The hype around decentralized ID (DID) is overwhelming. When speakers talk about digital trust, empowerment and security emerge as the two main themes. A stellar example of this is the partnership between Al Fardan Corporation and RaonSecure, which will bring DID solutions to the Middle East. Yet between all these buzzword bingo cards, are we REALLY asking the tough questions. Are we really thinking through the region’s unique intricacies before forcing a Western-born innovation into its highly-varied communities?
Whose Identity Are We Decentralizing?
Decentralized ID holds great promise for putting individuals back in control of their data. Sounds great, right? What happens when “the individual” isn’t actually the individual? Elsewhere in the Middle East, identity is often ascribed at birth and rooted in family, tribe, religious sect or denomination, and nation.
Think about it: a woman might need her father's or husband's permission for certain transactions. Someone who is a member of any historically marginalized group may be subject to discrimination no matter how “secure” their digital identity may be. Can a technology designed primarily for individualistic societies truly address the nuances of a region where collective identity often takes precedence?
We need to be brutally honest: a shiny new DID system won't magically erase existing power imbalances or social inequalities. In fact, it could exacerbate them. Now, picture a world where access to all services—healthcare, education, even food—depends on having a DID. Without digital literacy, resources, or social capital, millions of people can’t find their way through the system. This growing digital divide cuts them off from the opportunities that advanced technologies were supposed to set them free with.
This is beyond just access to the technology, but availability of what’s culturally relevant. A DID system rooted in Western conceptions of privacy and autonomy would likely conflict with cultural practices and philosophies ingrained in everyday life. Are we willing to change the technology to fit the cultural context? Or are we simply attempting to shoehorn a one-size-fits-all solution?
Digital Divide Deepens The Fault Lines
It’s an issue of digital literacy, affordability, trust and access—not just to the internet, but to online services as a whole. Tech enthusiasts are abuzz with the promise of decentralized identity (DID) to revolutionize our notions of digital trust. In real life, things are more complex.
And on the other end, remember all those inspirational tales about blockchain-enabled farmers in the developing world gaining access to microloans? Let's be real: those are the exceptions, not the rule. Unfortunately, millions of people across the Middle East lack even the most basic digital skills. This challenge is acutely felt in rural areas and marginalized communities, which already struggle to access a decentralized ID system.
If an internal combustion engine is a step beyond understanding how to use a smartphone, how can we expect them to navigate their own digital identity.
Additionally, the expense associated with using devices, data, and spaces with reliable internet access is still a major challenge for many. An alternative decentralized ID system requires always-on connectivity and expensive biometric scanners. Unless we want to further widen the gap between the rich and poor, this is a dangerous setup.
In areas where governments suppress information and disband public gatherings, apprehension toward new technologies abounds. Second, they are afraid to share their personal data. So how can we possibly expect them to be open to a decentralized ID system? They are afraid it will be used against them to surveil them or criminalize them. This anxiety and fears are valid.
Who Controls The Decentralized Keys?
Decentralization is the mantra, but who really has the keys in a state that spans the spectrum of political liberty from East to West? We understand that there is a very legitimate concern out there about government overreach or misuse of government DID systems. This is increasingly the case in nations that curb free expression and routinely abuse civil liberties.
Imagine a foreign government that forced all of its citizens to adopt DID. The danger of this mandate is that it creates a new national, centralized database of sensitive personal information in the name of decentralization. Or, alternatively, what if a country with authoritarian proclivities would censor or otherwise block access to DID-related services because they don’t like the perceived threat that DIDs present?
The partnership between Al Fardan Corporation and RaonSecure is presented as a step towards a secure digital future, but we need to ask: who benefits from this partnership? If the goal is truly to set people up to succeed, or is this more an issue of providing corporations and governments with better opportunities to collect and manage data?
We have to be vigilant to defend decentralized ID networks. Our goal should be to make sure that they don’t end up being instruments of surveillance or oppression. This will only happen if there are strong legal protections in place, independent oversight, and a real dedication to transparency and accountability. Supporting independent civil society organizations and human rights activists is an essential ingredient. They’ll keep an eye on how DID systems get implemented and be an advocate for marginalized communities’ rights.
Ultimately, the success of decentralized ID in the Middle East depends not just on the technology itself, but on the values and principles that guide its implementation. Let’s put inclusivity, cultural sensitivity, and the respect for human rights at the core—all of it. Otherwise, we may find ourselves in a digital dystopia where the potential for empowerment becomes a reality of manipulation and control.
