In a world where digital footprints stretch across continents, governments are grappling with how to manage the risks and opportunities presented by social media. This week, both Pakistan and the United States unveiled sweeping new approaches to monitoring and regulating online activity—each citing national security, but sparking sharp debates about privacy, civil liberties, and the limits of state power in the digital age.
On December 11, 2025, Pakistan’s Deputy Interior Minister Talal Chaudhry stood before journalists in Islamabad with what he described as documentary evidence: a trove of social media accounts, operating on the X platform and elsewhere, that he said were linked to militant groups and run from Afghanistan, India, and beyond. According to the Associated Press, Chaudhry warned that these accounts were not just spreading extremist content, but actively aiding outlawed organizations like the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) and the Pakistani Taliban (TTP).
Chaudhry’s message was clear—and urgent. “This is a matter of serious concern,” he told reporters. He claimed that “Kabul is not only sheltering militants but, in some cases, elements of the Afghan government are providing patronage to individuals spreading hate material and terror content against Pakistan.” There was no immediate response from officials in Kabul or New Delhi, but the accusations are not new. For years, Pakistan has charged its neighbors with supporting hostile groups, a claim both Afghanistan and India have consistently denied.
Behind the headlines is a country on edge. Pakistan, with an estimated 70 million social media users out of a population of 250 million, has seen a surge in violence in recent months. Most attacks have been claimed by the BLA and the TTP. The latter, known formally as Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, is a separate entity from the Afghan Taliban but maintains close ties. Since the Afghan Taliban’s return to power in August 2021, many TTP leaders and fighters have reportedly found safe haven across the border.
Chaudhry painted Pakistan as a bulwark against global terrorism: “Pakistan is currently serving as a wall between terrorists and the world,” he declared, warning that groups operating against Pakistan could eventually threaten other nations. He called on major social media companies to intensify their efforts to identify and remove extremist content, and to open offices in Pakistan for better coordination. Artificial intelligence, he suggested, could be a key tool in detecting and deleting so-called “mirrored accounts” that glorify militants or promote hate speech.
But the government’s patience appears to be wearing thin. While WhatsApp, YouTube, Telegram, and Facebook have begun to cooperate with Pakistani authorities, Chaudhry said, X’s response has been limited. He cautioned that if platforms do not act, “we will be compelled to do what we do not want if we don’t get cooperation.” Deputy Law Minister Aqeel Malik went further, suggesting Pakistan could follow Brazil’s example and impose fines or other legal measures if platforms fail to comply. In recent years, Pakistan has not hesitated to briefly ban platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and X for what it deems hateful, obscene, or anti-state content.
Earlier in 2025, Pakistan’s parliament passed a controversial bill giving the government sweeping controls over social media, including the power to send users to prison for spreading disinformation. Critics, both domestic and international, have warned that such measures risk stifling free expression and could be abused to silence dissent. Nevertheless, the government insists its focus is on curbing violence and protecting national security.
Meanwhile, across the globe, the United States is considering its own expansion of digital scrutiny—this time aimed at foreigners hoping to visit. On the same day as Pakistan’s announcement, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security published a proposal that would require travelers from about 40 visa-exempt countries to submit a much broader array of personal information before entry. As reported by France 24 and the Associated Press, the new rules would apply to citizens traveling under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), which currently allows for short-term visits for tourism or business without a visa.
Under the proposal, applicants would need to provide five years’ worth of social media history, a decade of email addresses, and extensive family information—including relatives’ places of birth and phone numbers. The Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), which screens VWP travelers, would also request phone numbers used over the past five years and metadata from submitted photos. This marks a sharp increase from the current requirements, which are limited to details like parents’ names and a current email address.
Asked whether the changes might dampen tourism, President Donald Trump was blunt: “We want safety, we want security, we want to make sure we’re not letting the wrong people come into our country.” The proposal, he emphasized, is about keeping Americans safe. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) echoed this, stating, “Nothing has changed on this front for those coming to the United States. This is not a final rule, it is simply the first step in starting a discussion to have new policy options to keep the American people safe.”
The public has 60 days to comment before the rule could go into effect. CBP linked the move to a recent terrorist attack against the National Guard in Washington DC, just before Thanksgiving. The agency also cited a January executive order signed by Trump that called for more rigorous screening to prevent national security threats.
It’s not the first time the U.S. has sought to peer into travelers’ digital lives. Since the first Trump administration, visa applicants from non-waiver countries have been required to provide social media information and, in some cases, to make their accounts public for scrutiny. The Biden administration kept these policies in place. Now, the net may be cast wider: refusing to set accounts to public can be grounds for visa denial, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services reviews whether applicants have “endorsed, promoted, supported, or otherwise espoused” anti-American, terrorist, or antisemitic views.
These developments have alarmed privacy and free speech advocates. Critics warn that such broad data collection could chill legitimate expression, target political dissenters, and expose travelers to arbitrary or discriminatory treatment. “The heightened interest in social media screening has drawn concern from immigration and free speech advocates about what the Trump administration is looking for and whether the measures target people critical of the administration in an infringement of free speech rights,” reported France 24.
Both Pakistan and the United States find themselves at a crossroads, balancing the imperative to protect citizens with the need to uphold rights and freedoms. As governments worldwide wrestle with the double-edged sword of social media, the coming months will test not just the limits of technology, but the values that underpin democratic societies.