Iran’s Internet Shutdown Raises Civilian Safety and Rights Concerns Amid Regional Escalation

Last updated: 21 September 2026

A person using their phone in Tehran, Iran on January 27, 2026. © 2026 Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images

On March 6, 2026, Human Rights Watch published a report examining Iran’s ongoing internet shutdown and the risks it poses to civilians amid a broader military escalation involving Iran, the United States, and Israel. In the article, the organization argues that the communications blackout is not only a restriction on access to information, but also a development with direct humanitarian consequences for people trying to stay safe during airstrikes and other emergency conditions.

According to Human Rights Watch, the shutdown intensified after February 28, 2026, when internet traffic in Iran dropped sharply following strikes across the country. The report cites network monitoring data indicating a near-total collapse in connectivity. It points in particular to Cloudflare Radar, which said that internet traffic in Iran fell by 98 percent on February 28, suggesting that the country was experiencing an almost complete nationwide blackout. The organization also notes that state-affiliated media indicated that only pre-approved websites remained accessible through Iran’s National Information Network.

The central point of the report is that a blackout during wartime or emergency conditions can significantly increase danger for civilians. Human Rights Watch says people need stable internet and communications access to receive timely warnings, understand where strikes are taking place, locate medical care, and find food, shelter, or other basic services. In its assessment, cutting off communications at such a moment can obstruct access to life-saving information and leave civilians more vulnerable to injury or death. The organization also says that families may be unable to contact relatives inside or outside the country, compounding fear and uncertainty.

The article places this latest shutdown within a broader pattern of restrictions imposed by Iranian authorities during periods of unrest and conflict. Human Rights Watch says Iran has repeatedly used internet disruptions and shutdowns not only to limit communications, but also to restrict the flow of information, obstruct independent scrutiny, and make it harder to document abuses. The report recalls that on January 8, 2026, authorities imposed a 21-day internet shutdown alongside severe communications restrictions during a period in which security forces were reported to have killed thousands of protesters and bystanders. It also notes that during the 12-day Israel-Iran armed conflict in June 2025, Iranian authorities enforced a similar near-total shutdown.

To reinforce that pattern, the report refers to earlier precedents from previous years. It mentions the November 2019 nationwide shutdown, which lasted nearly two weeks as protests spread across the country and authorities carried out a violent crackdown. It also points to restrictions used during the Women, Life, Freedom protests from September to December 2022, when the authorities imposed a range of measures, including localized and short-term shutdowns. By connecting the present blackout to those earlier episodes, the Human Rights Watch report presents internet restrictions in Iran as a recurring state response during moments of political instability, public protest, or armed confrontation.

A major part of the article focuses on the legal implications of such measures. Human Rights Watch argues that the current blanket shutdown violates a range of human rights, especially the right to seek, receive, and impart information through all forms of media, including the internet. The organization says that while states may in some circumstances impose security-related restrictions on communications, those measures must be grounded in clear law and must be necessary and proportionate to a specific threat. In the case of a sweeping nationwide blackout affecting civilians across the country, the report concludes that the scale of harm appears incompatible with those legal standards.

The article also discusses the issue in the context of the laws of war. Human Rights Watch notes that communication networks, including mobile data infrastructure, may be used for both civilian and military purposes during conflict. For that reason, it says any restriction would still need to comply with the principles of necessity and proportionality under international humanitarian law. Even if a government claims a military reason for limiting communications, the report says the expected civilian harm cannot be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage. Human Rights Watch’s assessment is that a broad and generalized shutdown imposed on the population as a whole fails that test because of its severe impact on civilian safety and access to essential information.

Another element highlighted in the report is the effect of shutdowns on transparency and accountability. Human Rights Watch says blackouts can help conceal large-scale abuses and contribute to the spread of misinformation and disinformation. They also make it much harder for journalists, human rights monitors, and independent observers to verify events on the ground or document possible violations by all parties to the conflict. In that sense, the article presents the shutdown not only as a domestic rights issue, but also as a barrier to international scrutiny at a time when questions about civilian harm and compliance with the laws of war are becoming more urgent.

The report further emphasizes the psychological consequences of communications blackouts. Human Rights Watch says that during active conflict, losing the ability to contact family members or obtain reliable news about one’s surroundings can intensify panic and emotional distress. The organization quotes its senior technology and human rights researcher, Tomiwa Ilori, as saying that internet shutdowns during crises can contribute to severe psychological harm because people are cut off from their loved ones and denied access to life-saving information. Although the article avoids framing this as a secondary issue, it treats mental strain and social isolation as part of the broader civilian cost of communication restrictions.

Human Rights Watch also argues that the ongoing regional conflict does not justify a blanket shutdown inside Iran. The article refers to continuing attacks by the United States and Israel on targets in Iran, as well as Iranian military actions involving several countries in the region, but says these developments do not provide sufficient grounds for sweeping restrictions on internet access for the civilian population. Instead, the organization maintains that such measures deepen the risks faced by ordinary people, who require communications access precisely because of the emergency conditions created by war.

In support of its legal argument, the report cites the 2015 Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and Responses to Conflict Situations, in which United Nations experts said that communication “kill switches” shutting down entire parts of communications systems can never be justified under human rights law, even during conflict. Human Rights Watch uses that reference to place Iran’s current shutdown within a broader international debate over whether governments can ever lawfully cut off digital communications on such a large scale. The article suggests that the answer from international rights experts has been clear for years: full-system shutdowns are fundamentally incompatible with protected freedoms.

The report ends with a call for both domestic and international action. Human Rights Watch says Iranian authorities should immediately restore unrestricted internet and communications access throughout the country. It also says the international community should support internet access for civilians, including through technical and regulatory measures that could help maintain connectivity in conflict settings. The article specifically mentions the potential role of policymakers and companies in exploring solutions, and it refers to satellite connectivity as one possible means of helping affected populations in humanitarian contexts.

Taken together, the Human Rights Watch article presents the internet shutdown as a critical part of the current crisis rather than a secondary policy issue. Its account suggests that in modern conflict, communications access is closely tied to physical safety, emergency response, independent reporting, and legal accountability. By focusing on the blackout itself, the report broadens the discussion of wartime harm beyond bombings and direct attacks to include the infrastructure people rely on to survive and stay informed.

Conclusion

The report by Human Rights Watch portrays Iran’s internet shutdown as both a human rights issue and a civilian protection issue during a period of regional conflict. Its analysis suggests that communications blackouts can magnify the human cost of war by limiting access to safety information, isolating families, and reducing independent visibility into events on the ground.

More broadly, the article draws attention to how digital restrictions are increasingly becoming part of modern crises. In this case, the topic has drawn attention because it connects questions of technology, wartime conduct, and civilian security in a single rapidly developing regional context.