By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Facing potential Starlink withdrawal from Ukraine, the EU Commission is exploring alternative satellite communication solutions. Eutelsat, a Franco-British operator already active in Ukraine, is in discussions with the Commission to significantly increase its capacity, aiming to provide approximately 40,000 terminals within months. This expansion requires substantial financial and logistical support, with the EU considering leveraging existing and planned programs like Govsatcom and IRIS2. The situation highlights the strategic importance of secure and sovereign European satellite communication capabilities.
Read the original article here
Eutelsat’s proposition to serve as an alternative to Starlink in Ukraine presents a complex scenario. While it’s presented as competition, the reality is likely far more nuanced. The idea that Eutelsat could seamlessly replace Starlink is debatable, considering the inherent differences in infrastructure and capabilities.
The significant disparity in satellite constellation size immediately comes to mind. Starlink’s vast network of low-earth orbit satellites provides unparalleled coverage and speed, a crucial factor in modern warfare and civilian communication needs. Eutelsat, even with its expansion into low-earth orbit, likely possesses a smaller constellation, leading to potential limitations in bandwidth and coverage area, particularly in a large and geographically diverse country like Ukraine.
Furthermore, the cost of user terminals plays a vital role. While newer information suggests Eutelsat’s terminal costs might be comparable to Starlink’s, or even slightly cheaper, there’s a prevailing perception that older high-orbit satellite systems are burdened by significantly more expensive hardware. This cost difference could make Eutelsat’s service less accessible to a wider range of users compared to Starlink’s more widely adopted solution.
The speed difference is another critical point. Lower earth orbit (LEO) satellites, such as those in Starlink’s network, inherently offer lower latency and faster speeds than traditional high-orbit satellites. The difference could be substantial, potentially impacting the usability of the service for bandwidth-intensive applications. While military operations may not require gigabit speeds, the benefits of a faster connection are still significant for situational awareness, communication, and command and control functions.
However, the potential for Eutelsat to act as a supplementary or backup service shouldn’t be dismissed. In scenarios where Starlink service is disrupted or unavailable, having an alternative, even if less capable, could prove beneficial. The relative reliability of a more established provider like Eutelsat compared to the perceived volatility of Starlink, due to various political and economic factors, might also appeal to some users.
The argument against Eutelsat as a complete replacement often cites its infrastructure limitations. This points to a broader issue concerning the development and deployment of satellite internet infrastructure globally. The sheer scale of investment required to build a substantial, truly competitive satellite network is immense. While Eutelsat’s presence and technology are commendable, they might not be sufficient to match Starlink’s current widespread adoption and capabilities.
The discussion inevitably touches on the larger geopolitical implications of the situation. The dependence on a single provider, regardless of who it is, can create vulnerabilities. Diversifying communication infrastructure is a strategic imperative for nations, ensuring resilience against potential disruptions. Eutelsat’s offer can be interpreted as a crucial element in this diversification strategy.
The concerns about Elon Musk’s control over Starlink and potential arbitrary service disruptions are undeniable and fuel the search for alternative solutions. This is perhaps the greatest factor driving the interest in Eutelsat as a potential replacement. The desire for a more stable and politically neutral provider is a powerful argument in Eutelsat’s favor.
Ultimately, Eutelsat offering itself as a Starlink replacement in Ukraine is less about a direct, one-to-one substitution and more about providing a crucial backup and diversification option. It might not provide identical performance or features, but its presence contributes to a more resilient communication infrastructure, ultimately benefiting Ukraine’s needs in times of conflict and beyond. While it’s not a perfect substitute, its role in ensuring communication during a time of crisis is undeniable. It is perhaps the start of a much-needed competition within the satellite internet market, ultimately benefiting consumers and potentially preventing future reliance on a single entity’s technology.