The story of Starlink and reality

The story of Starlink’s satellite internet network is not of today. Its beginning was actually in the 1990s; although the reality of today’s Starlink began a new chapter in January 2020, as a result of the then Trump government’s “Clean Internet” policy. This policy had thrown the global internet system into a major risk of splitting into “United States” and “China” networks. Before going into detail in that context, let’s revisit the backdrop of the 1990s.

The 1990s context
In March 1994, a company named Teledesic started its journey in the United States, whose main business goal was to build a broadband satellite internet network. At that time, this business objective seemed like a far-fetched dream, but in reality, Teledesic created its design within just four years. However, at that time, submarine cable networks for global internet bandwidth supply began to expand rapidly. In comparison to the estimated cost of building Teledesic’s satellite network, the cost of creating and managing submarine cable networks was nearly half. For this reason, Teledesic’s initiative did not create much stir among US policymakers.

In 1996, Teledesic undertook a project titled “Internet on the Sky.” Its goal was to ensure high-speed internet service inside airplanes. Through this, they moved one step further to impress US policymakers; but due to internal conflicts and the burden of losses, the company eventually met an untimely demise. On the other hand, in 2001, Elon Musk took up the highly ambitious “Mars Oasis” project with the aim of establishing a greenhouse on Mars to ensure human habitation. From that plan, SpaceX was established in 2002.

In 2004, SpaceX founder Elon Musk appointed Larry Williams — former vice president of Teledesic’s abandoned “Internet on the Sky” project — as vice president of strategic relations at SpaceX. This time, “Sky on the Internet” began with new investment and new enthusiasm. However, this time the project was not limited to providing high-speed internet only on airplanes, but expanded with the goal of building a parallel commercial satellite internet network alongside submarine cables globally. The process for designing, business planning, and obtaining approval from the US government kick-started.

Finally, in 2016, the US Federal Communications Commission approved the name “Starlink” for SpaceX’s “Satellite Internet Network” project. Incidentally, the name “Starlink” comes from the popular American novelist John Green’s novel The Fault in Our Stars.

Starlink in the new context
After Donald Trump was elected President of the United States in 2016, a new chapter in the story of Starlink began. Donald Trump adopted the “Clean Internet” policy as part of commercial competition with China. At that time, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a press conference that Clean Internet is a “China-free internet” system. Through the implementation of this policy, no network built using Chinese companies’ equipment could be used to access the servers of any US company. After Mike Pompeo’s announcement, even American experts and analysts became vocal critics of the Clean Internet system. Information technology analyst John Chipman, in his speech at the World Economic Forum, strongly criticised Trump’s Clean Internet policy, saying, “This policy will instead help China take control of the global internet system.”

Because if the internet system splits, weaker economies are more likely to lean toward China. The Clean Internet policy also faced strong criticism in congressional debates. As a result, during the Trump administration’s tenure until 2020, the project failed to implement the Clean Internet policy. However, Elon Musk’s Starlink did not remain idle. Their satellite internet network development continued. In 2021, Starlink began commercial operations in the United States and Canada. From 2023, it also started providing 150 Mbps internet service inside aircraft for several major commercial airlines around the world. By 2024, Starlink completed preparations and achieved the capability to provide satellite internet connectivity in 130 countries around the world. This is where a new chapter of implementing Trump’s Clean Internet policy begins.

In reality, Starlink’s satellite internet network is the first complete technological alternative to the global submarine cable network in the commercial sector. We know that most of the current submarine cable consortiums in the world are built with Chinese technology. Also, in the case of domestic fiber optic cable and radio microwave networks — in Bangladesh and many other countries — about 80 percent of the equipment used comes from two Chinese companies. Therefore, if we consider the submarine cable network, it is essentially under China’s control. As a result, US control or surveillance at submarine cable landing stations and gateways in various countries was becoming almost impossible. Again, Trump’s “Clean Internet” policy also created a possibility of giving China even more power.

In this reality, the United States had no alternative but to create a satellite-based network as an alternative to the submarine cable network. Because although it has lost dominance in submarine cables, the US is still far ahead of China in satellite technology. On April 25, in the online version of Vietnam’s National Defense Journal, a research article titled “US-China Competition in Low-Orbit Satellite and Their Impact on the Region” stated that there are currently about 6,000 low-orbit (LEO) satellites in the world, of which 5,000 belong to the United States. China has 600. However, China is rapidly implementing several projects to increase its satellite capabilities.

On the other hand, according to a report published in The Wall Street Journal citing Starlink’s own announcement, 7,000 LEO satellites have already been manufactured for commercial service. The goal is to increase this production to 12,000 in the next five years. In addition, there are plans to send a total of 34,400 LEO satellites into orbit within the next 15 years. Detailed information about China’s commercial satellite production and launches is not publicly available. But it is certain that China will not sit idle. According to the nature of current global commercial competition, China will surely try to keep pace with the United States. And in the near future, the global internet system will be divided by this very satellite internet, along the lines of the “Clean Internet” policy.

Technological differences
The technological characteristic of the submarine cable network is that a landing station is required inside a country to receive services from this network. Then, connecting to the country's gateway, it must integrate with the domestic fiber optic network. As a result, the country has full control over the bandwidth of the submarine cable network. On the other hand, a key feature of satellite internet networks is that they can connect directly to the customer's device in any country, without connecting to that country’s gateway. However, a country may still mandate that satellite bandwidth be routed through its own gateway and internal fiber optic cable network.

In such a case, a ground station would also be needed; but if a country's internal network transport capacity is lower than the speed of satellite bandwidth, then companies like Starlink will not be able to ensure full-capacity customer service. The most important point is that, while submarine cable networks are technologically dependent on a country’s gateway and internal network, satellite networks are not. To provide satellite internet service in a country, it is sufficient to obtain permission to use that country’s radio frequency system or spectrum. In other words, a satellite internet network is essentially an open network fully under the control of the providing country and company. Now, that open network is under the control of the US company Starlink.

Soon, China will undoubtedly launch its own parallel satellite internet network. As a result, two satellite internet networks of parallel capacity will be formed in contrast to the submarine cable network. In this scenario, the United States could choose not to allow any Chinese company access to its network servers. Similarly, China could also fully prohibit any US company’s server from accessing its network. Even in the current submarine cable network system, China restricts access to US services like Facebook and Google at its gateway — but cannot completely block them. However, with its own satellite network, such restrictions would no longer be necessary — full blockage would be technically possible.

A new sphere of dependency
Now the question arises: if two parallel internet networks of the US and China are established in the future, what role will countries like Bangladesh play? The answer is simple. Not only our country, but many developing and even least-developed countries often have to diplomatically operate with a foot in half a dozen boats, not just two. In this situation, third world countries will have to allow business access not only to the US’s Starlink without objection, but also to similar Chinese companies when they arrive in the near future. There will be little room to consider what conditions each superpower sets or what the benefits and losses may be. Because in the prevailing information technology reality, both countries will likely impose joining their satellite internet network as a primary condition in commercial and economic dealings with third-world nations.

Therefore, there is no reason to blame any government for permitting Starlink’s access. In the case of third-world countries, regardless of which party is in power, authorisation will have to be given to US or Chinese satellite internet companies. If not, an even bigger problem may arise in the future. If, in a situation of international trade conflict or war, the submarine cable network is disrupted temporarily or for the long term, then relying on satellite internet will be the only option. For this reason, instead of being misled by sensational stories about Starlink, today’s and tomorrow’s policymakers of the country must undertake deep factual research.

Rased Mehedi: Editor, Views Bangladesh, and technology analyst