The United States has reportedly threatened to block Ukraine’s access to Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite internet service unless Kiev agrees to grant American companies access to its critical mineral reserves, according to sources cited by Reuters on February 22. The potential shutdown of the service, which has been instrumental to Ukrainian military operations since Russia’s invasion in 2022, places additional pressure on President Vladimir Zelensky’s government as it seeks to maintain crucial support from Washington.

Since the onset of the conflict, more than 40,000 Starlink terminals have been donated or supplied to Ukraine, allowing troops on the front lines to maintain secure communications. The service, provided by Musk’s SpaceX, has become an indispensable tool for both military coordination and civilian infrastructure. One source quoted by Reuters described Starlink as Ukraine’s “North Star,” emphasizing that losing access would deliver a “massive blow” to the country’s defense capabilities.

Despite its critical importance, Ukraine’s reliance on Starlink has made it vulnerable to political pressure. The reported ultimatum reflects a shift in US policy, where military and technological support is now being tied to economic concessions.

The threat to shut down Starlink was allegedly conveyed during a meeting in Kiev on February 20 between Zelensky and Keith Kellogg, a close ally of US President Donald Trump. According to insiders, Ukrainian officials were warned that without a deal granting US companies significant stakes in the nation’s mineral wealth, Starlink services could be suspended imminently.

In response, Zelensky reportedly offered Trump a preferential partnership in developing Ukraine’s natural resources, including rare-earth minerals crucial for modern technology and defense industries. However, he rejected a proposal that would have granted US entities ownership of 50% of Ukraine’s mineral reserves, stating, “I cannot sell our country.” This refusal has sparked tensions, with Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, calling the reaction “unacceptable” and urging Ukraine to “tone it down” and sign the agreement.

This development marks a turning point in the relationship between Ukraine and the United States. While Washington has provided substantial military aid and technological support, the new demands signal a shift toward leveraging that assistance for long-term economic benefits. By tying continued access to Starlink to mineral rights, US negotiators are seeking to secure a foothold in Ukraine’s resource sector, which is seen as essential for future supply chains in electronics, renewable energy, and defense.

However, the feasibility of such a deal has been questioned. Writing for Bloomberg, commodities expert Javier Blas noted that Ukraine’s known reserves of rare-earth elements are limited, with only small scandium deposits of commercial significance. Additionally, Zelensky acknowledged that around half of Ukraine’s mineral resources are located in regions currently under Russian occupation, further complicating their extraction and export.

The situation is further complicated by the personal and political dynamics between Musk, Trump, and Zelensky. Musk, a vocal supporter of Trump, has become increasingly critical of Ukraine’s leadership. Both Musk and Trump recently referred to Zelensky as a “dictator” and accused him of stifling dissent within the country. Trump also argued that Ukraine should not complain about his administration’s decision to reestablish direct negotiations with Russia, which had been halted under President Joe Biden.

Musk’s influence over Starlink has been a source of controversy throughout the conflict. While the service has been a lifeline for Ukraine, Musk has previously hinted that SpaceX may not continue to provide it indefinitely without financial support from Western governments. His willingness to align with Trump’s hardline stance raises concerns that Starlink’s availability could become increasingly subject to political calculations.

The prospect of losing Starlink poses a significant threat to Ukraine’s military and civilian infrastructure. Without reliable satellite communications, front-line troops would face severe challenges in coordinating operations, while civilian services could experience disruptions in internet access. This vulnerability underscores the risks of relying on private companies for critical wartime infrastructure, especially when those companies are subject to shifting political pressures.

Moreover, the US demand for mineral concessions has raised ethical and sovereignty concerns. Critics argue that leveraging essential technology for economic gain undermines Ukraine’s autonomy at a time when it is fighting for its survival. Zelensky’s refusal to cede control over half of the nation’s mineral wealth reflects broader concerns about maintaining national sovereignty and preventing exploitation under the guise of military assistance.

As Ukraine navigates this latest challenge, the outcome of these negotiations could have far-reaching implications. If Kiev succumbs to US demands, it may secure continued access to Starlink but at the cost of significant economic concessions. Conversely, refusing the deal risks losing a critical technological advantage, potentially weakening Ukraine’s defense capabilities at a crucial moment in the conflict.

The situation also highlights the broader geopolitical dynamics shaping the war in Ukraine. With Trump poised to potentially return to the White House, his administration’s approach to the conflict could shift further toward transactional diplomacy, prioritizing US economic and strategic interests over unconditional support. Meanwhile, Musk’s role as a private actor with outsized influence over Ukraine’s communications infrastructure underscores the growing intersection of technology, politics, and warfare.

Ultimately, whether Ukraine can maintain its access to Starlink without compromising its national sovereignty remains to be seen. But the very threat of a shutdown serves as a stark reminder of the complex and often contentious nature of modern alliances, where technological lifelines can be wielded as instruments of geopolitical leverage.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel