Technology & Science
Russia Begins Nationwide Throttling of Telegram to Funnel Users to State-Run ‘Max’ App
On 10 February 2026 Roskomnadzor quietly activated network-level throttling of Telegram across Russian ISPs and announced “successive restrictions” until the foreign-based messenger complies with domestic data and content laws.
Focusing Facts
- Moscow court dockets show eight hearings that could levy up to 64 million roubles (≈US$830,000) in fresh fines against Telegram in the coming months.
- The watchdog had already disabled Telegram’s voice and video calls in August 2025, mirroring partial blocks on WhatsApp the same week.
- Within the first two days of the new throttle, outage trackers registered roughly 15,000 complaints from Russian users—ten-fold the normal volume.
Context
Kremlin technocrats are replaying their aborted 2018 Telegram ban and, more pointedly, Beijing’s 2013–15 phasing-out of foreign messengers in favor of WeChat; both episodes show how states first tolerate, then co-opt, and finally supplant private platforms once dependence is entrenched. The latest squeeze slots into a two-decade global drift toward “digital sovereignty”: Russia’s 2019 sovereign-Runet law, India’s 2021 intermediary rules, and the EU’s 2024 DSA all signal that governments—authoritarian and democratic—now assert territorial control over code and data. Whether the tactic works matters because communication networks, like 19th-century telegraphs or 20th-century short-wave radio, shape political power for generations: if citizens accept a surveillance-ready super-app today, the architecture of the Russian internet could resemble China’s walled garden for the rest of the century; if they keep circumventing with VPNs, the attempt may join the Soviet jamming of the BBC (1949-88) as a costly, ultimately porous exercise in information control.
Perspectives
Russian state agencies and regional outlets citing Roskomnadzor
Russian state agencies and regional outlets citing Roskomnadzor — They portray the slowdown as a lawful measure to combat fraud, terrorism and to enforce data-localisation rules, insisting the restrictions protect citizens. By repeating Roskomnadzor’s talking points and avoiding any mention of political censorship or Max’s surveillance risks, they serve to legitimise Kremlin control over the information space.
Independent Russian media in exile and human-rights-focused publications
Independent Russian media in exile and human-rights-focused publications — They argue the Kremlin is weaponising connectivity to silence dissent and that throttling Telegram undercuts both free expression and even Russia’s own military communications. Because these outlets are openly adversarial toward the Kremlin, they may emphasise worst-case scenarios and downplay Telegram’s real moderation gaps to keep the spotlight on state repression.
International tech press sympathetic to Pavel Durov and digital-rights advocates
International tech press sympathetic to Pavel Durov and digital-rights advocates — They frame the crackdown as an attempt to push Russians onto the state-run Max “super-app,” echoing Durov’s claim that the move mirrors Iran’s failed ban and threatens user privacy. Reliance on Durov’s narrative can understate Telegram’s own legal obligations and gloss over broader concerns about extremist or fraudulent content on the platform that regulators cite.