2LT International News

KYIV, Ukraine: In late September 2022, during a crucial phase of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to reclaim territory from Russian forces, Elon Musk issued an order that disrupted military operations and undermined Kyiv’s confidence in Starlink, the satellite internet network that had been vital to Ukraine’s battlefield communications.

According to three individuals with direct knowledge of the situation, Musk instructed a senior SpaceX engineer at the company’s California headquarters to disable Starlink coverage in several contested areas, including the strategic Kherson region in southern Ukraine.

“We have to do this,” engineer Michael Nicolls reportedly told colleagues after receiving Musk’s directive. In response, SpaceX staff deactivated service to over 100 Starlink terminals, turning large swaths of the front line dark on the company’s internal coverage maps. The shutdown extended to parts of Donetsk province in eastern Ukraine, also under Russian occupation.

The abrupt blackout left Ukrainian forces without a critical communications infrastructure. According to a Ukrainian military official, a defense advisor, and two soldiers near the affected zones, the sudden loss of Starlink paralyzed operations. Drones used for reconnaissance fell silent, and artillery units, dependent on satellite internet to calibrate and coordinate long-range fire, struggled to operate effectively.

As a result, Ukraine’s attempt to encircle Russian forces in the town of Beryslav, just east of the regional capital Kherson, was derailed. “The encirclement stalled entirely,” the military official recounted. “It failed.”

Although Ukraine eventually succeeded in liberating Beryslav, Kherson city, and additional areas from Russian control, Musk’s decision to limit Starlink access marked a significant and previously unreported intervention. It was the first known instance of Musk actively cutting off satellite coverage over an active war zone. This move startled some within SpaceX and raised ethical questions about the role of a private individual in shaping the trajectory of a sovereign conflict.

“This decision effectively gave Musk the power to alter the course of the war,” one of the three sources said.

The revelation challenges Musk’s public narrative about Starlink’s operations in Ukraine. In a March 2024 post on X, the social media platform he owns, Musk wrote: “We would never do such a thing,” in response to claims that he had denied service on the battlefield. Neither Musk nor Nicolls responded to detailed requests for comment from Reuters.

In an email, a SpaceX spokesperson called the reporting “inaccurate,” referring journalists to a prior company statement on X that read: “Starlink is fully committed to providing service to Ukraine.” The spokesperson did not specify what aspects of the report were incorrect, nor did they address detailed questions about the company’s involvement in the conflict.

The Ukrainian government, including President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s office and the Ministry of Defence, did not respond to requests for comment. Publicly, Ukraine continues to rely on Starlink for some military communications, and Zelenskiy has thanked Musk for the service as recently as 2024.

It remains unclear why Musk chose to disable the service at that specific time. The three sources familiar with the order believe Musk acted out of concern that further Ukrainian gains could provoke a nuclear response from Russia, fears he would later express publicly. One source said the outage began on September 30, 2022, while the others placed it around that same timeframe. A former White House staff member confirmed that some senior U.S. officials shared Musk’s apprehension about possible Russian escalation.

Musk’s influence over Starlink, a privately owned but strategically vital technology, has raised increasing concerns about the intersection of private enterprise, geopolitics, and warfare. His ability to unilaterally decide the availability of internet access during a major military campaign underscores the extent to which corporate actors can now shape events on the global stage.