Following the COVID-19 pandemic and rapid digital transformation, the Global South has reached a crossroads. Digital technologies have changed society, but they have also exacerbated existing disparities. Rural schoolchildren cannot attend online classes, and underfunded healthcare systems lack digital infrastructure, making digital exclusion more than just an inconvenience. It poses a direct threat to human development, institutional trust, and national security.
This article contends that digital inequality should be viewed as a non-traditional security threat – one that undermines democratic institutions, fuels disinformation, and limits a country's ability to respond to crises. This article, which proposes a human-centered policy framework, urges governments and development actors to incorporate digital inclusion not only into social and economic planning, but also into national security and governance strategies. Against this backdrop, this article recasts digital inequality not as a passive development concern but as a proactive threat to national security, trust in governance, and civic cohesion.
Framing Digital Inequality as a Non-Traditional Security Threat
According to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), nearly 2.6 billion people worldwide remain offline, with a disproportionate number residing in low and middle-income countries. The consequences go beyond access to devices and connectivity to include job losses, weakened public service delivery, and systemic marginalization of already vulnerable groups.
Individuals who lack digital access are cut off not only from economic opportunity but also from safety nets in today's hyper connected world. During the COVID-19 pandemic, marginalized communities in India and Africa lacked digital access to health alerts, welfare benefits, and vaccination updates. In conflict zones, the inability to access secure digital networks resulted in entire populations lacking verified news, aid coordination, and basic identification systems.
Governments that fail to ensure inclusive digital access risk exacerbating inequality and unrest. The GSMA Mobile Internet Connectivity Index reports that mobile internet adoption in Sub-Saharan Africa was only 25% in 2023, compared to 85% in North America. In India, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) data shows a persistent rural-urban digital divide of more than 30%.
Table 1: Digital Divide Snapshot – 2023
Table 1 highlights the severe disparities in digital access across regions in the Global South. In India, rural populations face both infrastructure and affordability challenges, while Sub-Saharan Africa struggles with mobile penetration and data costs. Southeast Asia reflects a gap primarily in digital literacy. Each of these access limitations directly correlates with region-specific security risks—from civic unrest to misinformation to digital marginalization. These patterns reinforce the need for policy solutions tailored to regional barriers and vulnerabilities.
Key Drivers of Risk: A Human-Centric Threat Landscape
Digital inequality is not a single issue; it is a network of interconnected risks. A human-centric security lens reveals that unequal digital access influences not only what people can do, but also how they live, work, and survive in a digital world. For the Global South, this means that millions of people are digitally invisible or misrepresented, contributing to systemic fragility in public service delivery, labour markets, and civic engagement.
Risks can be broadly classified into four critical dimensions, all of which contribute to vulnerability:
1) Inadequate broadband and electricity access can prevent access to digital services.
2) Affordability: High device and data costs hinder economic participation.
3) Limited digital literacy leads to lower adoption of government services and tools.
4) Algorithmic bias and data gaps, particularly for marginalized populations, can deepen digital exclusion. For example, datasets that do not represent linguistic diversity or rural users may lead to misclassification and denial of service access.
Federated learning – an emerging technique that allows AI systems to learn from data stored on multiple local devices or servers without transferring that data to a central repository – can help mitigate such issues by preserving data sovereignty while improving model accuracy. Combined with better dataset representation, it promotes fairness in automated decision-making.
A Human-Centric Policy Framework: The D.I.G. Model for Digital Security
To address digital inequality as a security risk, countries in the Global South must move beyond fragmented digital development initiatives and adopt a strategic, system-level approach. This section introduces the D.I.G. Model – Digital Inclusion Grid, a three-pillar policy architecture that aims to place inclusion, resilience, and equity at the centre of national digital strategies.
Figure 1: The D.I.G. Model – A Three-Pillar Human-Centric Policy Framework for Digital Security
Source: Designed by the author based on principles of Digital Inclusion and global best practices in infrastructure, education, and ethical AI governance
The D.I.G. Model visualizes digital equity as a three-tiered structure essential for national security resilience in the Global South. The base layer, “Digital Access for All,” emphasizes infrastructure and affordability. The middle layer, “Inclusive Digital Capability,” builds functional skills and participation. The topmost layer, “Governance of Ethical Tech,” ensures fairness in AI and data systems. Together, these interconnected pillars support sustainable, inclusive, and secure digital ecosystems.
Examples like India’s PM-WANI scheme (decentralized public Wi-Fi) and Kenya’s M-Pesa (mobile money platforms) demonstrate how infrastructure and inclusive innovation can scale access rapidly.
Pillar 1: Digital Access for All (Infrastructure Equity): The goal is to provide affordable and secure digital connectivity at the last mile.
Policy actions include expanding public Wi-Fi, subsidizing smartphones, and supporting community networks.
Pillar 2: Inclusive Digital Capability (Skills & Participation): To provide functional digital skills to citizens, particularly marginalized groups.
Policy actions: Promote digital literacy in education and mobile-based learning.
Pillar 3: Governance of Ethical Technology (Fair AI, Data Sovereignty): Ensure public AI and data systems benefit citizens, not harm them.
Policy actions include algorithmic fairness audits, federated learning, and digital rights frameworks.
Strategic Recommendations: A Policy Action Matrix for the Global South
To implement the D.I.G. Model and address security threats posed by digital inequality, governments must prioritize large-scale actions that take into account local needs and are funded in a sustainable manner.
Table 2: Digital Inclusion Policy Action Matrix
Sources: PM-WANI Scheme, Kenya USF Reports, Bangladesh She Power, Brazil LGPD, UNDP Digital Strategy
Table 2 outlines a structured action plan for implementing the D.I.G. framework. It provides a regionally adaptable roadmap that connects each focus area—Infrastructure, Capability, Governance, and Partnerships—with concrete, time-bound policy steps. The matrix emphasizes cross-sectoral collaboration and prioritizes both short-term readiness and long-term sustainability. For example, infrastructure equity can be addressed by subsidizing devices and expanding Wi-Fi networks, while ethical AI governance requires fairness audits and digital rights mechanisms.
Conclusion: A Policy Call to Action
The digital divide is no longer a silent chasm; it is a loud and growing fault line that cuts through the heart of the Global South's development trajectory. As digital technologies become increasingly important in health, education, employment, and governance, excluding billions is not only unjust, but also strategically dangerous.
Policymakers must broaden their definition of security to encompass digital dignity and equitable access. The cost of inaction is no longer theoretical: social unrest, misinformation, ineffective governance, and economic stagnation are already visible in digitally divided societies.
(Dr. M. Zaheer Ahmed is a senior government faculty member, e-learning strategist, and researcher working at the intersection of digital inclusion, sustainable development, and public policy serving as a Convenor of the Training and Placement Cell at Dr. Kalaignar M. Karunanidhi Government Institute for Post Graduate Studies and Research, Karaikal)