It is an explosive charge: Ukrainian troops claim Russia’s 83rd Air Assault Brigade dial-up Starlink phones to coordinate attacks in the country’s occupied territories.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX, which operates Starlink, denies it does business with Russia. If it finds any accounts registered by the Russian military, Musk vows to disable those accounts. Russia, too, denies that it is using Starlink, though Russian denials carry little credence.
Whatever the truth, Starlink’s potential misuse raises serious concerns about Internet infrastructure, more and more of which are privately built and run. Do we want to be in a position where a mercurial billionaire is in control of infrastructure at the center of a war? National governments must keep strong control over who should have access to sensitive, dual-use technologies.
The world needs to enforce and expand regulations for products operating in space. US companies (including Starlink) are subject to US regulation. Current satellite internet regulation is a hodgepodge of regulatory frameworks and agency guidelines.
Starlink is the poster child for reform. When Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia destroyed the military’s traditional Internet service. Kyiv reached out to Musk and asked for emergency Starlink shipments. Their impact on the battlefield was almost immediate. Ukrainian military regained access to the Internet – and were able to coordinate their defense and counterattack.
But Starlink has also been a source of political controversy. When Ukraine attempted to fly attack drones to hit targets in Crimea, Musk reportedly blocked service. The Ukrainian military was unable to access Starlink and the drones fell into the sea.
Although some public confusion ensued about whether Musk “shut off” Starlink, or simply never enabled it, the effect is the same. Musk insisted that he refused to activate Starlink in Crimea because Ukraine intended to launch an offensive attack against the Russian navy and that such an attack would violate Starlink’s terms of use limiting military use of the technology to defense.
The US Defense Department contracts Starlink to provide service in Ukraine. The contract terms are secret. If the Russian military is using Starlink, it could violate the agreement. The Defense Department should make clear what has happened.
The larger problem is that private companies control most of the internet infrastructure. Global Cloud Xchange, a subsidiary of the British company 3i Infrastructure, owns the Fiber-Optic Link Around the Globe (FLAG). In the United States, AT&T and Comcast control most domestic cable, in the ground. Laws protect against illegal uses such as cybercrime and child sexual abuse material. Although ways may exist to get around the controls, the problems caused by the technology aren’t going to change if the cable is publicly or privately controlled.
Starlink satellites are different. They are located in space, where jurisdiction remains murky. “Space Law” is defined by a set of treaties and United Nations regulations, but there isn’t at present a clear way to bring lawsuits or enforce claims under that law. The law focuses on where the companies are based; for Starlink, that’s the US, but it is an international company that does business around the world.
Although Musk maintains that Russians are not using Starlink, would he know if his company’s devices were purchased through a third party? Starlink has a responsibility to verify that the account buyer isn’t under sanctions. If someone buys a terminal and accounts and transfers them, it will violate Starlink’s terms of use.
But Starlink might not know. Russians may have used such a third party to purchase Starlink accounts. Starlink may not have known that they were selling to Russians, and it is unclear what responsibility the company has to vet accounts that are utilized in Russian-occupied regions.
Recent reports of American intelligence indicate that Putin is seriously considering putting nuclear weapons in space, to target satellite systems. Such a move would violate one of the tenets of Space Law, the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty, to which both Russia (via succession from the Soviet Union) and the United States are signatories. Unfortunately, it’s not clear how the treaty would be enforced against Russia.
We may not want to live in a world where infrastructure is privately controlled and where multinational companies make life-or-death decisions. But we live in that world. Private companies play a crucial role in ensuring technology remains accessible. The unanswered question is how to make sure they defend our national interest and do not aid our enemies.
Joshua Stein recently completed a postdoctoral fellowship at the Georgetown Institute for the Study of Markets and Ethics. His work focuses on ethics, technology, and economics.
Bandwidth is CEPA’s online journal dedicated to advancing transatlantic cooperation on tech policy. All opinions are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the position or views of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis.
