Space-based internet means providing broadband connectivity via satellites instead of (or in addition to) ground cables and towers. Instead of a single geostationary satellite, modern systems use mega-constellations of low-orbiting satellites to beam the internet to users worldwide. The most prominent player is SpaceX’s Starlink, which, as of mid-2025, has launched over 7,000 satellites and serves millions of customers in about 125 countries. Other major efforts include the UK-backed OneWeb (now part of Eutelsat), which has hundreds of satellites covering much of the globe; Amazon’s Project Kuiper, which began launching satellites in 2023 and plans service by late 2025; and several Chinese initiatives (sometimes called Qianfan or SpaceSail) backed by state support, aiming for tens of thousands of satellites. The EU is also developing its own government-funded constellation (IRIS²) to ensure “digital sovereignty”. In short, dozens of nations and companies are racing to put thousands of internet satellites in orbit, promising near-global coverage.
However, this new connectivity also challenges authoritarian regimes. A common tactic of such governments is to censor or completely shut down the internet during unrest. Satellite broadband—being hard to block—gives citizens a way around those controls. For example, during protests in Iran in late 2022, activists smuggled in Starlink terminals to restore social media access after the government shut down local networks. This prompted Tehran to outlaw civilian Starlink use, calling it a “breach of national sovereignty” and a threat to digital security.
By the same token, pro-democracy groups and international NGOs see the space internet as a tool for freedom. It can empower dissidents and journalists to get around firewalls and shutdowns. Analysts note that satellite systems “can connect poorly-served communities, empower opposition forces, and break the authoritarian stranglehold on information,” because they deliver data directly to end users beyond any one government’s filters.
Perhaps the biggest alarm has been over the power of private companies in wartime. In fall 2022, Elon Musk reportedly ordered Starlink to cut service to parts of the Ukraine battlefield for a short period, citing fears of escalation. This unprecedented move “reshaped the front line” and showed how one CEO could influence a war’s outcome. British officials warned that this “concentrated power” in an unregulated space is dangerous.
Space Internet Technological and Economic Competition
Space internet is now a major front in great-power competition. The U.S., China, and Russia all see these constellations as strategic assets. The U.S. leads today mainly through commercial firms (SpaceX, Amazon), but its policy is still evolving. Europe is rushing to catch up with its IRIS² program, which aims for an EU-controlled constellation by the late 2020s. Russia’s government has its own plan (the Sfera program) to launch several hundred satellites for Arctic and remote coverage, though it lags far behind.
China is moving most aggressively. State-supported companies are planning tens of thousands of satellites. In April 2025 alone, China launched new batches of Internet satellites as part of a planned 15,000+ LEO constellation. Analysts warn that this Chinese network would be much more than a competitor to Starlink – it could export China’s censorship model globally. A recent study notes China’s LEO system will be “an extension of the Great Firewall, exporting its censorship regime globally”.
Major powers are already jockeying. Brazil, for example, is negotiating with U.S. (Project Kuiper), Canadian (Telesat), and Chinese (SpaceSail/Qianfan) providers to expand broadband. China’s SpaceSail recently struck deals in Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and elsewhere – notably in places where Musk’s companies have run into trouble. In Brazil, SpaceSail is teaming up with state telco Telebra,s while Starlink has been embroiled in legal fights over misinformation fines. In Kazakhstan, officials even floated a ban on foreign satellite services “for national security,” effectively forcing SpaceX to decline service and paving the way for local alternatives.
International Cooperation on Space Internet and Conflict
Space internet raises new international policy questions. Satellites use radio frequencies and orbital slots that are governed by the UN’s ITU Radio Regulations, which normally require a satellite operator to coordinate with each country it covers. But LEO satellites, whizzing around the Earth every 90 minutes, complicate the old rules. For example, Iran filed a formal complaint at the ITU when Starlink terminals appeared on its soil without permission. Tehran successfully lobbied other countries to add “unauthorized satellite operations” to the agenda of the 2023 global spectrum conference. In plain terms, this means regulators around the world are debating whether global satellite networks should require explicit permission from each country before serving it.
Besides spectrum, there are concerns about space traffic and debris. Thousands more satellites will crowd the valuable low-Earth orbits, raising the risk of collisions. Governments and companies are under pressure to follow international space-sustainability guidelines (e.g., UN COPUOS recommendations on debris mitigation) and to coordinate tracking and orbital slots. Any major accident could create a cascade of debris (a “Kessler syndrome”) that endangers all satellites. So far, international efforts to regulate debris and spectrum are mostly voluntary, but policymakers may need to strengthen them as constellations grow.
Perspectives: Optimism and Criticism
The promise of space internet – universal connectivity – has many champions. Optimists envision every child in a remote village getting the same educational resources as city kids. They point out that pandemics, natural disasters, or conflicts can sever terrestrial links (as was seen in Iran, Kashmir, Sudan, etc.), and satellites provide a resilient backup. They also highlight the competitive dynamic: just as smartphones spread rapidly around the world, satellite internet could enable entrepreneurs, telemedicine, and online education globally. A Brookings-style hope is that open satellites will help build “digital solidarity,” letting civil societies connect and exchange ideas freely, much like undersea cables do for developed countries.
Critics counter with several cautions. First, digital sovereignty: many governments want to keep control over critical infrastructure. As the TechPolicy analysis explains, “spectrum sovereignty” is an established principle in international law, and countries may balk if foreigners beam signals without permission. If new rules force tracking or shutdown features, smaller or start-up providers could be squeezed out. Second, concentration of power: currently, a few billionaires (Musk, Bezos, etc.) and states decide this infrastructure, not any public agency. The Reuters expose of Musk’s actions in Ukraine warned that his “unregulated” power to enable or disable the internet is a systemic risk. Third, military use and collateral damage: humanitarians worry that making satellites “dual-use” blurs lines. For example, some fear Starlink coverage could be cut if it’s used (even unintentionally) in ways a government dislikes. And any jam or shoot-down of satellites could cut off health and emergency services as well as military communications.
Environmental and economic critics also raise issues. The space around Earth is already getting crowded, and astronomers complain about bright LEO satellites ruining night skies. Policy analysts note that international satellite alliances resemble historic submarine cable networks, but with far less collective governance, raising concerns about “digital neocolonialism” if a few nations’ companies dominate global connectivity.
Space Internet: Policy and Cooperation
Looking forward, policy will matter enormously. Governments and international bodies are already grappling with these issues. At the UN’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU), regulators are discussing new spectrum rules for non-geostationary satellites. Some proposals include requiring global constellations to install “kill switches” or user-tracking to enforce national bans. While that might satisfy sovereignty concerns, experts warn it could hamper innovation and give incumbents an advantage. Policy-makers will need to balance network openness with the legitimate need for regulation.
Space sustainability is another policy arena. The UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space has adopted Long-Term Sustainability guidelines calling for debris mitigation, space-traffic management, and international cooperation. These will apply to satellite internet, too. Nations may tighten licensing (e.g., the U.S. FCC now requires operators to have deorbit plans) and urge firms to share tracking data. Diplomatic efforts might be needed to manage orbital congestion and avoid collisions – a problem that affects all countries equally.
On digital policy, many argue for an affirmative vision. For democracies, this could mean investing in infrastructure to ensure their citizens have access independent of authoritarian tech. The EU’s IRIS² is one example of a government taking charge of part of the network. Similarly, the U.S. might consider public-private partnerships or funding to expand and diversify space internet sources. At the same time, support for internet freedom online (through encryption, satellites to activists, etc.) could become a formal part of foreign policy, much like broadcasting to closed societies was during the Cold War.
Internationally, multistakeholder dialogue is needed. The emerging conflicts at the ITU show that we lack clear rules on cross-border satellite service. It may be necessary to negotiate new agreements (at ITU or UN) that clarify under what conditions a global satellite net can serve each country, while protecting the free flow of information. Likewise, export controls or trade policies on satellite tech might be updated to reflect the new security stakes.
In conclusion, space-based internet is already reshaping geopolitics. It offers a powerful tool for development and freedom, but also raises new arenas for state rivalry. The coming decade will test humanity’s ability to manage a truly global network that lives in orbit. Wise policies – combining openness, security, and sustainability – will be crucial if space internet is to unite rather than divide the world.
Article by Shaloo