Russia blocks Meta’s WhatsApp, pushing its 100 million+ users to state-backed service
The Kremlin confirmed on 11 February that WhatsApp was removed from Russia’s internet directory managed by Roskomnadzor, the country’s communications regulator. Authorities said the block was due to Meta’s failure to comply with Russian laws, a justification that Meta strongly disputes.
- Feb 12, 2026,
- Updated Feb 12, 2026 7:29 PM IST
Russia has fully blocked access to WhatsApp on 12 February, the globally popular messaging app owned by Meta, in a major escalation of its efforts to bring foreign tech services under tighter state control.
The Kremlin confirmed that WhatsApp was removed from Russia’s internet directory managed by Roskomnadzor, the country’s communications regulator. Authorities said the block was due to Meta’s failure to comply with Russian laws, a justification that Meta strongly disputes.
State-controlled alternative promoted
Russian officials are urging citizens to switch to a state-backed messaging service called MAX, which is being positioned as a “national messenger”. Critics, however, warn that MAX lacks end-to-end encryption and could function as a tool for surveillance. The government denies these claims.
Due to Meta's unwillingness to comply with Russian law, such a decision was indeed taken and implemented," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Reuters.
The move forms part of a broader drive to create a so-called “sovereign internet”, in which foreign tech companies operating in Russia must adhere strictly to domestic regulations or risk being blocked. As per a report by Financial Times, authorities have already restricted services such as Facebook, Instagram and parts of YouTube, which are now mainly accessible only through virtual private networks (VPNs).
WhatsApp reacts
WhatsApp also posted on X (formerly Twitter), saying that cutting off more than 100 million users from secure communication is a “step backwards” and could reduce safety for people in Russia.
The WhatsApp ban follows escalating restrictions on other messaging services. Russian regulators have also curbed access to Telegram, in what officials describe as steps to enforce compliance with local laws and combat extremist or criminal content. Critics argue these moves are aimed at reducing foreign influence and bolstering state oversight of digital communications.
Russia has fully blocked access to WhatsApp on 12 February, the globally popular messaging app owned by Meta, in a major escalation of its efforts to bring foreign tech services under tighter state control.
The Kremlin confirmed that WhatsApp was removed from Russia’s internet directory managed by Roskomnadzor, the country’s communications regulator. Authorities said the block was due to Meta’s failure to comply with Russian laws, a justification that Meta strongly disputes.
State-controlled alternative promoted
Russian officials are urging citizens to switch to a state-backed messaging service called MAX, which is being positioned as a “national messenger”. Critics, however, warn that MAX lacks end-to-end encryption and could function as a tool for surveillance. The government denies these claims.
Due to Meta's unwillingness to comply with Russian law, such a decision was indeed taken and implemented," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Reuters.
The move forms part of a broader drive to create a so-called “sovereign internet”, in which foreign tech companies operating in Russia must adhere strictly to domestic regulations or risk being blocked. As per a report by Financial Times, authorities have already restricted services such as Facebook, Instagram and parts of YouTube, which are now mainly accessible only through virtual private networks (VPNs).
WhatsApp reacts
WhatsApp also posted on X (formerly Twitter), saying that cutting off more than 100 million users from secure communication is a “step backwards” and could reduce safety for people in Russia.
The WhatsApp ban follows escalating restrictions on other messaging services. Russian regulators have also curbed access to Telegram, in what officials describe as steps to enforce compliance with local laws and combat extremist or criminal content. Critics argue these moves are aimed at reducing foreign influence and bolstering state oversight of digital communications.