The European Commission will adopt a decision this week that would privilege European satellite operators in a move designed to curb the European expansion of Starlink, the flagship service of Elon Musk’s SpaceX. The decision lands just before the Commission presents its Tech Sovereignty Package, a project aimed at freeing the EU from strategic dependence on foreign technology providers, while ordinary people are left to live with the consequences of a spectrum fight between corporate and state power.
Who Gets the Airwaves
Thomas Regnier, the Commission’s spokesperson for tech sovereignty, framed the move in the language of security and control. “Satellite connectivity is a key piece of our technological sovereignty, our security, and our defence, as also highlighted by IRIS²,” he said. He added, “In the changing geopolitical situation, EU-wide satellite connectivity becomes synonymous with resilience, security, and capability.”
The Commission is due to adopt its decision on Wednesday on the selection of operators for pan-European systems providing mobile satellite services for the 2 GHz radio spectrum frequency, the only band harmonised at the EU level. Since 2009, this bandwidth has been allocated to two European operators, Viasat and EchoStar. The machinery of allocation is not neutral: it decides who gets to control the infrastructure and who gets boxed out.
These frequencies are currently used for a limited range of use cases, notably when a smartphone has no mobile network connection but can still be used to call the emergency services. Following technological developments, the Commission is now considering expanding the use of these frequencies for so-called direct-to-device communications, allowing smartphones and other devices to connect directly to satellites in space. That shift would let the likes of SpaceX and Amazon directly compete with European mobile operators, offering space-based connectivity that makes terrestrial infrastructure obsolete.
Corporate Rivalries, State Mediation
The upcoming decision is set to favour the European satellite operators, with whom European telecom operators prefer to interact because they are not seen as a direct threat to their business model. In other words, the regulators are choosing which giants get protected and which giants get challenged, while the rest of society gets told this is what “sovereignty” looks like.
The question is whether the move will anger the US government, which, since Donald Trump returned to the White House last year, has been particularly assertive in protecting the interests of American companies abroad, including in Europe. At the Mobile World Congress in March, the chairman of the US Federal Communications Commission, Brendan Carr, warned the EU against favouring European providers in satellite spectrum allocations.
Carr said, “Europe has national champion satellite providers that do substantial business in the US. And I think we have all benefited from a fair and even-handed approach. And whether we get to continue to do that, frankly, is in the hands of European regulators right now.” He also said, “If Europe insists on going down a path of satellite sovereignty that excludes providers that are not based in the continent, then the US will have to be taking that into account with respect to the reciprocal treatment that we provide.”
That is the language of empire by spreadsheet: access, reciprocity, retaliation, and the quiet threat that regulators can rearrange markets on behalf of one bloc or another.
Defence Wants Its Slice Too
At the same time, the Commission believes the worst-case scenario has already been avoided: last week, EU policymakers managed to settle their differences and reach a political agreement on the controversial EU-US trade deal. But the 2 GHz radio band also pits commercial interests against military applications, with the defence establishment perpetually seeking to reserve bandwidth for its own use.
Within the Commission, this tension is playing out in the form of a clash between EU digital chief Henna Virkkunen, who is closer to the interests of telecom operators, and Defence Commissioner Andrius Kubilius. In an interview with the Financial Times last week, Kubilius pushed for IRIS² to obtain a slice of satellite frequencies, a position not necessarily shared by the rest of the Commission.
Spectrum is a scarce resource, and its allocation has always been a balancing act between competing interests. As the EU presses ahead with developing its domestic technology solutions, striking the right balance — avoiding Washington’s wrath and leaving enough room for defence applications — will be a particularly delicate act. For everyone below the level of the regulators, executives, and defence officials, the result is the same: decisions made at the top, consequences carried everywhere else.