What Are The Odds That Ukraine Is Allowed To Use Starlink Or Starshield Over All Of Russia?
Musk might understandably balk due to not wanting to provoke Putin into escalating out of self-defense in ways that risk World War III, but it remains unclear whether Trump shares his caution, though everything will likely become clearer in the next 100 days per Polish PM Tusk.
The Atlantic published a detailed report late last week about how “Zelensky Asked Trump for a Favor From Elon Musk”, with the subtitle reading that “Ukraine wants to start using Musk’s Starlink to target ballistic-missile launchers inside Russia.” Zelensky allegedly shared his proposal with Trump during last week’s White House meeting, pitching it as an alternative to receiving scarce Patriot missile interceptors by going after the source of Russia’s “systematic strikes” against Ukraine.
According to their sources, Musk snubbed Zelensky by declining his invitation to meet to discuss this proposal, while Trump was noncommittal about pressuring Musk into complying. The Atlantic also reported that “Zelensky suggested that if Musk refuses to allow the use of Starlink for strikes on Russia, the Pentagon could give Ukraine access to the Starshield network for the same purpose.” This is a sister system but “more expensive, more complicated, more difficult to integrate into [Ukraine’s] systems.”
One of their Ukrainian sources was skeptical that Trump would agree to Zelensky’s ‘Plan B’ because “It’s one thing to let Ukraine do this on its own territory. It’s another thing to use American technology on the territory of Russia to take out their air defenses, their launchers for ballistic missiles. This is an unfriendly act. I don’t know how Russia could react to that.” That’s a valid point since the deindustrialization and demilitarization of Russia that the West is now pursuing by Ukraine’s hand is extremely risky.
This latest phase in the ‘war of attrition’ that the US is waging against Russia after Trump’s recent decision to ‘escalate to de-escalate’ is already unprecedented in post-World War II history. If it succeeds in even partially deindustrializing and demilitarizing Russia, then Putin might finally snap and authorize even just symbolic action against NATO as the first step for restoring deterrence before this campaign brings his country to its knees. Everything could easily spiral out of control after that.
That scenario’s tripwire could be Ukraine’s use of Starlink or its sister system Starshield over all of Russia per Zelensky’s proposal due to the odds that such a move would greatly raise the success rate of his country’s drone strikes against strategic infrastructure and military targets alike. The Atlantic noted how Musk has been reluctant to play any role in escalating the conflict, so he might rebuff Zelensky, thus raising the question of whether Trump would overrule him by allowing Ukraine to use Starshield.
Apart from escalation-control reasons, Trump might eschew this for political ones, namely not wanting to get on Musk’s bad side and risk having him suppress the reach of top MAGA influencers on X ahead of November’s midterms or between then and the next elections in 2028 depending on the possible timing. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said last week that “the next 100 days may decide the outcome of this war, and it’s a 50/50 chance”, with Trump, Musk, and “some other people” playing pivotal roles in this.
This suggests that he’s aware of Zelensky’s plans and believes that they’ll lead to Russia’s capitulation if Musk approves Ukraine’s use of Starlink over all of Russia or Trump overrules his refusal by allowing Ukraine to use Starshield for that purpose instead. Musk might understandably balk due to not wanting to provoke Putin into escalating out of self-defense in ways that risk World War III, but it remains unclear whether Trump shares his caution, though everything will likely become clearer in the next 100 days.
Given Russia's passivity in the face of NATO's openly admitted involvement in the killing of Russian military personnel and, above all, Russian civilians, and the destruction of Russian strategic infrastructure, one is entitled to ask a question. What if? Let's step back a little. NATO thinks it has put the Russian frog in a pot of lukewarm water that it is gradually heating up. What if? What if Russia is forcing NATO to reveal everything it has in store, and is learning to counter it with the aim of a possible major confrontation? What have we been witnessing for four years? Russia is forcing NATO to roll out an increasingly sophisticated arsenal and is finding its flaws. All the usual weapons have found their countermeasures, and most of them, supposedly terrifying, have turned out to be expensive, complex, fragile gadgets, unsuited to high-intensity warfare. We know that the Russians do not have the same media-driven fear of human losses. What if Russia is learning NATO? Question: how is the Russian public taking Putin's passivity in the face of the now daily killing of Russian civilians, with no other response than to go and shell Ukrainian beet fields?
«This is an unfriendly act. I don’t know how Russia could react to that.»
The U.S., using ISR, has consistently enabled Ukrainian drone and missile strikes on sensitive Russian targets for years—not least its nuclear triad (Operation Spiderweb). Moscow did not react to Storm Shadows, ATACMs, or Baltic drones, all of which qualify, along with the latest hits, as "unfriendly acts". The U.S. can hardly be deterred from further escalation, given Putin's tepid response and Trump's history of overcoming his own reluctance or vow(s).