon. The goal becomes not just reconnecting people but creating systems capable of enduring future conflicts.
International NGOs and global organizations have begun to acknowledge these difficulties. UNICEF and UNHCR have implemented satellite internet solutions in refugee camps. Digital rights organizations like Access Now and Internes are providing training in cybersecurity and digital safety to frontline workers. While these are crucial initiatives, they are still not widespread. The majority of global reconstruction strategies continue to regard digital infrastructure as supplementary or optional, rather than essential.
A fundamental change in perspective is necessary: digital infrastructure must be seen as central to rebuilding efforts following conflicts. Robust communication systems can facilitate airstrike alerts, remote mental health care, advocacy for diaspora populations, and mobile education. In contested areas, even temporary governance can hinge on a dependable internet connection. A government-in-exile requires secure digital infrastructure to operate effectively, and displaced individuals must have stable connectivity to fight for their rights.
New technologies hold promise for the future. Low-Earth orbit satellite internet, such as Star link or One Web, can circumvent physical destruction and censorship. Community-managed networks, based on local understanding and requirements, may prove to be the most sustainable approach in regions with a lack of trust in centralized institutions. Governments and donors ought to emphasize open-access digital frameworks that empower communities to construct and maintain infrastructure independently.
In conflict zones, connectivity transcends bandwidth—it is fundamentally about human rights. It facilitates the unhindered exchange of information, the capacity to seek assistance, and the right to share one’s narrative. In areas like Gaza, Ukraine, Syria, and elsewhere, the struggle for information parallels the fight for survival itself. In an era defined by hybrid warfare and misinformation, digital infrastructure is intrinsically linked to conflict—it is the battleground upon which these struggles unfold. If the international community genuinely aims to promote peace, it should stop considering digital access as a secondary concern or an optional aspect of rebuilding. In truth, connectivity is as essential as access to clean water or medical assistance. The capability to reach out to a family member, request support, document events, or obtain critical information can distinguish between hopelessness and survival.
Communication technologies have transformed into more than just physical devices—they have evolved into essential lifelines. These connections reunite separated families, facilitate remote healthcare consultations, and maintain education even in the face of destroyed institutions. They transmit narratives from the epicenters of disasters to the wider world, galvanizing support and inspiring action.
In the aftermath of conflict, these technologies are frequently the first priorities for communities to restore—whether it’s a temporary satellite connection, a solar-powered cellular tower, or an internet café running on a generator. This reflects a primal instinct as old as humanity itself: the instinct to connect, to document experiences, to claim identity, and to envision a future beyond strife. Neglecting connectivity is to overlook the lessons imparted by numerous communities affected by war. The internet has the potential to bring together the dispersed, amplify unheard voices, and assist in mending a society. It can foster trust, safeguard culture, and ensure accountability in times when conventional institutions have been weakened or destroyed.
If the aim is indeed peace, then ensuring connectivity must be prioritized, not treated as a mere afterthought. It must be recognized as a shared obligation—a global commitment to resilience, justice, and the fundamental right to be visible, heard, and connected, even in the bleakest times. Ultimately, digital access is more than just a means; it serves as a connection between crisis and recovery, between hopelessness and community, and between the devastation of today and the potential for a more hopeful tomorrow.
Author: Shahla Ahmed is a researcher and analyst focused on international relations, human rights, and digital connectivity. Her research examines the influence of technology and communication on resilience, recovery, and peacebuilding in regions affected by conflict. Through comprehensive research and writing, she seeks to highlight the vital role that connectivity plays in both crisis management and long-term stability.
This article reflects the author’s own opinions and not necessarily the views of Global Connectivities.
