Apple on Tuesday announced a temporary halt of sales of its products in Russia, the latest in a series of actions from tech companies in response to Russia’s large-scale military invasion of Ukraine. (Apple and Google had both previously restricted Apple Pay and Google Pay in Russia after U.S. sanctions of Russian banks.)
In response to Tuesday’s announcement from Apple, Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s minister of digital transformation, tweeted: “No more @Apple product sales in Russia! Now @tim_cook let’s finish the job and block @AppStore access in Russia. They kill our children, now kill their access!”
Apple announced a temporary halt of sales of its products in Russia, the latest in a series of actions from tech companies in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
On Saturday, Fedorov had asked Big Tech companies to help Ukraine by blocking or limiting access to their services for Russian users. He called out Google CEO Sundar Pichai, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos, Apple CEO Tim Cook and others by name. The Ukrainian government has even asked the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the global internet registry known as ICANN, to effectively isolate Russian sites and Russian users from the global internet.
Google, Twitter and Meta (formerly known as Facebook) have taken different steps to restrict advertising funds for accounts linked to Russian state media. Netflix announced it would refuse to air Russian state TV channels in the country. So far, no major tech platforms have announced complete blocks that, per Fedorov’s request, would stop users located in Russia from accessing sites or apps, despite the fact that geolocation blocks (access restrictions that target specific geographical locations) are not technically difficult.
Generally, it is a positive sign that tech companies are acting in support of Ukraine and, by proxy, in support of a global order that respects principles of national sovereignty. However, cutting off Russian access to apps, sites or even the physical internet should be properly acknowledged as an extreme measure and not something that the tech companies and the international community take lightly. Blocking internet access is a serious — and potentially dangerous — step, and tech companies must take care to not forfeit long-term goals of a stronger, open, international internet.
Restricting the reach of government propaganda is one thing. Blocking individual users from accessing internet services is another game entirely. The internet is more than cat memes and viral dance videos. For billions around the world, it is a lifeline, a connector to communities, both local and global.
Internet access restrictions may anger the population, decreasing public support for the war and for President Vladimir Putin. They might serve as a strategic hit against Russian disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks, as well as the threat of cyberwarfare. However, sophisticated state actors are unlikely to be deterred by simple user geolocation bans from tech platforms. Also, blocking Russian access to the internet will not harm the oligarchs who run the country (some of whom are likely nowhere close to Russian territory at the moment).
The danger is that we end up isolating the Russian people and pushing the population more toward the isolated Russian internet, which the government tightly controls. That would cut the Russian people off from the world and from uncensored information and deny them the technology they need to safely protest and organize for change.
The internet is more than cat memes and viral dance videos. It is a lifeline, a connector to communities, both local and global.
Sometimes, extreme measures are necessary, but we need guardrails. Tech companies weighing whether to cut access to Russia need to create transparent and consistent policies that explain their decisions.
It’s worrisome that no tech company has announced a time limit on the access restrictions. They need to do so and spell out the conditions that would allow them to restore access to Russian users. Such statements would reinforce the idea that they aren’t just isolating Russia to bully the Russian people to uphold the norms of global peace.
The fact that a nation at war is forced to publicly ask tech companies for help shows the outsize power these tech companies have. That outsize power is even more worrisome given the inconsistent positions the tech industry has shown in past global conflicts. For example, Facebook has been taken to task for its missteps in relation to the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar, and Apple blocked protest apps in Hong Kong and has been found to comply with Chinese censorship generally.
We need more than a few Big Tech companies controlling the internet. We need policies that support startups and competition. This is important not only to allow for new market entrants but to also motivate existing Big Tech companies to push the field further and strengthen U.S. leadership in tech. We need policies in the U.S. that continue to support innovation domestically — including export controls. We also need public alternatives, as well as policies that encourage open source and interoperability standards.
This will not be the last war that threatens the very foundations of the international community. We should not depend on tech companies to save us. While many of the major tech companies are U.S.-owned now, this may not always be the case. It would be folly to pursue policies that assume the United States will always lead the tech industry.
Similarly, it is folly to assume that today’s global order will be set in stone forever. We need the open internet and international interoperability for any long-term vision of globalization to come to fruition. The desire for democracy is not unique to Ukraine, or to Europe, or to the United States. If we believe in the cause of global democracy, and human rights for all, we must continue to fight for an open internet.
It is good that powerful companies like Apple are taking a public stance in support of democracy and peace. They should take their responsibility seriously and take measures to make sure that internet restrictions on Russia do not harm more than they help. It is important that we do not let this moment lead us — paradoxically — to a more divided internet and a more divided world.
Tiffany C. Li
Tiffany C. Li is a technology lawyer and legal scholar. She is an assistant professor of law at the University of New Hampshire School of Law and a fellow at Yale Law School's Information Society Project.