Starlink and Sovereignty

With all eyes on Gaza, Elon Musk garnered headlines when he met with the Israeli government over his offer to furnish international aid organizations in the Strip with access to his Starlink satellite internet service. The trip was overshadowed by his apparent endorsement of an anti-semitic conspiracy theory on X days earlier, but it was significant as the latest illustration of how sovereignty is shifting in a world where access to digital technology is critical for national security, economic development, and human rights. With more than 5,500 satellites in the sky and a planned network of 42,000, Starlink, owned by Musk’s company SpaceX, has no rivals at the moment, affording the mercurial tycoon an unprecedented level of global influence. 

The ability to provide broadband access to anyone, anywhere means political, economic, and national security power. For protestors in Iran cut off from the internet by their government, Starlink enables communication with the outside world and the ability to mobilize. For an internet cafe owner in South Africa, Starlink means the possibility of business success, despite the risk of fines from a national government that has outlawed the service. For Ukrainian soldiers in the field, it’s a vital lifeline, “the essential backbone of communication on the battlefield,” but also one that can potentially be cut off like a lightswitch.    

As these cases illustrate, satellite internet has the potential to affect the lives of billions around the world. It also raises bigger questions related to sovereignty in an age where private individuals control powerful new technologies that hover far above terrestrial, national borders: Who should own these tools? Whose interests should they serve? And who gets to decide how they are used?   

These questions will only become more urgent as national and corporate competitors race to catch up with Starlink. In October, Amazon’s Project Kuiper launched two satellites into low-earth orbit (LEO), the first prototypes of a planned 3,236 that will provide high-speed broadband to the earth below. The European companies OneWeb and Eutelsat merged in September to better compete with Starlink. China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp plans to launch the first of a planned 300 satellites this month. The Chinese government reportedly plans to launch a nearly 13,000-satellite constellation over the next decade. And the European Union is developing its own network of 170 satellites called IRIS. 

Consumer satellite internet has existed since 2003, but in its early years, service was unimpressive. Most satellites were in geostationary orbit—22,236 miles from the Earth’s surface—yielding speeds and latency (delays in data transmission) significantly worse than cable or fiber. The new wave of LEO satellites circumnavigates the Earth at a height of only 350 miles and below. Lower altitude means less geographic coverage and greater vulnerability to magnetic storms and disruptions from Earth’s gravitational pull. But LEO satellites are smaller and cheaper, and they provide latency and speed that rival cable and will approach fiber as the technology improves. The only infrastructure they need on the ground is a small transmitter, about the size of a laptop, enabling coverage in the most remote corners of the planet. 

This combination of speed, global reach, and increasing affordability make LEO satellites a reasonable vehicle for bridging the digital chasm between the haves and the have-nots, the 2.7 billion people around the globe who still lack internet access. Most of these people are in the developing world—only 40 percent of Africans are connected—and in rural areas, where connectivity is half of what it is in urban areas. Internet use is closely linked to wage growth and economic development. In sub-Saharan Africa, a one percentage point increase in the share of internet users in a population raises per capita GDP by as much as 0.4 percentage points, the International Monetary Fund estimates. As artificial intelligence accelerates, access to connectivity will become even more valuable for unlocking economic benefits. 

Beyond closing the digital divide, satellite internet also has the potential to support democratic activity and free expression. More governments, from China to Ethiopia to India, are censoring content, restricting information, and blocking access to parts of the global internet than ever before. Internet shutdowns are becoming more sophisticated and frequent, as a tool to stifle dissent, prevent political organizing, and control access to information. Rights advocates have cheered satellite internet as a way to circumvent government internet control and empower individuals.

So far, satellite internet has undermined the control of national governments—but rather than empower citizens, it has augmented the influence of private tycoons. During the war in Ukraine, the power to decide whether the Ukrainian military had the internet access they needed for battlefield communications rested solely with Elon Musk. Leaders in the Pentagon found themselves negotiating with Musk to ensure Starlink continued to provide service.  

These examples demonstrate how satellite internet is just another way that unaccountable technology companies are gaining greater influence over geopolitics, the global economy, and human political and social life. Many governments ban Starlink in their territories for this reason. Emerging competition from Amazon and other entrants to the market might dilute Musk’s control, but there is little reason to think these companies will prioritize universal access or human rights to a greater degree than SpaceX. Governments are getting into the game, too, but with the aim of strengthening national control over internet access, not delivering a global public good.

If deployed in the public interest, LEO satellite internet could politically and economically empower billions of people, especially the marginalized and repressed. But achieving that would take ambitious public–private partnerships and international cooperation on a massive scale. 

Large democracies, such as the G7, would benefit from launching such an effort. This might seem improbable in an era of high interest rates, debt overhangs, and costly international conflicts, but the world has come together before to carry out scientific and technological projects for the public good. Though primarily a research laboratory, CERN is an expensive international collaboration that has produced critical scientific breakthroughs in, among other areas, particle physics and computer science, including the development of the World Wide Web. The more ad hoc network of scientists, manufacturers, and governments that came together to create and produce COVID-19 vaccines is another example.

Universal internet access does not present the same urgent demand signal as a pandemic does, but the benefits to democratic governments would be profound. A satellite internet initiative would help build global trust in the international system. It would provide a redundant means of communications for the United States and its military allies. It would help democratic governments support populations in authoritarian countries. And in the long term, strengthening economic development globally could help reduce pressures for immigration and conflict.

If satellite internet continues on its current trajectory, an opportunity to combat global inequality and strengthen human rights, freedom of expression, and democracy will be missed. It is likely that children born today will never know a world when chains of fast-moving satellites did not crisscross the night sky. Who controls those satellites and for what purpose will help determine what kind of world that is.