Ukraine’s survival can’t depend on Musk and Trump

Almost a fortnight on from the first signs that something was amiss with Ukraine’s access to the Starlink satellite network, the fog of war remains around what happened, why, and, more importantly, how it has altered the outcome of the conflict, according to The Independent.

Donald Trump’s account of events remains vague — but he did say that Elon Musk, whose SpaceX company owns the 10,000-plus satellites and their systems, had “put it back”. “It”, presumably, being the hitherto secure and reliable connections to both Starlink and its military variant, Starshield, both of which are heavily relied upon by the Ukrainian military.

Yet the government in Kyiv claims that things are not, in fact, back to normal: “As of this morning, instances of connectivity loss at speeds of 161 kmph are still being observed. There is currently no confirmation that these restrictions have been lifted,” says a spokesperson for the source in the Ukrainian Defence Ministry.

In recent days, there have been accusations that the White House decided to “throttle back” the speed at which the Musk satellite systems operated, which meant it was far harder to track Russian rocket-powered drones, and made even normal battlefield communications from a moving car difficult.

“Sources” have countered that it was Musk’s idea, and that the president endorsed it. Others say it was entirely a decision for Musk and his team, given that Musk owns the infrastructure. Those responsible may have grown impatient with President Zelensky and wanted to send him a message, pushing him towards peace talks and a surrender treaty that would end the war on Russian terms.

If so, then they have once again underestimated the Ukrainian spirit of resistance — because for Ukrainians, Russian occupation is guaranteed to be even more painful than the effort to sustain the fighting, even against the odds and without Starshield.

It seems to be a common misunderstanding in Washington, and one of many basic confusions. Indeed, secretary of state Marco Rubio even said the other day that Ukraine hadn’t enjoyed access to Starshield in the first place: “Starshield is a defence product, a military product. It’s not, at this moment, available to Ukraine, and that’s under consideration.”

No one in the US is taking responsibility for this man-made catastrophe, which is understandable, given how well supported the Ukrainian case is among American voters, and with the midterm elections to Congress imminent. Both the president and Mr Musk, who has ploughed a reported $445m (£332m) into the congressional campaigns of Maga Republicans, have a vested interest in plausible deniability.

In any case, the result has been the slaughter of yet more innocents in renewed attacks on the homes of Ukrainian people and the essential infrastructure that will sustain them in the coming winter — power and water supplies. Kyiv is a focus of Russian aggression, but nowhere is spared, and war crimes are routinely committed. How that pattern now continues is far from clear, but this is a moment to recognise certain obvious truths that these latest events painfully underline.

The fundamental learning is that it can be said with even more confidence that neither Musk nor President Trump want Ukraine to win — in stark contrast to the rest of what we used to call the West. The diesel deal, which enables Trump to receive Russian oil exports, and the lifting of other sanctions, also point that way.

Yet the continuing provision of US intelligence and, possibly, satellite communications does also suggest that they are not inclined to hand the Kremlin an easy win. But, either way, Ukraine and its more committed allies know that it is foolish to rely on capricious men in Washington to protect the independence of Ukraine.

It follows that Europe, with Ukraine, has to speed up alternatives to Starlink and Starshield. This is already underway, and Kyiv has become unequalled in its speed of military innovation, but, as ever, Europe is moving too slowly to prevent the ultimate catastrophe of a Russian victory entirely won by starving and freezing civilians rather than ground gained in the battlefield.

It is also obvious that something as vital as Starshield to the security of the West — and that includes the United States itself — cannot be controlled and deployed at the whim of one man, even if he happens to be the richest person on the planet.

The slow abandonment of Ukraine by the US is one of the most shameful and inexplicable episodes in US foreign policy since the end of the Second World War; and it is the defining geopolitical fact of life on the European continent. Only Europe can save Ukraine, and it will require a huge, and costly, technological effort to do so. Time for the “coalition of the willing”, if such a thing still has any meaning, to do what the Americans cannot or will not do.