As Heather Cox Richardson reported in her Letter from an American, overnight:
According to Ukrainian presidential advisor Serhiy Beskrestnov, last night, without warning, Elon Musk's SpaceX restricted the speed limits for the Starlink terminals Ukraine's military uses, known as Starshield, debilitating Ukraine's drones even as Russian forces launched strikes against Ukraine's energy and critical infrastructure—the very infrastructure Trump said must be left alone.
Think about that for a moment. A man perhaps best known for his instability, support for far-right causes, and his penchant for disruption, who appears, once again, to be back in President Trump's Republican fold, has appeared to use his corporate power to support attacks by Russia on Ukraine by potentially removing Ukraine's ability to operate some of the drones that are now an important part of its air defences.
It is, of course, true that anyone, anywhere, who has studied war and how it is engaged in will appreciate that the interests and power of corporate enterprise are intimately connected to the ways in which wars are conducted. It would be extraordinarily naive to deny this. However, those interventions have usually related to the production of weaponry and other supplies, from which fortunes are usually made.
I suspect there are those who would argue otherwise, but what strikes me as quite exceptional about Starshield's denial of access to critical facilities to Ukraine during the course of not just war, but actual attacks, is that this might represent the use of corporate power to now actively intervene in the conduct of a war in a way very obviously intended to influence its outcome. That influence could benefit Russia. At the same time, it supports Donald Trump's position. It exposes Ukraine to considerable risk. It undermines the positions of NATO, Europe, and the UK.
As a consequence, corporate power is behaving as if it is a direct party to war and an active commander in combat. Is that unprecedented? I suspect not, given the long history of mercenaries, but this iteration might be, one prior case involving SpaceX, recorded by Reuters, having been noted.
So too might this expression of the power of the world's ultra-wealthy be unprecedented, to date.
Everyone knows of these people's influence on government, and there are few signs that they use that influence with benign intent. Now, however, we appear to have confirmation of its malignancy.
What does this imply? First, it indicates that there is a dispute over this issue between the White House and Musk.
There is considerable confusion over responsibility for the restrictions, with Musk pointing to US government control of Starshield while White House officials have reportedly denied having control over SpaceX.
Musk suggests as a result that the systems used by Ukraine are under the control of the US government. Trump has denied that and appears to blame Musk.
This incoherence does, in itself, suggest the dangers of permitting excessive power to rest in the hands of a few exceptionally privileged people who prioritise their own agendas rather than those of wider communities.
Second, the indication is very clear that the control of quasi-monopolistic, or in this case, actual monopolistic power over critical state functions being in the hands of individuals is wholly inappropriate when the services supplied are essential to well-being. This example may be extreme, but it is hardly unusual. Just look at the role of Palantir inside the UK government now, and this dependency is very obvious, and I have no more confidence in Peter Thiel than I do in Elon Musk.
What is the answer to this? It is not, I suggest, a wealth tax, although we very obviously need to tax those with wealth a great deal more if we are to control their power within the world economy. Instead, the need is for the state to exercise its power, particularly over marketplaces, more thoroughly.
One of the major themes that I address in the book I am currently writing, called How to Govern, is that neoliberal governments have forgotten the powers that are available to them to create well-being. One of those powers is the ability to set the rules of marketplaces. There is nothing natural about modern marketplaces. They are human constructs. They can only exist if effectively regulated. Monopoly is always an abuse of them. Control of it is, therefore, essential.
President Teddy Roosevelt understood this well in the early 20th century, when he tackled the monopoly abuse of those then described as the robber barons, who exploited their power over oil, steel, and railways to extract value from the people of the USA. His courage demonstrated that this power could be challenged and constrained.
We need to see evidence of that courage again now. A situation where someone like Elon Musk might have that influence over war is unacceptable. The need for the containment of that power is vital.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Taken in conjunction with everything else Trump has done and said regarding Russia, this latest piece of evidence would be enough to prove that he(Trump) is complicit in Putin’s war crimes. If he were a Russian asset, he would have acted exactly as he has done. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.
Of course, he won’t be called out as such, for fear of reprisals. I’m afraid we have a US President showing increasing signs of mental instability and nobody has the courage to stand up to him. Thankfully, we have the half-term elections in November ( which may yet be sabotaged by Trump); a Democrat victory should, in theory, severly restrict the President’s palpable madness.
‘The need for the containment of that power is vital.’
This is what the extreme liberalism of Neo-liberalism has sought to hide for years. And I still think that traditional Liberalism still ignores the reality of human weakness/bad behaviour especially these days of the monied and powerful. It has developed a blind spot.
With regard to this action though, this is a despicable act as far as I am concerned. The hostility is palpable. For the rest of the world, it is IFAD – Independence From America Day surely? Lets invest, lets get it done.
Independence from the USA (and Russia) is a position pushed by the democratic socialist left since 1980s. This is an extreme position according to UK government. Too many pockets filled, too many corporate jobs awaiting, a polity corrupt as hell.
Trump is desperate to reduce fuel prices at the pump in the US before the mid-terms. He very mistakenly blames Kiev for recent price increases after their bombing of Russian refineries, an accusation that pales into insignificance compared to the consequences of the Middle East catastrophe. There is a certain stupid chain of reasoning (I won’t call it logic) that says if we stop Ukraine from attacking Russia, diesel prices in Kentucky will fall, and will fall before November 3rd. Of course it makes no sense but at this stage I don’t think we’re expecting that much sense. And neither Trump nor his inner circle care anything about Ukrainian lives.
Much to agree with
If Elon Musk sat down in Trafalgar Square holding a cardboard placard saying, “I support Russian aggression – stop the sanctions now!” – would he be arrested? Of course not. Arrest and prosecution is for small people.
I share these links, fully aware of how morally and politically complex this issue is. The Iran-USA-Israel-Starlink story is a very murky one, with echoes of Ukraine’s Maidan protests and subsequent regime change, depending on whose accounts you read and believe.
https://newcoldwar.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/The-far-right-the-Euromaidan-and-the-Maidan-massacre-in-Ukraine.pdf
https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/israel-smuggled-starlink-systems-into-iran-former-pm-says-2026-06-23/
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/10/14/iran-targets-starlink-as-tool-of-war-with-hints-at-internet-restrictions
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2026/01/13/kill-switch-iran-shuts-down-starlink-internet-for-first-time/
Thank you
Given that Putin targets civilians and therefore is, on the face of it, committing war crimes, might there be an argument that Musk is facilitating Putin by his Starshield denial of access? If so, arguably Musk could be charged as an accomplice. Unlike Putin or Trump, Musk would not be able to argue for some form of sovereign immunity.
An interesting idea.
Couple of realities.
1. The restriction does not have much impact on the front line since drones there, for the most part use speeds of less than 150kph.
2. The restriction DOES have an impact on the ability WITHIN Ukraine to use high speed interceptor drones wrt jet-powered Gerans.
3. The restriction has zero impact on long range strikes (but DOES have an impact on medium-range ones = logistics behind the front).
4. The Ukrainians are already……………..I don’t want to spoil the surprise waiting for the Russians and the two Putin-lovers, Musk and tRump (aka Krasov – his file name in the FSB).
Lesson for the EU & UK – the need for complete detachment from ALL US weapons systems (& intelligence) is now very clear. Only a fool/tRump-lover would buy US weapon systems. Time Europe stood on its own two feet and also kicked out most/all US financial orgs and companies (looking at you Goldman-Sucks). Europe has been a “play-ground” for the USA for more than a century. It is time this stopped. & given the fact that the US embassy in Berlin spied on Merkel (& her mobile phone) there is an argument for the closure of ALL US embassies – reduce them to a two or three person operation.
I agree with the lesson for the UK
We need to have as little interaction with US tech as possible for critical systems
But where is the investment an MMT government deliver a result?
I suggest that the lesson be re-phrased to:
“Complete detatchment from US. (fullstop)”
I realise that’s not possible, even in the longterm, but my thought is that if we can break a link, then we should. After all, every link is a potential pressure point in the future.
Why make our lives difficult?
As a person old enough to have practiced “*Bomb Threat” drills in elementary school, I only have a one word comment: DISGUSTING!
*Bomb Threat drills went on in the school system I attended until 1975. Older schools built pre-1960 had bomb shelters. These shelters are now used as tornado shelters with the requisite “Tornado Drills”.
Wow
We didn’t have them
We were, however, told to shelter under the stairs in case of a nuclear attack.
I have never trusted patronising goverbnment ever since. That was obviously crass when I was young. Why did they say it?
In fairness it should be pointed out that Mr Musk denies that he ordered downgrading Starshield for Ukraine. Apparently Starshield is separate from the commercial Starlink and is controlled by the US government and the Pentagon.
I don’t know whether that’s true but, if so, it’s Trump not Musk. That seems plausible because Trump has never liked Zelensky since he refused to instigate an investigation into Hunter Biden to discredit the Democrats. There have been plenty of incidents since to confirm that. Most recently Zelensky has not obeyed Trump in stopping attacks on Russian oil so obviously Zelensky needs to be punished (and to hell with Ukraine). I think is as simple as that, Trump is punishing Zelensky for disobeying him. Trump is losing it. He may genuinely believe that degrading Russian refineries is putting up the price of US diesel. He can’t face looking in the mirror to see who really caused the price increase.
But, in line with other comments, yes the UK should disengage from the US as much as possible. France, The Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and Denmark, are moving away from Microsoft office suite for government. It is entirely possible. Germany, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg have launched Wero to circumvent US payment systems. Spain, Italy, Portugal, Poland, Norway, and more, joined forces under the European Network for Payments (ENP) joint venture, based in Madrid, to establish an independent financial infrastructure. We should do the same. We can’t afford to be dependent on the US for anything if we can avoid it.
I noted the confusion on this issue.
I note Robert Reich does not believe there is any this morning.
Trump also denied it, if he can be believed.
Can’t disagree with Robert Reich, “both Musk and Trump are loathsome human beings.”
Full service appears to have been restored on Starshield, which is interesting. Both Musk and Trump are distancing themselves from the downgrade. It seems there are limits to what that loathsome pair can do in the face of public, and congressional, opinion. Meanwhile there have been suggestions that it may have been due to a Russian hacking operation – now there’s a convenient shapegoat.
This list of US near-monopolies is far from complete.
VISA
MASTERCARD
PAYPAL
STRIPE
MICROSOFT
APPLE
ALPHABET/GOOGLE
X
META
PALANTIR
BOEING
TRIDENT MISSILES
AMERICA’S CLIENT STATES (ISRAEL -Pharmecuticals, Surveillance spyware, Weapons/Drones/Battlefield AI, Hasbara – GULF STATES – Oil, LPG, Premier League Football)
There’s quite a lot of work still to do, especially with regard to non-US card providers & payment systems, within the UK. With software, the picture is more hopeful as alternatives are growing in popularity, and are much more user friendly than they used to be – GUI is no longer a dirty word.
Agreed.
I am making a video on this for the weekend.