 | (Source: Le courrier des entreprises) |
| Quick reminder on the Starlink system | Starlink is a satellite internet system. It is operated by SpaceX. It uses thousands of satellites placed in low Earth orbit. It provides high-speed internet almost anywhere on the planet. The process is simple. A Starlink terminal facing the sky gives access to the internet. Starlink was meant to be as a technological solution for remote areas. But it has become a key geopolitical tool. | Starlink's role in crisis and wars | The war in Ukraine was a shift. It showed how a private company could have direct influence on a crisis. Russia's attacks had damaged or destroyed networks in Ukraine. At the beginning of the war, SpaceX delivered thousands of terminals to Ukraine's forces. This played a key role. Terminals allowed the government, forces, and civilians to stay connected and coordinate action. It supported battlefield communication, drone operations and emergency services. | But few months after, Musk warned that SpaceX could not finance Ukraine forever. Indeed, he argued that Starlink wasn't meant to have war purposes. Disruptions on the network followed. But an agreement was made with the U.S. to pursue the service. SpaceX also once cut coverage in some areas. It was to prevent Ukraine from launching a subsea drone attack on the Russian fleet in the Black Sea. SpaceX was worried that such a strike could trigger a nuclear response by Russia. It also refused to extend its services to territories occupied by Russia. This raises the question of dependance on a private actor. | | | | Trump's Exec Order #14154 — A "Millionaire-Maker"
Donald Trump has cheated death.
He's overcome insane and criminal vote rigging.
And survived every indictment and impeachment thrown at him.
But his next move could make him a legend – and perhaps the most popular president in U.S. History.
Former Presidential Advisor, Jim Rickards says, "Trump is on the verge of accomplishing something no President has ever done before."
And if he's successful, it could kick off one of the greatest wealth booms in history.
We recently sat down with Rickards to capture all the key details on tape.
For the moment, you can watch this interview free of charge – just click here. |
|
| | Ukraine is not the only crisis where Starlink had an impact. Starlink restored internet in Iran. The regime shut down internet in the context of the protests. Anyone owning a terminal could freely access the network to organize the protests. It was also crucial for people to share images and testify. It is hard to know exactly how many people have access to this tool. Some estimates say there could be up to 100 thousand terminals in the country. | But the regime took actions against the owners and the terminals. Starlink counters the internet shutdown, eases communications and exchanges with rest of the world. That is a problem for the regime. But it is also illegal in Iran. Indeed, last year, the regime passed a law making it illegal to have a terminal. Doing so can be sentenced by prison time. | The regime used jamming devices to prevent the use of internet. It also used drones above roofs to identify terminals and their users. It managed to disrupt the network in some areas. But a complete shutdown is difficult. | Challenges for sovereignty and independence | The role played by Starlink in Ukraine and then Iran raises questions. First, governments lose their power to enforce internet shutdowns during crises, protests, or conflicts. Second, legal authority becomes unclear. A foreign private company can deliver strategic services without being physically present. For authoritarian states, this is a direct challenge to control. For democratic states, it raises questions about regulation and accountability. In Iran, it allows communication within the country and with the outside world. This is crucial for oppressed populations. There are no doubts that this is a good thing. The question is more about how a private actor can bypass a state decision. | At the same time, Starlink creates new forms of dependence. States, militaries, and NGOs that rely on Starlink become dependent. And they are dependent on a system they do not own or fully control. Decisions about access, coverage, pricing, or restrictions are made by a private company. This company can be influenced by business interests. Or even by political pressure from its home state. | This can be seen in Ukraine. Starlink provides crucial services. This allows the state to pursue its war. It also maintains communication for civilians and emergency services. But it makes the states heavily dependent on a private actor. As seen, Ukraine's actions can be restrained by SpaceX decisions. It forces to choose between protecting sovereignty and accepting dependence in exchange for resilience. | A new form of U.S. influence | Starlink belongs to a private company. But its use strengthens the U.S. global influence. It gives a new form of influence that does not rely on treaties, military bases, or direct diplomatic pressure. Its global satellite network often aligns with American strategic interests. It supports allies and maintains connectivity in crisis zones. But it also weakens authoritarian control over information. This creates a form of indirect power. On the one hand, the U.S. benefits from technological dominance. But on the other, it does not formally control or fully take responsibility for the consequences. | Decoding geopolitics isn't a job. It's survival. | Joy |
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Keep a civil tongue.