Weaponising Digital Space in War

Civic space and reliable information have long been among the first casualties of conflict.

War has historically provided cover for state actors and armed groups alike to launch violent campaigns against civil activists, journalists, protestors and critics.

The so-called fog of war reaches far beyond the battlefield, allowing the suppression of domestic dissent while diverting attention and justifying crackdowns on critical voices under the guise of national security.

The current war in the Middle East is no different. Instances of attacks against activists and journalists proliferate, within Iran and far beyond its borders.

A UN report released on March 11 warned that the ongoing conflict in the Middle East could intensify authoritarianism in Iran on an unprecedented scale, including violations that may amount to crimes against humanity.

The UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran, reviewing events between April 2025 to February 2026, noted patterns of institutionalised repression it predicted could worsen amid the current conflict.

During last June’s 12-day war with Israel, the report noted, the Iranian authorities announced that they had arrested 21,000 supposed suspects, “many taken at checkpoints or during house raids without legal cause.

“Victims included journalists, lawyers, and social media users merely calling for peace”.

During the anti-regime protests earlier this year, one of the first reactions of the Iranian authorities was to shut down the internet, a common tactic in the authoritarian playbook.

There were even reports that Iran was planning to permanently break from the global internet, only allowing individuals vetted by the regime to connect online. The regime then briefly restored access to the internet to yet again completely shut it down on February 28 directly after the initial strikes on Iran, preventing the most basic of life-or-death communication.

Such shutdowns demonstrate how authorities weaponise digital space to conceal violations and suppress dissent at precisely the moment when scrutiny is most needed. Such crackdowns control information during moments of crisis, weaken due process and undermine respect for the right to life.

The huge level of weaponisation of existing platforms also demonstrates how modern conflict’s use of media plays a crucial role in information warfare as a tool to influence public perception and shape narratives.

In Lebanon, for instance, defamation campaigns are one of the most common tactics used to discredit critics of Hezbollah. Activists and journalists who speak up against the militant group are decried as foreign agents, spies and traitors.

Back in 2023, several Lebanese journalists and activists were subject to online bullying and in some cases threats made against their lives after criticising Hezbollah’s approach to the Israeli war on Gaza.

In the context of the current conflict, with many Lebanese people opposed to their country being dragged into this war, journalists and political activists are again being targeted.

Journalist Ghada Eid, for instance, posted on social media that she had received death threats from people she believed were Hezbollah supporters, and warned that she would take legal action.

While this tactic is not new, Lebanese organisations and activists are expressing concerns about the intensity of this wave.

Unlike previous instances of cyber harassment, mostly done through anonymous accounts, some perpetrators are not even bothering to hide their identity. Using their own accounts, they resort to open hostility, accusations and condemnations that at times escalate to calls for violence against individuals for merely exercising their freedom of expression.

In response to the Iran war, several countries in the Gulf have taken further harsh steps in an attempt to limit what their governments interpret as the spread of misinformation. To avoid what officials describe as “inciting panic amongst residents”, governments in the region have taken a variety of measures ranging from banning the posting of images or information about strikes to imposing restrictions on reporters’ access to affected areas and detaining or harassing journalists.

In a report published this month, digital rights organisation SMEX warned that “measures like these may have negative repercussions, leading to a crackdown on freedom of expression and journalism, especially under authoritarian regimes”.

These represent a series of real-life test cases in how battlefield operations can translate into a cognitive domain where information dominance is as critical as physical force.

In both cases, AI acts as a force multiplier, enhancing the speed, precision, and scale of military operations, while simultaneously enabling sophisticated, automated disinformation campaigns.

It is also worth remembering that online threats and intimidation rarely stay in the virtual realm.

In Iraq, prominent feminist activist Yanar Mohammed was killed on March 2 in what appears to be a targeted assassination in broad daylight right in front of her house in Baghdad.

Yanar’s murder ignited outrage in Iraq and around the world, raising fears that  deteriorating security could provide cover for a violent campaign against civil activists and journalists amid a persistent culture of impunity.

Malign actors will always exploit conflict and security for their own ends. It is of crucial importance that the work of independent civic society and professional media is protected in the face of a scenario of permanent uncertainty where truth is buried amidst other rights and freedoms.