Sure you can technically wall of a subset of it and live on your own, but why would any sane person want to? I mean I get it, they want to limit access to non ideologically compatible ideas, which is most of everything.
But then that severely limits the utility of their new internet. Right now the economy is coasting pretty heavily on oil exports. If unlike say Qatar, they don't invest massively in more long term sustainable economic growth (which tends to require education, hence Qatar's massive education boom) then in a bit they are going to be pretty screwed. And cutting off this access to information is just so short sighted.
It's like blinding yourself because right now you can afford the servants to take care of all your needs. Long term, when you run out of money, you might wish you had eyes so you could earn some new money.
Most importantly, your analogy misses the point about the Internet and the current power structure in Iran. If they do nothing to stem the free flow of information they will not be able to hold on to power long enough to run out of oil money. Comparing Qatar to Iran is apples to oranges. The political climate in Qatar is remarkably different than the political climate in Iran.
To a large extent your analysis is spot on. However you are assuming that the Iranian leadership is a semi-benevolent organization whose central goal is the betterment of the average Iranian's life. This is simply not the case in Iran. The Iranian leaders are more concerned with maintaining power and the destruction of Israel than they are with improving the lives of Iranians.
They had their license revoked after broadcasting a "confession" by Canadian journalist Maziar Bahari that was conducted after torturing him and under threat of execution.
Then they apparently admitted to being editorially controlled by their Iranian branch, who are not licensed to broadcast in the UK.
If they were any good at the international diplomacy soft power game they'd have just made sure only pro-Iranian people got hired to work at Press TV. Kind of like RT and Al Jazeera.
Nothing there is a condemnation of the West.
According to Wikileaks the West has been trying to remove Press TV's broadcast.
"Of course there was some physical torture. He beat me, hit me with a belt, punched and kicked me but to me the scarier parts were these conversations because I could see he had a very wrong view of the world.
If the answer is yes, don't you see a fatal flaw in such political programme?
"While foreign funding agencies have provided substantial support for the developers and vendors of services that facilitate the unfettered flow of information and opportunities for freedom of expression through the Internet, little consolidated knowledge exists on the basic communications network infrastructure of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In the absence open access and public data, rumors and fear have reigned supreme. During provisional research on the censorship regime of the government, we found initial indicators that telecommunications entities in Iran have leveraged private address spaces to build a mature information network only reachable within the country. Despite the clear political implications of the claim we put forward, particularly in light of rampant speculation regarding the mandate of Article 46 of the Fifth Five Year Development Plan to establish a ``national information network,'' we hestitate to engage in speculation regarding the purpose of this structure. Rather, in order to solicit critical feedback for future research, we outline our initial findings and attempt to demonstrate that the matter under contention is a nation-wide phenomenom that warrants broader attention."
So essentially, my argument is that the widescale routing of 10/8 subnets across domestic networks, coupled with domains pointed to these addresses, warrants serious attention.