In recent weeks, authorities across nearly a dozen Russian regions have employed a variety of justifications to thwart demonstrations aimed at protesting internet censorship and the blocking of the popular messaging app Telegram. From citing a “tree inspection” in one city to attributing the cancellations to snow removal issues or lingering COVID-19 restrictions in others, the excuses have been as diverse as they are creative. In some instances, officials even claimed that the reasons for the protests were nonexistent.
Activist Response to Crackdowns
Faced with a heightened crackdown on dissent since the onset of the four-year invasion of Ukraine, many activists have opted to forgo unauthorized rallies, even when the issues at hand are not directly related to the war. Some have turned to the courts to contest government refusals to authorize pickets, while others have adjusted their strategies to host smaller indoor gatherings. Nevertheless, discontent remains palpable across the political spectrum, particularly regarding the government’s actions against Telegram, which is Russia’s second-most popular messaging app.
“Clearly the situation has changed, the laws have become stricter, but the protest hasn’t gone anywhere,” noted Alexander Sustov, a legislator from Russia’s far eastern Primorye region, where a pro-Telegram rally was recently blocked. “Discontent remains. And any ban only fuels that discontent,” he added, reflecting a sentiment shared by many.
Government Control Over Communication
The restriction of Telegram represents the latest effort by the Russian government to tighten its grip on the internet. Thousands of websites and platforms have been blocked, along with numerous virtual private networks that allow users to bypass censorship. Widespread cellphone internet shutdowns have left citizens with access to only a limited number of government-approved websites.
Telegram, which boasts a user base of approximately 93.6 million in Russia, is second only to WhatsApp in popularity. It serves as a vital communication tool for government agencies, pro-Kremlin commentators, and military bloggers. Despite the government’s push for users to switch to MAX, a state-backed messaging app criticized as a surveillance tool, many continue to rely on Telegram for its utility and reach.
Military bloggers have voiced their concerns about the restrictions on Telegram, emphasizing its importance for Russian troops in Ukraine and for activists supporting crowdfunding campaigns for Moscow’s forces. Initially, the government had assured that Telegram would not be restricted on the battlefield, but recent statements from the Kremlin suggest a shift in stance.
Protests Across the Regions
The backlash against the blocking of Telegram has prompted various political factions, including those generally supportive of the Kremlin, to take action. Political analyst Abbas Gallyamov observed that widespread dissatisfaction and the absence of a clear narrative justifying the restrictions have emboldened people to protest. For instance, members of Other Russia, an ultranationalist, pro-war group, recently blocked the entrance to the Moscow office of the state media and internet regulator Roskomnadzor, demanding an internet free from government oversight.
While some regional branches of the Communist Party attempted to organize rallies, they faced obstacles as local officials dismissed claims of internet censorship as “at odds with reality.” In some cities, activists managed to hold small pickets, brandishing placards with messages like “It is not up to officials to decide what we read” and “The internet is not a prison.” However, these instances were exceptions rather than the rule, as authorities frequently denied permits or disrupted planned gatherings at the last moment.
In the Ural Mountains city of Perm, activists received authorization for a demonstration, only to be informed just hours before its start of a “potential emergency situation” at the rally site. Despite this, some participants still showed up, including an 80-year-old man who unfurled a banner demanding freedom of thought and speech. He was promptly detained and fined.
Emerging Forms of Dissent
In Novosibirsk, 16 individuals were detained at a site designated for a pro-Telegram rally, which was unexpectedly cordoned off for a supposed “tree inspection.” Activist Roman Malozyomov, among those detained, later staged a one-man picket in Lenin Square, expressing his desire to “stay connected” while crossing out the Roskomnadzor logo on his sign.
As activists in various regions prepare to file for authorization of additional rallies, many are met with swift rejections. Despite the challenges, smaller demonstrations continue to occur, addressing a range of issues from cattle culling to demands for back pay. In some instances, authorized rallies have drawn hundreds of participants, indicating a readiness among the populace to voice their concerns.
Konstantin Larionov, an activist in Kaluga, has taken a different approach by filing a lawsuit against Roskomnadzor and other government officials, arguing that the restrictions on Telegram and WhatsApp violate free speech and privacy rights. His efforts have garnered support, swelling the number of plaintiffs to 105, showcasing a collective willingness to challenge the status quo.
While the landscape for protests in Russia has undoubtedly shrunk, the determination to continue advocating for change remains. As Gallyamov aptly noted, the protests surrounding Telegram may not be a direct challenge to the regime but rather a signal of growing public discontent, representing yet another crack in the foundation of Putin’s rule.
