While we cheer Starlink, US is banning TikTok

WE really live in a weird world.

On Tuesday, Zimbabwean netizens were over the moon after local telecommunications regulator Postal and Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe (Potraz) confirmed the “sweet news” that the United States satellite internet company, Starlink, which is owned by eccentric South Africa-born American billionaire Elon Musk had applied for a licence to operate in Zimbabwe.

Well, on the same day, more than 14 000 kilometres away, American lawmakers were gathered in Washington, D.C. to enact a law to ban Chinese video-sharing application TikTok, which is also popular in our teapot-shaped Republic.

For Bishop Lazi, it does not get as ironic as this. While we were cheering for Starlink, the Americans — nay, American lawmakers — were banning TikTok.

You see, more than half of the Americans — about 170 million out of a population of 333 million — use TikTok, so they would not ordinarily favour outlawing an application they crave the most. And all this while we thought that the concept of representative democracy enjoins elected representatives to push for the interests of the electors or voters.

But not in this case.

The bill to ban TikTok, which goes against the wishes of the majority of the Americans, overwhelmingly passed by a 79-18 vote.

So much about majoritarian democracy!

Maybe the American lawmakers were taking a leaf from what former US First Lady Rosalynn Carter once said: “A leader takes people where they want to go. A great leader takes people where they don’t necessarily want to go, but ought to be.”

This makes democracy a very complex creature. But the US’ unease with TikTok stems from the paranoia of not only having its citizens’ data in the hands of a Chinese company, particularly in the current epoch of the great-power rivalry pitting Washington and Beijing, but the possible pervasive influence and capability that the application might have in influencing and shaping opinions of ordinary Americans, the majority of whom are young. And it is precisely this premise, which is considered a national security issue, that is being used to overrule the American TikTokers.

Remember, about 60 percent of TikTok users in the US are between the ages of 16 and 24.

But while TikTok, which is owned by ByteDance, is the only application that is being targeted, there are plenty of other Chinese applications, such as CapCut (also owned by ByteDance), shopping app Temu, Lemon8 and Shein, which are popular in the US as well.

Interestingly, all these apps can also collect user information, analyse trends and use algorithms to target consumers with products or information to keep them engaged.

If anything, this shows the irrepressible rise of China as a superpower, which Washington interprets as a threat.

For example, the number of international patents from Chinese inventors have surpassed applications from the US for the first time. In 2022, they applied for 68 600 patents through the Patent Cooperation Treaty, compared to 58 200 US-based applications, according to a report from the National Science Foundation’s National Centre for Science and Engineering Statistics that was published on February 29, 2024.

Experts believe patent data is a critical measure of “science and technology prowess — and the economic and national security strength that come with it”.

Fears

However, the US’ TikTok fears are informed more by how its security apparatus, particularly its intelligence community, has been mining data and manipulating information gathered from internet giants such as Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple.

Was it not Edward Snowden — an American who once worked as a network security technician in Geneva, Switzerland, under diplomatic cover — who told us about the existence of PRISM, a secret intelligence-gathering programme through which agencies like the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had direct access to servers of companies such as Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple?

Snowden’s claims were subsequently confirmed and vindicated by an independent panel that was set up by then-US President Barack Obama in August 2013.

This is food for thought for our lawmakers in Zimbabwe, since we are considered Washington’s “adversaries”.

And Starlink, a subsidiary of the Musk-controlled SpaceX, is not that innocent. Last month, Russia announced that it was aware of US intelligence efforts to use commercial satellite operators such as SpaceX.

The company is apparently building a network of hundreds of spy satellites. This is being done under a classified contract with a US intelligence agency that manages spy satellites, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). In fact, SpaceX’s Starshield has a US$1,8 billion contract with NRO signed in 2021.

Digital sovereignty

In an age where political power and influence are now increasingly projected less by superior firepower and boots on the ground and more through technological prowess, as Zimbabwe, we need to interrogate our digital sovereignty, as it is a frontier that would likely shape our future national security and territorial sovereignty.  We need to critically reflect on issues that were recently raised by the country’s information czar, Cde Jenfan Muswere, in his public lecture that was aptly delivered at the Zimbabwe National Defence University on February 28 this year.

“National security can no longer be defined in terms of territorial integrity or sovereignty in terms of physical space, but it is also defined in terms of the cyber security framework that we currently have in terms of international telecommunications.

“We need to redefine our national security in terms of cyber security,” he observed. Cde Muswere added: “The fact that every citizen can broadcast whatever they would want to broadcast, either negative or positive, means we need to refine our laws and ensure that we come up with sustainable ICT (information and communication technology), publicity and broadcasting that serves as a legal framework to protect our citizens . . .

“The fact that most of these social media platforms are not hosted in Africa automatically means we have challenges in terms of data sovereignty. We don’t have authority over digital sovereignty. This also affects the national security of any country in the world.”

And this is dangerous.

The seeming extraterritoriality of the internet, together with the social media platforms it carries, means, without guardrails to protect the content that gets into Zimbabwe, the country’s social media users, who constitute about 10 percent of the population, are having access to unfiltered content from around the world.

It is not only about the political implications of this.

Some of the content that dominates social media platforms is systematically gnawing at our cultural, moral and social fabric in a way that disfigures the norms and values that have held our communities and societies for centuries.

For instance, we seem to have become used to, or inured even, to the hypersexual content and gratuitous pornography on platforms such as X. And the influence of social media platforms has become pervasive in our society.

Statistics indicate that there were 1,43 million users aged more than 18 years using social media in Zimbabwe at the beginning of 2023, which translates to 16,4 percent of the total population in that age group.

Overall, it is also believed 26,1 percent of Zimbabwe’s total internet users used at least one social media platform in January 2023.

Arresting the decay

So, essentially, we need to arrest this decay. Countries such as China and India — which are the most populous states in the world and are, therefore, wary of influences that might destabilise their societies — have shown the way. Through sheer ingenuity, Beijing has been able to come up with its own applications such as WeChat (similar to WhatsApp) and search engines like Baidu, which also ringfence its digital sovereignty.

While India freely allows Western technological companies, there is, however, a caveat — they must set up local offices and sometimes servers to protect users’ data and information.

It also makes New Delhi able to assert its influence and ensure that information that is broadcast and shared with its people is in sync with India’s values, norms, culture and other sensitivities.

The Indian government most famously had a four-year standoff with BlackBerry maker Research in Motion over provision of encryption keys for its secure corporate emails and popular messenger services.

India had threatened to shut down the service. At the time, super-secure corporate emails, called Blackberry Enterprise Services, were the company’s main drawcard.

But the country has also been able to tame and compel other Western corporates such as BBC, X and Amazon to toe the line.

The lesson learnt from these emerging economies is that, it is not so much about banning these platforms but asserting control and moderating and mediating the information and influences that come through this new digital-age highway.

We, too, need to start asserting our digital sovereignty by not doing what America — a hypocrite — says but what it does.

Luke 20:45-47 says: “While all the people were listening, Jesus said to his disciples, ‘Beware of the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honour at banquets. They devour widows’ houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely’.”

Bishop out!