Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Government Networking Technology

Afghan Government Turns To Iran For Internet 80

Posted by Soulskill
from the access-of-evil dept.
Barlaam writes "Renesys describes new evidence that the Iranian national telecommunications provider, DCI, is selling (uncensored?) Internet connectivity to customers in neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan. 'The Internet connectivity outreach that we now see in the global routing tables seems like continuing evidence of Iran's long-term strategy: aggressively pursuing bilateral infrastructure and investment projects with its neighbors, in ways that will increase Iran's regional influence after the Americans have moved on.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Afghan Government Turns To Iran For Internet

Comments Filter:
  • Gee, this won't hurt the US, will it?

    • Re:Iran helping? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Jawnn (445279) on Saturday September 18, 2010 @02:58PM (#33621794)
      It will, if you see the world through 20th century cold-war goggles. Filling a vacuum; political, military, economic, etc., was the name of the expansion game. This is simply more of the same. We could choose to see this move as ground lost to the communists... er, "Islamo-facists" (that is such and idiotic term...), or we could take a deep breath and realize that communication of that type is a thing to be exploited for commercial and cultural gain. Any bets?
      • Iran isn't a communist state. LOL. They have trade embargo with most of the countries in this world because of their nuclear reactor issue.
      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        er, "Islamo-facists" (that is such and idiotic term...),

        Your right about that. If you look up the term "Fascist" you will see that the definition doesn't even come close to their doctrine. Actually they are very non-fascist. If you want to see a fascist in the world today look at the US. Today the US is the leading fascist state. Really go look up the term fascism and see if it doesn't fit.

        Yes I am a US Citizen and yes I am ashamed of my government.

    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by mabhatter654 (561290)

      of course it will.... This is brilliant for Iran. Having spent a semester in college watching Kazakhstan, like Kazakhstan, Iran sits neatly between all the new development in the Eastern EU and the huge markets in China. I don't believe Iran has any interest in starting wars... most of the leaders spent 15-20 years fighting the Shaw and Iraq. Being connected will keep the US off their backs even more than trying to develop nukes. When they become a hub for telcom and transportation in the region, it gets

      • World Map (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Seriously? You studied Kazakhstan for a semester and you don't know that the EU is far, far away?

        There is no "Eastern EU" anywhere near Kazakhstan, the Ukraine is as far from joining the EU as ever (never). Are you regionally challenged? The EU is not synonymous with the continent of Europe.

        As for your claim that Iran will become a hub for the "region" I doubt your map reading skills. Iran is insignificant to Russia, and China is even further away. Russia is a great deal more capable than Iran, guess who's

      • by linumax (910946)

        ... most of the leaders spent 15-20 years fighting the Shaw and Iraq.

        While I agree with most of your comment, out of curiosity, where did you learn "Shaw"? I mean Shah is the correct word, meaning King in Farsi. It's a short form for "Mohmmad Reza Shah" (while his father, the previous king is known primarily as "Reza Shah"). I see a lot of English speakers referring to him as Shaw which to my knowledge is a last name as in George B. Shaw.

        • Re:Shaw? (Score:4, Funny)

          by Gonoff (88518) on Saturday September 18, 2010 @04:51PM (#33622460)
          This reminds me of some 1970s grafitti in Paris.
          Someone had written "Mort Au Shah" and someone else had added
          "et vive les souris"
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by NevarMore (248971)

            "Mort au Shah, et vive les souris"

            Death to Shah, and long live the mice

            Shah sounds a lot like "chats" which means cats. So theres the joke for non-French speakers.

  • I'm sure they don't censor criticism of the Iranian government (see Green Revolution [wikipedia.org]).
  • I seriously doubt that the Iranian government and it's nationalized telecom company will be the only company with infrastructure investments in Iraq or Afghanistan. If there's money to be made, the global conglomerates will make it.

    • True but the services of said infrastructure will become a resource in the future.

      Maybe I should RTFA and stay on topic but it could be a good plan to put that oil revenue to use on something tangible before it runs out.

    • With the violence, and destruction that is rampant over there (specifically to western companies) there may not be much money to be made. And Iran is not in it for profit.
      • by Sulphur (1548251)

        With the violence, and destruction that is rampant over there (specifically to western companies) there may not be much money to be made. And Iran is not in it for profit.

        They want to be known as Iranian Service Providers.

    • If there's money to be made, the global conglomerates will make it.

      So Halliburton will become Agfhanistans ISP . . .

    • by ImaLamer (260199)

      Eventually they will offer censorship services or a level of 'Islam-friendly' censorship and they will be the dominate player. I don't mean political censorship, 'omg dont let people read the Constitution' - but block porn, etc.

      "Look, you get your internet from us already, get your clean internets from us too!"

      I only am thinking this because I'm learning of these religious-friendly search engines. A niche market, but I get it because people want to protect their delicate minds (or just avoid that 'hate' spe

  • by Big Jojo (50231) on Saturday September 18, 2010 @02:55PM (#33621784)
    Who else should be providing Internet access and building local business ties but neighboring countries? In this case, Iran looks like they're being a good neighbor. It's time to move beyond this prejudice against Iran. They've been the victim of US (and British) Corporate interests for numerous decades ... and if they dare to object or fight back, or otherewise look after their own interests, they get demonized. Recall that the CIA overthrew the Shah to protect interests of what became British Petroleum (BP): The Iranian government of the time was just trying to control its own oil. Naturally, the people of Iran weren't keen on the CIA coup. And US/British Corporates weren't happy with pushback on their plans to steal all that oil wealth. So here we are ... Iran does something innocuous and the western establishment press still wants to find a way to blame them for something (what?) while spinning the West as blameless.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      They might not be being a *good* neighbour - I mean, doing this is going to be in Iran's interest - but it's in the interest of Iraq and Afghanistan too to have internet feeds from multiple political entities. Regardless of how America is treating them now, it is not a good idea for Iraq or Afghanistan to be 100% reliant on them.
      • by jd (1658)

        I agree it's not good for any nation to be 100% reliant on any other nation. I would far prefer all nations to have as many Internet feeds as they can sensibly afford - greater reliability through greater redundancy, shorter paths to destinations makes for better performance, and the avoidance of any particular political master prevents "unfortunate accidents" disconnecting sources that may conflict with one ideology or another. (Both the US and Iran have extensively used disinformation and psychological wa

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Cidolfas (1358603)

      While I agree that the west has fucked with Iran a lot, the analysis the article makes isn't the crazy, anti-Iranian spin you're making it out to be. Iran absolutely wants to become the regional hegemon of the middle east, and this is a way to increase their ability to do so. Whether or not that's innocuous is up for debate. I lean on the side that feels Iran being a hegemon is ok as long as that means they give way to control by their democratized populace instead of being run by secret police and a theolo

      • by oiron (697563)

        It may or may not be innocuous, but is it in any way surprising? As of now, they seem to be the only reasonably stable polity in that belt, apart from Saudi Arabia. It's a no-brainer that they would try to exert their influence over their neighbours. In pretty much the same way, and with about the same amount of justification, as you rightly mention, as the Monroe doctrine.

        And is it in any way wrong for Afghanistan (and possibly Iraq) to seek better relations with their neighbours, no matter how extremist t

  • Non issue (Score:3, Interesting)

    by http (589131) on Saturday September 18, 2010 @03:05PM (#33621830) Homepage Journal
    Someone trying to make a buck off of providing alternate internet routes. How unusual.
    As for the article itself, you have got to be kidding me - "aggressively pursuing"? Why not just post a photo of the cheque from the US State Department?
  • Countries (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Investing in network connectivity with its neighbour is just crazy. They should be busy invading countries thousands of miles away.

  • by compucomp2 (1776668) on Saturday September 18, 2010 @03:35PM (#33622012)
    Or possibly FOX News?

    Just because the United States has an embargo in Iran, doesn't mean everyone else in the world has to have one as well. Besides, the mullahs in Iran don't particularly like Afghanistan either, they almost went to war with the Taliban in 1998. I thought this site was for "news for nerds", not biased political pieces bordering on propaganda.
    • Well, the regime in Iran does have its way with the Internet offered there, so I wouldn't exactly call it a great day for Afghanistan either. It is news for nerds everywhere that a country is locking down their Internet, it could encourage others to do the same.

      On the other hand that might be exactly what the Afghan government wants; a censored Internet. It would suit them as well after all.

      I have no hostility towards the nation of Persia, or the Persian people, I greatly admire their country and believe th

    • When a state provider only has a couple of network peers and seems to be changing them around - that's things that nerds (or network nerds at least) would be interested in. When those states have dominated political agendas as much as Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan have in the past decade then that makes it newsworthy.
    • by tehcyder (746570)

      biased political pieces bordering on propaganda

      It's only propaganda when teh evil terrorists do it.

  • so what (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    We in Iraq already have several links into the country coming from FLAG Cable, Iran , Turkey , Kuwait , Saudi , Jordan......besides the VSAT terminals which is still widely used here.
    Turkey was the first to sell internet to iraq via fiber links since sometime ago....iran's link is rarely used here.

  • by John Hasler (414242) on Saturday September 18, 2010 @03:59PM (#33622160) Homepage

    Look at the map. When you are a landlocked country you get your connectivity from your neighbors. I suppose they could run cable all the way over to western Afghanistan from Pakistan. Would you want to sole-source all your connectivity from Pakistan? The other choices aren't worth mentioning.

    • by Peeteriz (821290)

      mod parent up.

      They are all landlocked neighbouring countries; the practicalities of telecommunications business - laying long, expensive stretches of cable - are overriding here. There are fiber optics cables running even between Isrel and Arab countries despite their wars...

    • by ImaLamer (260199)

      If we are going to be scared, as a people, by who they pick as their uplinks, it should be Pakistan more than anyone. Pakistan hates the US and likely the west a lot more than Iran (of the two, which has the terrorists we are looking for?).

      But it's just packets, I don't know if I am that worried. Redundancy is best, for political and technical reasons - maybe I'd like to see a new Wifi distance record set and have Afghanistan beam their bits to a router on top of Mt. Everest? I would hope that the landmass

  • Language Bias? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 1 a bee (817783) on Saturday September 18, 2010 @04:23PM (#33622310)

    A quick look at the map shows a language bias of Farsi in the population. Iranians are some of the most prolific producers of web content in that region of the world. And virtually all of that is in Farsi. I don't know the details of how routing algorithms work, but if a majority of users in these regions browse Iranian web sites wouldn't that skew the routing tables towards routers in Iran?

  • Fools (Score:2, Funny)

    by oldhack (1037484)
    They should have gotten the Comcast Super Combo Deal and save a bundle.
  • Time to block Iran [countryipblocks.net] then.
  • I tell ya what I could do without from the /. RSS feed: ads for Liz Cheney's "Keep America Safe" BS.

  • "The Internet connectivity outreach that we now see in the global routing tables seems like continuing evidence of Iran's long-term strategy: aggressively pursuing bilateral infrastructure and investment projects with its neighbors...."

    The Horrors!!!!
  • War it Cyrus or Xerxes?
  • Just think high speed data transfers, GB/s speeds, fiber optics leaping into the 21st century, and yet, their women are still stuck in the 12th century. They only seem good for one use only, god...er I mean allah help them if they produce more girls than boys. Backward countries that want, no demand equality with the rest of the world as long as it doesn't include gender. What an idea!

Mediocrity finds safety in standardization. -- Frederick Crane

Working...