Can Elon Musk be trusted to provide Starlink internet service in combat?

Founder of SpaceX Elon Musk’s Deny permission Ukraine U.S. Air Force Secretary Frank Frank said last September’s surprise attack on Russian forces in Crimea using Starlink Internet services raised questions about whether the U.S. military will need to be more explicit in future contracts about the services it purchases. Or the product could be used in the war, Kendall said Monday.

Excerpts from Musk’s new biography published by the Washington Post last week showed that Ukrainians requested Starlink support in September 2022 to attack Russian naval ships stationed in the port of Sevastopol in Crimea. Musk refused, fearing a Russian nuclear attack. Russia seized Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and claims it as its territory.

When Musk rejected the Crimea request, he did not sign a military contract. He has been providing free terminals to Ukraine in response to Russia’s February 2022 invasion. However, in the months since, the U.S. military has funded and formally contracted Starlink for continued support. The Pentagon did not disclose the terms or cost of the contract, citing operational security.

But the Pentagon’s reliance on SpaceX extends far beyond the Ukrainian response, and the uncertainty that Musk or any other commercial supplier might refuse to provide services in a future conflict is causing military planners of space systems to reconsider what needs to be articulated. Kendall spoke about the future agreement during a roundtable with reporters Monday at the Air Force Association convention in National Harbor, Maryland.

“If we’re going to rely on commercial architecture or commercial systems to operate, then we have to keep them available,” Kendall said. “We have to have it. Otherwise, they are a convenience in peacetime and maybe an economy, but in wartime they are not something we can rely on.”

SpaceX also has a contract to help the Air Force Air Mobility Command develop rocket ships that can quickly deliver military cargo to conflict zones or disaster zones, which could reduce the military’s reliance on slower aircraft or ships. Gen. Mike Minihan, head of Air Mobility Command, did not identify SpaceX specifically, but said, “U.S. industry must clearly understand its full purpose.”

As U.S. military investment in space has grown in recent years, concerns have focused on how to indemnify commercial suppliers if problems arise during launches, and whether the U.S. military has an obligation to protect those companies’ assets, such as satellites. or ground stations if they provide military support in a conflict.

Until Musk was rebuffed in Ukraine, there had been little focus on whether language would be required to say that companies providing military support in a war must agree that such support could be used in combat.

“We acquire the technology, we acquire the services, the platforms that are needed to serve the Air Force mission, or in this case the Department of the Air Force,” said Andrew Hunter, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics. “As such, we expect it will be used for Air Force purposes, including in support of combat operations when necessary.”

Svlook

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *