Iran sets conditions for Durov: what Tehran wants from Telegram to lift the ban

The standoff between Iran’s Islamic Republic and Pavel Durov’s Telegram continues, each side standing firm. Tehran insists the app must stop harming the authorities and the people, while Durov remains committed to defending free speech.

Banned since 2018, Telegram could soon be unblocked in Iran, but only if it meets a list of government demands. Iranian officials have laid out clear conditions and are reportedly awaiting Telegram’s response. As with most government negotiations, the details come with no shortage of nuance.

Given Durov’s firm stance on privacy and digital freedom, many of these demands, then and now, seem nearly impossible to accept. Here’s what Iran wants, how its expectations have evolved since 2018, and whether Telegram might actually comply.

A brief history of the ban

Iran began restricting access to Telegram in December 2017, at the height of nationwide protests. For many Iranians, the move was a major blow—out of roughly 80 million people, about 50 million were active on the app. Until April 2018, authorities kept pressuring Pavel Durov to comply with their demands. In January, the country’s Minister of Information and Communications Technology warned that Telegram would face restrictions if it didn’t block what officials called “terrorist channels.”

The pressure didn’t work. By March, officials were already discussing the launch of a domestic alternative, while public tension around Telegram kept growing. By April 2018, Iran formally blocked Telegram, claiming the app was used to coordinate terrorist attacks on the Iranian parliament and the mausoleum of Imam Khomeini in 2017:

The app played a pivotal role in last year’s riots that claimed the lives of citizens and injured others while incurring huge financial losses to public assets, paving the way, as a medium, for causing rift in the national unity through provoking chaos and riot.

What Iran wants now

According to the WANA news agency, Tehran has presented Telegram with a detailed list of requirements for unblocking the app:

• Restrict ethnically provocative content
• Remove posts following citizen complaints
• Cooperate with Iran’s judiciary
• Block channels linked to terrorism or threats to national security
• Guarantee that user data will not be shared with foreign intelligence services

Sources told regional outlets that Iran’s Ministry of ICT is already in talks with Telegram. The company has not made any public statements, seemingly to avoid jeopardizing the possibility of a compromise.

Have Iran’s demands changed much since 2018?

Not much. Back then, even though the country’s parliament (somewhat paradoxically) opposed direct content filtering, officials wanted a firm commitment from Pavel Durov that Telegram wouldn’t be used as a tool against the Iranian people. Occasionally, as a gesture of goodwill, authorities even lifted what they called a “partial block.”

In reality, Tehran’s current conditions look almost the same as before. The government still wants guarantees that protests will no longer be coordinated through Telegram, that illegal or politically sensitive content will be removed on request, and that local user data will never end up in the wrong hands.

From the start, Iran’s conflict with Telegram stemmed from the platform’s refusal to help the government fight opposition groups that spread information it deemed harmful to “the state and the people.” Durov, for his part, has said repeatedly that the ban was imposed because Telegram publicly refused to block those channels.

Ultimately, the messenger was restricted because it couldn’t be fully controlled, and because authorities feared user data might be exposed to foreign intelligence. Durov refused to bend to the regime’s demands, and what began as a so-called “partial” block in the name of public safety eventually turned into a full-scale ban.

Will Telegram comply with Iran’s demands?

For Iranians, Telegram was essential, and Iran itself held great significance for Durov. The country ranked among the leaders by user numbers. In early 2018, one of Iran’s most prominent entrepreneurs, who at the time ran his business entirely on Telegram, gave an interview to Durov’s Code. He said that “no country in the world uses Telegram like Iran,” noting that “out of 70 million residents, around 50 million were using it,” despite the ban.

The source described Telegram as a kind of all-in-one internet for Iranians, where channels replaced websites, bots acted as apps, and for many, “the internet began with Telegram.” He added, “It’s a vibrant ecosystem. Most Iranians aren’t mobile-first, they’re Telegram-first.”

The businessman also emphasized that dialogue between Durov and Tehran was essential.

“If [Durov] can’t come to Tehran, he can invite officials to Dubai,” he said. “He owes it to Iranian users. We’ve invested a lot in his platform, helped it grow and mature.”

Over the years, waves of anti-government protests have shaken Iran, often followed by internet shutdowns and intensified crackdowns on Telegram users. Opposition channel owners were detained, and some were even executed. Durov, it seemed, had little power to influence Telegram’s unblocking, though the platform occasionally removed channels at Tehran’s request. One opposition group’s channel, whose creator was later executed, was taken down in late 2017 for “inciting violence.”

Durov has often cited Iran as an example of a country where laws directly contradict Telegram’s mission — protecting privacy and free speech globally. He’s repeatedly said that bans in Iran, China, and Russia happened because Telegram refused to compromise on human rights.

Even if talks are taking place, it’s difficult to imagine Durov agreeing to all of Tehran’s conditions. Doing so would contradict the very principles he continues to defend, and undermine his stance on preserving a free internet. If Telegram ever reaches a compromise, it will owe users full transparency about the terms.

“When Iran demanded we block channels of peaceful protesters, we refused, and Telegram was banned in Iran. We’re ready to leave markets that aren’t compatible with our principles because we’re not doing this for money. We’re driven by the intent to do good and defend people’s basic rights, especially where those rights are under threat,” — Pavel Durov.