The drone has become the signature weapon of the Russo-Ukraine war. On any day in Ukraine, tens of thousands of drones are out hunting the battlefield for targets. These could be individual enemy soldiers or vehicles, or they could be larger targets such as depots, headquarters, bridges or power plants. Yet, this drone war has […]
The post When the US slows down Starlink in Ukraine appeared first on Asia Times.
Ukraine’s operation to strike Russian targets at operational and strategic depth is continuing, Unmanned Systems Forces Commander Robert “Madiar” Brovdi said. He listed data centers, military and strategic sites, and energy hubs “deep in the swamps,” his usual name for Russia.
The fresh statement lands amid fears that a Starlink disruption could break front-line operations.
Overnight into 14 October, the 7th Air Assault Corps said the faster StarShield military package, an advanced version of Starlink that its units depend on, had been throttled, halting a series of missions. Against that backdrop, Brovdi says his branch’s strikes are not falling.
“A serious brawl is underway in conditions of significantly worse weather, drizzle, fog, and precipitation,” Brovdi says, underscoring that the pace held through conditions that usually ground drones.
Over the first two weeks of October, the drone branch verified 7,306 Russian soldiers killed or wounded, up 59.45% on the same period in August and 24.65% in September, he writes on his Telegram page, calling the trend the opposite of de-escalation.
One sector stands out above the rest. On the Dobropillia-Pokrovsk axis, in the zone of the Azov group, the branch’s drones accounted for 3,221 Russian losses in the first two weeks of October, a 102% jump on August and 42.5 percent on September, Brovdi reports.
The figures cover only the drone branch and are verified in the military’s Delta, the video fixation system, he stresses, so the full count of Russian losses across all Ukrainian forces can be much higher.
The numbers behind the claim are large. Over the first two weeks of October, the branch flew 124,500 combat missions, strike and reconnaissance, and hit 32,172 Russian targets, of which manpower was 22.7%, by his count.
That works out to about 2,298 Russian targets a day, he adds, the kind of tempo that makes any talk of a lull on the front hard to square with what his drones are recording. The deep-strike half of that campaign has grown 1,150% over 2026, reaching military-industrial and energy sites far inside Russia, according to Euromaidan Press.
Tech billionaire Elon Musk wrote on X on 15 October: “And so the slaughter continues … Time for Zelensky to go.” Four days earlier, he had posted that Zelenskyy had gone too far, after US President Donald Trump said it was time for Ukraine to get a new president. Asked by Morgan on 14 October whether he would resign, Zelenskyy said he would not: “It’s my responsibility.”
Musk’s post comes as Washington squeezes Kyiv instead of Moscow: Ukraine’s military satellite links slowed, US missile warnings went missing, and the US threatened to cut intelligence unless Kyiv stops hitting Russian refineries.
Zelenskyy said elections could not be held under constant Russian attack: “From the point of security, you can’t do elections.”
Of any future president, he said: “I’m sure the new man or woman will defend our country.” He also reminded Trump that Crimea and parts of Donbas were already occupied when he took office, under another president, long before the full-scale invasion.
“I’m a realist, and I understand that people are more important than one kilometer or two kilometers. It’s not about kilometers. It’s about land and homes,” he told Morgan.
Zelenskyy has said Ukraine is ready for elections if a full 60-day ceasefire is in place. Numerous sources told The Atlantic that Trump sees Zelenskyy as the main obstacle to a peace deal and related business deals with Russia. One Trump adviser said he is also an obstacle to Trump’s hopes for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Ukrainian forces reported restrictions on Starshield, the SpaceX satellite system they use for battlefield communications and drone operations, and Zelenskyy warned the decision would cost lives. On 14 October, Musk said Starshield is owned and controlled by the US government, which sets its limits, and that commercial Starlink cannot be used for offensive military action. Zelenskyy told the FT he did not know whether the decision was SpaceX’s or the US government’s, adding: “I think it’s about SpaceX.” A senior US official told Axios the Trump administration had nothing to do with the restrictions.
On two consecutive nights, air raid alerts in Kyiv sounded only after Russian ballistic missiles were already approaching or striking the capital. Zelenskyy said Ukraine received no warning from partners of the launches on 12 and 13 October, which hit civilian infrastructure and a major power plant. A Ukrainian official told CNN the loss of intelligence “will give Russians a real leverage on a frontline.” A European official questioned Washington’s explanation that weather caused the gaps in missile warnings. Trump denied halting intelligence sharing.
Washington had warned it could suspend intelligence sharing if Ukraine kept striking Russian refineries, Axios reported. A US official disputed that any explicit threat was made. Sources told CNN the US had also threatened to halt European purchases of US weapons for Ukraine. Zelenskyy told the FT the warning came through military channels.
To lower energy costs before next month’s midterm elections, Trump has pressed Kyiv to stop refinery strikes, CNN reported. Zelenskyy said he felt betrayed after Trump announced a diesel supply deal with Russia. On 14 October in London, he told the FT that Ukraine would resume strikes on Russian oil refineries.
Ukrainian officials contacted the White House, CIA, and Pentagon after the restrictions, which Ukraine says affected both Starlink and Starshield, Axios reported on 14 October. A senior US official told Axios the Trump administration had nothing to do with the restrictions. On the same day, Elon Musk said on X that Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government, and that any speed or usage limits are decided by the US military and ultimately the president.
The restrictions could affect Ukraine’s ability to intercept Russian attack drones and carry out mid-range strikes against Russian forces and military targets in occupied Ukrainian territories. A speed cap of 160 km/h was insufficient to intercept some jet-powered drones, an unnamed Ukrainian official told Axios. Ukrainian officials told Axios they suspect SpaceX imposed the restrictions to pressure Kyiv to accept US President Donald Trump’s demand to stop striking Russian oil refineries, though the motive remains unconfirmed. But Starlink does not work inside Russia, and the drones attacking Russian oil facilities use other communications systems, according to Reuters.
Musk did not directly address the throttling, Axios noted. Starlink, he wrote, “is a commercial service owned and controlled by SpaceX,” limited to civilian or defensive use.
White House officials told the Ukrainians they don’t have control over SpaceX, two sources told Axios. One said the administration would reach out to SpaceX to figure out what happened. The White House did not immediately respond to Axios’s request for comment.
Presidential adviser Serhii Beskrestnov said on 14 October that SpaceX had imposed a 160 km/h limit on Starshield’s “military package” overnight without warning. Ukraine’s 7th Rapid Reaction Corps said mid-range strike drones must reach high speed quickly and that an unstable connection “will make it impossible to launch such aircraft or use them as intended.” One unit on the Huliaipole front had to cancel some missions, the corps told Novynarnia.
Ukrainian officials told Axios the system turned off when drones exceeded 160 km/h, and sometimes 80 km/h, before service was partially restored on 14 October. The Defense Ministry said SpaceX continues to restrict Starlink to 160 km/h and that it remains in communication “with partners and SpaceX regarding stable service conditions and the prevention of sudden restrictions,” Axios reported.
The restrictions followed Trump’s 9 October deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin easing sanctions on Russian diesel. A day later, Trump told reporters: “We said you could do whatever you want to Russia, don’t hit the refineries,” the Kyiv Independent reported.
Ukraine will resume strikes on Russian oil refineries, ending a three-day pause it held at Washington’s request, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told the Financial Times in an interview published on 15 October. Russia kept bombing Ukraine’s energy system throughout the pause, while Kyiv lost US missile warnings and its Starlink service slowed. Zelenskyy said Ukraine would halt energy strikes again only in exchange for more US air defense.
Ukraine's deep-strike campaign targets the Russian oil industry, which fuels Russia's army in Ukraine and earns the export revenue funding the war. Striking the plants that turn Russian crude into fuel, 12 of them hit in September alone, is one of the few levers Kyiv controls on Moscow’s war income. US President Donald Trump has blamed those strikes for higher US fuel prices, which most analysts attribute to the Iran war, and Washington has threatened to withhold intelligence, and reportedly weapons, unless Kyiv gives it up. Each step Washington takes toward Moscow, from fuel waivers to talk of frozen assets, widens the gap Europe and Ukraine must fill, while Russia gains revenue and time to keep striking.
Zelenskyy said he stopped the refinery strikes for three days to meet US wishes, but Russia kept hitting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure and killing civilians. During the pause, Ukraine received no US warnings of ballistic missile launches, he said. Starlink also slowed across the country, hampering front-line operations and mid-range strikes on Russian military targets, he added.
Russia used those days to fire 39 ballistic missiles and more than 120 drones at Ukraine’s grid overnight into 14 October, leaving at least 600,000 people without power. “We hold energy ceasefire from our side,” Zelenskyy told Piers Morgan on 14 October. Of the Starlink slowdown, he added: “I’m sure that they knew what they did.”
Ukraine could again stop hitting Russian energy only if it receives more US interceptors for its Patriot systems, Zelenskyy told the FT. He warned that a halt could simply invite more US-Russia deals that feed Russia’s war machine, and predicted the next one would involve gas.
US intelligence officials had warned Ukraine’s embassy in Washington that a new strike on Russia’s energy facilities would end all intelligence sharing at once, The Washington Post reported, citing a person familiar with the matter. Washington has not fully cut it off, but the threat stands, the person said. Trump said on 13 October that the US was still sharing intelligence.
A senior US official told Axios the administration had nothing to do with the Starlink limits, which Elon Musk had blamed on the US military. The administration is also considering easing sanctions on shadow fleet tankers, which have carried oil from Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, so the blacklisted vessels could haul non-sanctioned cargo, a US official told Reuters. The US Energy Department said the move would not help Russia ship its oil or fuel.
Washington eased sanctions on Russian oil this spring, after which Russia’s oil income jumped $890 million in a week, and it extended that waiver despite telling allies it would not. US envoys also proposed unfreezing part of Russia’s frozen assets to lure Moscow back to talks, an idea European officials rejected, the Financial Times reported.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has abandoned much of the diplomatic restraint that characterised his dealings with Donald Trump since their confrontation in the Oval Office in February 2025. In an interview on 14 October, the Ukrainian president accused his American counterpart of moving towards Russia and choosing the wrong side of history.
His intervention followed a series of American decisions that have increased pressure on Kyiv while offering Moscow economic and diplomatic advantages. A controversial agreement involving Russian diesel exports, uncertainty surrounding the provision of American intelligence and sudden restrictions on military satellite communications have brought relations between the two countries to their most difficult point since Trump’s return to the White House.
Zelenskyy’s criticism was unusually personal. Questioned about whether he felt betrayed by Washington’s recent decisions, he acknowledged the sense of betrayal but emphasised that Ukraine’s survival could not be treated as a commercial negotiation. He said Ukraine was not selling its country and argued that an American president claiming to act as an intermediary must not favour one of the belligerents.
The shift reflects the apparent exhaustion of a strategy Kyiv has pursued for more than a year: avoid openly challenging Trump, maintain personal contact with the White House and hope that American support can be preserved through diplomatic accommodation. That calculation is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain as Washington’s demands threaten to constrain Ukraine’s military operations without producing corresponding concessions from Russia.
The immediate demonstration of Ukraine’s dependence on American technology came during the night of 13–14 October, when SpaceX imposed restrictions on Starshield, the military-grade version of its Starlink satellite communications service.
According to accounts provided by Ukrainian frontline commanders, the changes disrupted connections to terminals travelling above approximately 160 kilometres per hour, forcing the abandonment of several drone missions. The restrictions affected systems used for reconnaissance, interception and strikes against Russian military targets.
As EU Today reported on 14 October, the disruption exposed a weakness extending beyond individual drone missions. Satellite communications form part of Ukraine’s operational infrastructure, supporting the movement of battlefield information, remote weapons control and communications across areas where conventional networks are vulnerable to Russian electronic warfare.
An interruption imposed remotely by a commercial provider can therefore affect military capabilities without any physical attack on Ukrainian equipment. Decisions taken outside Ukraine’s military command structure can alter the effectiveness of systems already deployed on the battlefield.
Ukraine’s Defence Ministry subsequently opened discussions with American officials, SpaceX and NATO partners while examining alternative communications arrangements.
Later on Wednesday, former Ukrainian defence minister Mykhailo Fedorov announced that Starlink functionality at speeds up to 160 kilometres per hour was being restored. Work was still required to remove the restrictions on Starshield altogether. The partial reversal offered immediate operational relief but did not resolve the underlying dependency.
There is no established evidence that the Trump administration ordered SpaceX to impose the restrictions. Nevertheless, their timing, amid mounting disagreements over Ukraine’s military operations, has reinforced Kyiv’s concerns about relying on communications infrastructure controlled by an American company.
The dispute over satellite access coincides with growing uncertainty about American intelligence cooperation.
Following Russian ballistic missile strikes on Kyiv on 12–13 October, Zelenskyy complained that Ukraine had received no advance warning from its international partners. The attacks damaged residential buildings and energy infrastructure, while Ukraine’s authorities raised concerns about the absence of advance intelligence.
Advance information about Russian missile launches is particularly important when ballistic weapons leave civilians only minutes to reach shelters. Intelligence cooperation also supports Ukrainian air-defence units in assessing threats and preparing interceptions.
Trump denied on 13 October that Washington had stopped sharing intelligence with Ukraine. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha likewise confirmed that cooperation continued. The absence of warnings about particular attacks therefore cannot be equated with a complete suspension of American assistance.
Yet the consequences of unreliable warning arrangements remain serious. For Ukraine, the distinction between information withheld, delayed or simply unavailable offers little protection when Russian ballistic missiles reach civilian neighbourhoods without sufficient warning.
The wider concern is that intelligence provision could become another instrument of diplomatic pressure. Accounts of negotiations over Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries have raised the possibility that Washington might use such assistance as leverage. Reports of explicit threats have been disputed, but the controversy has increased uncertainty surrounding a capability central to Ukraine’s defence.
The confrontation has also exposed a contradiction in Washington’s approach to the war.
Trump’s agreement allowing Russian diesel to return to international markets offers Moscow additional export opportunities at a time when Ukrainian attacks have damaged refining capacity and disrupted domestic fuel supplies.
The American administration has justified the arrangement partly through the need to ease fuel prices. Yet the initially announced quantities are modest in relation to international petroleum markets, raising questions about how much immediate relief the measure can realistically provide.
For Putin, its diplomatic significance may be considerably greater. Russia has secured a relaxation of American economic restrictions while Washington simultaneously presses Kyiv to limit attacks on the infrastructure that generates revenue for Moscow’s war economy.
The commercial implications of Washington’s sanctions reversal extend beyond the initial shipment volumes. The Treasury authorisation permits certain transactions involving Russian-origin diesel until April 2027, creating opportunities for international traders and financial intermediaries while leaving the broader sanctions framework formally intact.
Trump’s proposed energy ceasefire has compounded the difficulty. As EU Today examined earlier this week, Kyiv has offered to suspend strikes against Russian energy facilities if Moscow reciprocates. Russian attacks on Ukrainian power infrastructure have nevertheless continued.
An arrangement in which Ukraine stops targeting Russian refineries while Russia retains the ability to strike Ukrainian electricity generation would remove an important source of pressure on Moscow without protecting Ukrainian civilians.
Such an outcome would change the military and economic conditions of the war in Russia’s favour, regardless of how Washington describes its diplomatic objectives.
Zelenskyy’s sharper language also reflects a possible reassessment of where influence over American policy can be exercised.
For much of Trump’s second presidency, Kyiv’s diplomacy has concentrated on preserving a workable relationship with the president himself. That approach assumes that personal engagement can influence White House decisions even when Trump’s broader political instincts favour accommodation with Putin.
The events of October suggest that this strategy has reached its limits.
Ukraine’s alternative is not necessarily an outright confrontation with Washington. Rather, it involves placing greater weight on Congress, the American defence establishment and the institutional relationships that have supported Ukraine since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.
There is a historical precedent. During Trump’s first presidency, Congress supported military assistance to Ukraine despite differences within the administration over relations with Russia. Under Joe Biden, congressional resistance also demonstrated how domestic American politics could determine the timing and scale of weapons deliveries.
The months-long delay in approving the 2024 military assistance package contributed to severe ammunition shortages at a critical stage of Russia’s offensive operations. Ukraine’s loss of Avdiivka illustrated the danger of making battlefield planning dependent on political negotiations in Washington.
The congressional elections on 3 November 2026 could alter the balance of power. A change in control of either chamber would increase opportunities for oversight, investigations and legislative pressure on the administration, although Congress cannot independently direct every aspect of intelligence sharing or presidential diplomacy.
A less compliant Congress could nevertheless make it politically harder for the White House to restrict Ukrainian assistance without explanation.
For European governments, the dispute carries implications extending well beyond the immediate confrontation between Trump and Zelenskyy.
The transatlantic security relationship has historically depended on the assumption that American military capabilities, intelligence networks and political commitments would remain available to European allies during a major security crisis.
That assumption is increasingly difficult to reconcile with an American administration prepared to link assistance to Ukraine with wider commercial negotiations and domestic political objectives.
The consequences are particularly acute in areas where European capabilities remain insufficient to replace American systems quickly, including satellite intelligence, strategic reconnaissance, missile defence and specialised communications.
Europe can expand weapons production, finance Ukrainian purchases and develop alternatives to American technology. Replacing the full range of capabilities provided by the United States, however, requires investment measured in years rather than months.
The problem will not necessarily disappear when Trump leaves office. His return to power demonstrated that the American foreign-policy consensus which supported European security for decades can be challenged through the electoral process.
Future American administrations may seek to restore traditional alliances, but European governments must now account for the possibility that another election could reverse those commitments.
For Zelenskyy, the immediate calculation is exceptionally difficult. Public criticism risks provoking further retaliation from a president whose administration still controls capabilities essential to Ukraine’s defence. Continued diplomatic restraint, however, has not prevented Washington from offering concessions to Russia or introducing uncertainty into Ukraine’s military planning.
His latest intervention suggests that Kyiv is no longer convinced that avoiding confrontation will preserve American support. The question is whether greater political scrutiny of Washington’s decisions can prevent a further erosion of assistance before Russia turns the resulting military advantages into territorial gains.
The Ukrainian government on Tuesday night said that its access to the SpaceX-owned Starlink satellite internet service was throttled, prompting critics to question the wisdom of depending on any company owned by far-right billionaire Elon Musk. According to a Wednesday report in The New York Times, Ukrainian officials suspect that orders to restrict their access […]
The post Throttling Ukraine’s Starlink access heightens concerns over Musk appeared first on Asia Times.
Elon Musk pledged to make Starlink affordable in India as he renewed his attack on billionaire Mukesh Ambani’s (pictured) telecoms dominance, days before Jio Platforms launches a record-breaking IPO.
In a series of posts on social media platform X, the SpaceX chief argued that competition from Starlink would benefit Indian consumers by expanding connectivity options. “The reality is that competition would greatly benefit the average citizen in India by giving them more choices, as it always does,” he explained, adding, “Ambani’s profits will be lower, but he is not going out of business”.
Musk also dismissed claims that Starlink would struggle to compete with Jio’s low-cost data plans while also posing a threat to the incumbent operator. “This is absurd hypocrisy and hyperbole,” he said.
His comments come as Jio Platforms targets a valuation of around $106 billion, according to Reuters, in a planned IPO that could become India’s largest-ever listing. The business includes telecoms operation Reliance Jio, which reported 524.4 million subscribers at the end of March, including 268.5 million 5G customers.
“Prime Minister Ambani“
Musk has escalated his criticism of India’s regulatory process in recent days, accusing authorities and “certain oligarchs” of delaying Starlink’s entry into the country to maintain a “monopolistic chokehold on the Indian people”.
In a separate post on Friday (9 October), he sarcastically addressed the Jio Platforms-owner as “Prime Minister Ambani” and asked whether he would “consider allowing Starlink to compete”.
He argued satellite connectivity could bring internet access to underserved communities, improve educational opportunities and enable small businesses to reach international markets.
“Please accept my humble apologies for not realizing that you are the real boss of India,” he wrote, adding “Starlink would change their lives for the better”.
India’s Ministry of Communications has rejected allegations of discriminatory treatment, stating that Starlink and incumbents Bharti Airtel and Reliance Jio were at broadly the same stage of the regulatory process. All three have secured initial approvals but remain subject to outstanding security clearances before they can obtain spectrum access.
The post Musk takes fresh swipe at Ambani as Jio IPO looms appeared first on Mobile World Live.
Elon Musk-controlled SpaceX struck a deal to buy a nationwide low-band spectrum portfolio from Grain Management, ratcheting up its challenge to compete with US carriers for mobile customers.
The transaction for all of Grain Management’s nationwide portfolio of up to 14MHz of paired spectrum in the 800MHz band is subject to regulatory approval by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Financial terms are not available.
“This is the last critical piece of the spectrum puzzle needed for SpaceX to provide complete phone coverage in America,” Musk said on X above a post which questioned the company’s direct-to-device (D2D) strategy.
SpaceX stated Starlink Mobile’s global 2GHz mid-band spectrum will deliver high-capacity coverage in the US, while the newly acquired low-band frequencies will improve signal reach through obstacles including walls and extend service to devices indoors. The company added most existing mobile devices already support the underused band.
SpaceX plans to pair its satellites with ground-based femtocells to provide 5G mobile coverage, a plan many executives in the industry consider far-fetched.
The company stated the low-band spectrum would address a key remaining technical gap and help pave the way for Starlink Mobile to become a major US mobile carrier.
SpaceX stated once it garners approval it “will deploy a flexible architecture combining our satellite-to-mobile constellation in space with an advanced terrestrial deployment that can seamlessly connect devices everywhere”.
The move follows through on its plan to roll out a D2D service to compete against T-Mobile US, Verizon and AT&T.
On 6 October, SpaceX announced a regulatory win after it secured FCC approval to launch 15,000 next-gen satellites for D2D.
In August, T-Mobile US completed the sale of its nationwide 800MHz spectrum portfolio to Grain Management in exchange for $2.9 billion in cash and all of the latter’s 600MHz spectrum licences more than a year after agreeing a deal in principle.
Grain Management previously outlined a plant to work with energy and infrastructure specialist Black & Veatch to market the spectrum to utilities, critical infrastructure operators and rural and regional carriers.
The post SpaceX targets US carriers with low-band spectrum appeared first on Mobile World Live.
Indian authorities pushed back against Elon Musk’s claims that unnamed oligarchs were blocking Starlink from launching in the country, stating all three prospective operators remain broadly at the same stage of the regulatory process.
In a post on X, Musk accused “certain oligarchs” of trying to maintain a “monopolistic chokehold on the Indian people”, adding “you can guess who they are…” without naming the parties involved. “This is a crime against the people of India!” he wrote.
In a statement, India’s Ministry of Communications rejected the allegation, explaining its satellite communications framework is “fair and non-discriminatory”. It said assessments are currently underway for all licensed operators in India, with each required to meet security conditions before it can seek spectrum.
“At present, all the three entities are at broadly the same regulatory stage,” the ministry said, calling claims of discriminatory treatment “baseless and misconceived”.
The country’s telecoms sector is dominated by Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Jio and Sunil Mittal’s Bharti Airtel. Both operators, alongside Musk’s Starlink, have secured initial approvals for satellite services but are awaiting spectrum assignment and final clearances.
Starlink’s approval process has stretched over four years, with security requirements and spectrum access among the key issues under scrutiny. Musk has previously clashed with Ambani over India’s satellite spectrum allocation, although both Reliance Jio and Bharti Airtel later struck agreements with the tech mogul to distribute Starlink services in the country.
The US satellite venture’s regulatory wait has also been marred by security concerns. Local media reports stated authorities recovered illegal Starlink equipment in two separate operations in late 2024, including a drug seizure in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and an army search in the northeastern state of Manipur.
This week, Musk also disputed any suggestion the equipment was connected to an active Starlink service in India, posting on X that its satellite beams were “turned off over India” and “never on in the first place”.
The post India hits back at Musk over Starlink oligarch claims appeared first on Mobile World Live.
Login