Elon Musk says he refused to give Kyiv access to his Starlink communications network over Crimea to avoid complicity in a “major act of war”.

Kyiv had sent an emergency request to activate Starlink to Sevastopol, home to a major Russian navy port, he said.

His comments came after a book alleged he had switched off Starlink to thwart a drone attack on Russian ships.

A senior Ukrainian official says this enabled Russian attacks and accused him of “committing evil”.

Russian naval vessels had since taken part in deadly attacks on civilians, he said.

“By not allowing Ukrainian drones to destroy part of the Russian military (!) fleet via Starlink interference, Elon Musk allowed this fleet to fire Kalibr missiles at Ukrainian cities,” he said.

“Why do some people so desperately want to defend war criminals and their desire to commit murder? And do they now realize that they are committing evil and encouraging evil?” he added.

The row follows the release of a biography of the billionaire by Walter Isaacson which alleges that Mr Musk switched off Ukraine’s access to Starlink because he feared that an ambush of Russia’s naval fleet in Crimea could provoke a nuclear response from the Kremlin.

Ukraine targeted Russian ships in Sevastopol with submarine drones carrying explosives but they lost connection to Starlink and “washed ashore harmlessly”, Mr Isaacson wrote.

Starlink terminals connect to SpaceX satellites in orbit and have been crucial for maintaining internet connectivity and communication in Ukraine as the conflict has disrupted the country infrastructure.

    • Pendulum
      link
      fedilink
      English
      132 years ago

      It was never turned on in the first place. Read the article, not the clickbait headlines that have circulated (this one is on point though, credit to BBC)

    • @BigNote@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      92 years ago

      Doubt it. The smart money says that he did it because he does a ton of business with the Chinese and is very nervous about being seen to actively take sides in a way that would cause them to see him as a potential security threat.

        • @BigNote@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          You would have a point were I simply speculating, but I’m not.

          I am simply stating what the most well-informed and knowledgeable sources are saying.

          You would know this if you had sanitized and healthy media consumption habits, but you obviously don’t.

    • @scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      Now there’s a great idea. Especially since he never would have built SoaceX without so much public support via NASA.

  • Echo71Niner
    link
    fedilink
    42 years ago

    Right… Pretending it was not the U.S. gov. that pushed Elon to do this… A continuous conflict in Ukraine that bleeds Russia is the U.S. agenda.

    • @mx_smith@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      Actually Musk is friends with Putin, and helps his daddy out. Remember when Twitter spoke out with support for Ukraine. Putin didn’t like that so his buddy Musky bought the company and is currently trying to run it into the ground.

    • kn0wmad1c
      link
      fedilink
      English
      92 years ago

      Do… do you know how much money the US has given to Ukraine for this effort? A continuous conflict is untenable. The U.S. gov would want the opposite of what you’re thinking

    • Shalakushka
      link
      fedilink
      192 years ago

      Whatever it takes for you to decide it’s the U.S.'s fault, I guess.

    • Chozo
      link
      fedilink
      92 years ago

      You mean the same US government that was paying Musk specifically to maintain Starlink service in Ukraine? That one?

      Did you forget that the Pentagon was subsidizing Starlink? Or did you not know that before writing your very intellectual reply?

  • Endorkend
    link
    fedilink
    1342 years ago

    This is the same bullshit take propagandists and Musk himself are spreading.

    Musk sabotaged an active military operation in an effort to save Russian assets and materials, by disabling access to Starlink in that area, to halt the operation. And then refused to undo what he did.

    All to protect Russian assets in an illegal undeclared war of annexation where Russia is the aggressor.

    Musks actions enabled the death of thousands of civilians in Ukraine and likely will cause far more through his actions which extend how long this illegal invasion will continue.

    Musk should be stripped of his US citizenship and booted right back to South Africa. America stands by Ukraine, South Africa tries to pretend they are neutral but the agreements they have with Russia and the opinions of rich fuck South Africans like Musk make it clear they stand with Russia.

    And anyone who keeps spreading these press releases with his propagandist take on the subject rather than saying how things actually happened, should be ashamed of themselves and monitored until all this is over.

    • @DarkWasp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      522 years ago

      He should be charged with treason or something similar for doing this during wartime to a US ally. Enough of this narcissistic POS.

      • @Coreidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        122 years ago

        People always mention Elon doing so and so against a NATO ally and therefore it’s treason without ever mentioning the inverse which is Elon aided a war crime for a country who is a direct enemy of the US, which is the real treasonous crime imo.

    • @SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 years ago

      Because he’s a private business owner in a country that is not involved in the war.

      You don’t have to agree with his choice, at all, but that’s why it isn’t illegal.

      • @histy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        The problem with your point is that he knew to whom and for what he was offering the starlink services. If someone goes to a gun store and tells you they need a gun to shoot their neighbor, you can’t complain that they killed their neighbor with the gun you sold them.

        • @SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          They still have Starlink service. Just not in Crimea - which is currently (imo illegally) Russian territory.

          • @histy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            I know, I’m just refuting this ridiculous rhetoric that it would be complicit in acts of war by offering a service that has no direct action in the attacks, starlink is as complicit as the sea itself, since the drones are sailing on it. By that logic, Audi would be complicit in a hit-and-run. And as the provider of a service, which he knew the purpose of, he becomes complicit when he decides which attacks can or cannot take place using its service, he is literally making war decisions.

            • @SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              22 years ago

              I don’t disagree, with the caveat that Musk is explicitly not giving the Russian gov access to Starlink (though they do not require it)

              • @histy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                I suspect that the reason for him not supplying russia is much simpler, there are sanctions against russia by the US and I doubt that he will be able to get paid for the service legally, and he knows that if he does this his image will be obliterated.

    • nik0
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Unfortunately, not likely. Unless there are some apps that will be able to do that; we’re stuck with this.

      Sync actually has this

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      142 years ago

      It’s okay, he plans to replace them with his own progeny. What’s he up to now, 12?

      • kamenLady.
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        His father is even crazier about this, seriously. His father is very active, creating more muskeets …

        Not much of a story, if he wouldn’t be doing it with Elon’s stepsister.

    • @orangebussycat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      Russia has anti satellite weapons. Why should he risk it for zero reward? At least the defense contractors are getting paid. Elon does it for free.

      • @test113@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        82 years ago

        Yeah, sure. Have you ever heard of ‘reactions to actions’? What do you think would happen if Russia were to start targeting foreign satellites? How confident are you that they actually possess the technology to disable around 2000 out of the 4000 Starlink satellites to clear paths above Russia/Ukraine? Or, what do you think Russia is capable of in this regard? and did you really belive musk does this for free and with no ulterior idea? 😂😂😂, but there’s no such thing as free. Here’s just one example: Link to CNBC article on Pentagon awarding SpaceX a Ukraine contract for Starlink satellite internet https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/01/pentagon-awards-spacex-with-ukraine-contract-for-starlink-satellite-internet.html

  • Alien Nathan Edward
    link
    fedilink
    English
    242 years ago

    The escalation he was trying to avoid is shelling children. Elon Musk is why I hope hell is real.

  • @MrSqueezles@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    372 years ago

    Censorship is terrible. Except when I want to do it and pretend like I’m the best politician. Then it’s great.

  • WuTang
    link
    fedilink
    English
    32 years ago

    Are you all believing that UA military would depends that much on internet/Starlink, really? And it’s not like it is the only satellite network.

    Regarding OP, i don’t defend RU but I don’t support UA. None of my business if it was not my money which is flushed down in this proxy war and therefore, the money of my children!

  • Gyromobile
    link
    fedilink
    English
    202 years ago

    By not allowing Ukrainian drones to destroy part of the Russian military (!) fleet

    I think this quote is where we all need to take a step back. People are essentially blaming him for not empowering one warring party’s ability to attack another.

    It doesn’t matter which side you are on. He doesnt immediately become responsible for everything that the russians do with the soldiers and equipment that weren’t killed/destroyed in the attack.

    This is also assuming the drone attack would have been successful.

    I wouldn’t call it interference it was just refusal to play.

    The type of attitude used here is a very childish “you are with me or you are against me” take that everyone publicly recognizes as wrong.

    I would def prefer a ukrainian victory, but you guys treat musk like he is some sort of chaos god and all knowing entity or something.

    • @barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      142 years ago

      People are essentially blaming him for not empowering one warring party’s ability to attack another.

      No. We are blaming him for preventing Ukraine to defend itself. If you punch me and I punch you to get you off me then that’s not me attacking you, it’s still you attacking me.

      Worse, somebody just punched me and I’m about to punch back, and while I do that you swipe my leg so I lose my footing, saying “but you can’t attack them!”, causing me to land unluckily and break my wrist. That is what Musk did: He put Ukrainian forces and assets in direct danger over pulling a service he agreed to provide. Noone would blame him had he stayed out of things in the first place, or given notice that he’s backing out, or something like that. We’d be calling him a pussy, but that’d be it. But committing and then retracting support at a critical moment? That’s treason.

      • Gyromobile
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Just because you call it treason doesnt make it treason.

        Just as you pointed out, replace defend itself with attack Russia.

        Hows it sound then?

        Also as was pointed out it was never activated so its not like he deactivated it. Your analogy doesnt stand.

        • @LordOfTheChia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          It was already activated, Musk ordered it shut off during an Ukrainian operation meant to take out those ships. The same ships that have been launching missiles and hitting civilian targets.

          Elon Musk secretly ordered his engineers to turn off his company’s Starlink satellite communications network near the Crimean coast last year to disrupt a Ukrainian sneak attack on the Russian naval fleet, according to an excerpt adapted from Walter Isaacson’s new biography of the eccentric billionaire titled “Elon Musk.”

          As Ukrainian submarine drones strapped with explosives approached the Russian fleet, they “lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly,” Isaacson writes.

          Source:

          https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/elon-musk-biography-walter-isaacson-ukraine-starlink/index.html

          • Gyromobile
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            emergency request to turn on satellite access

            Is exactly what happened.

            He did not act.

        • @assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          8
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Just as you pointed out, replace defend itself with attack Russia.

          Hows it sound then?

          This doesn’t work because we all know Russia is the aggressor. It still sounds bad for Elon

          • @aidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            Japan aggressed against the US in WW2, the US still attacked the Japanese navy at many points. Stop trying to twist language to make a point that’s not necessary to make. Everyone knows Russia started the war, that’s irrelevant to whether something is an offensive move in a war.

      • @DrPop@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 years ago

        I agree with your statement, the fact that Musk can just make decisions like that is an issue. Regardless of whether or not he owns the majority of the company he agreed to provide this service. That means he should have to give ample notice before disabling the service.

          • @barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            Yes. He donated access points to the Ukrainian military. Militaries tend to use the hardware they have to do military things, Musk knew they weren’t planning on using starlink to play fortnite.

            • @aidan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              32 years ago

              And they knew those access points didn’t have coverage in Crimea, that’s why they asked him to give them access in Crimea.

              • @barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                42 years ago

                Musk agreed to provide service In Ukraine. That includes Crimea. It also includes their territorial waters. It also includes the rest of the occupied territories, which they again and again disable service for.

                Ukraine certainly didn’t know that there was no connectivity around Sevastopol otherwise they wouldn’t have sent drones there relying on starlink, now would they.

                Also, all in all this isn’t his decision to make. He has a contract with the US government to provide service in Ukraine. Lockheed-Martin doesn’t get to decide whether or not the US exports F-35 to Poland or not. It is not their place to say “but that would annoy the Russians so we’ll disable them”.

                If you don’t want to be a military contractor, don’t be a military contractor. If you are a military contractor, submit to democratically legitimised decisions of the fucking government.

                • @SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  2
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  The US government buys F-35s and then owns them. The US government is contracting Musk to provide coverage over certain areas of Ukraine.

                  It’s a significant difference. The gov can’t later use Starlink to help people in Taiwan, for instance, without a new contract.

    • @graphite@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Yeah, I honestly don’t understand why this narrative even needs to be played out.

      I don’t know what angle there is by making Musk a scapegoat beyond, maybe, Ukraine trying to strengthen its supporting relationship with the US population, but it already has most of the US support anyway.

      Musk has his issues, there’s no doubt about that, but not wanting to be involved is an ethical stance to take on his part.

    • @Rolder@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      My question is, if he was actually worried about being complicit with the war or whatever, why did he provide starlink at all? It was obvious what it was going to be used for. He get cold feet because Ukraine is doing way better then expected?

      • @SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        Article explains that he was worried he was contributing to an escalation that could lead to nuclear strikes, while he still provides ground support services to Ukraine proper

        Not arguing this was the right choice, but explaining that’s his decision-making process.

    • @lonke@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      No. Russia is 100% in the wrong, continously committing crimes against humanity for no justifiable reason at all.

      … that, in the pursuit of taking away Ukrainian freedom and independence.

      Hence, to actively disrupt their defense is deeply unethical. He chose to do something rather than nothing, and it directly helps those wishing to make the world a worse place. Disgraceful.

      • Gyromobile
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 years ago

        You mean he chose to do nothing rather than something. The starlink access was never turned ON

        • @lonke@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          By musks account. By Walter Isaacson’s account the opposite was the case. Considering musks opposition to aiding the victim, it would be on brand.

          • Gyromobile
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            I don’t disagree, but what evidence was produced that we can’t see?

            I have evidence that you diddle 12 year olds, but noone is allowed to see it. You’re a reddit mod so it would be on brand.

            See what I mean?

            I think we owe the claim some level of skepticism if theres no proof provided.

    • Kes
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      What’s even more mind boggling is that despite Starlink being so critical to Ukrainian communications, neither the Ukrainian government nor the US entered into a contract with a clause obligating Starlink to maintain service. Musk can just legally turn off Starlink for them with no legal repercussions because they never negotiated something against that into a contract with him. Even if they had to pay a premium rate for Starlink, for a service that critical to the Ukrainian Armed Forces it’s worth it

      • @SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        The US government has recently contracted for Starlink satellites. They did it when he first flinched under Russian pressure and threatened to turn them off

    • @SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 years ago

      Buddy you’re in the middle of learning that nuanced takes don’t play on Lemmy, because this place is full of radicalized outcasts that don’t even read articles.