A Swedish defence technology company has told LBC that Ukraine needs communications equipment it owns outright, rather than a subscription to a third-party satellite service, after restrictions on Starlink in October limited its ability to defend itself against Russian attacks. The firm, TERASi, set out its case in a report published on 4 November 2026, alongside a Kyiv-based analyst who said the episode had damaged trust between Ukraine and the United States.
Key facts
- Speed cap: connectivity was cut for anything moving faster than 160km/h, according to LBC — the threshold AOL, carrying reporting from The Hill, gave as 100mph. By our own conversion the two figures are within about a mile an hour of each other.
- Who was hit: Starlink-supported Ukrainian military drones, aeroplanes and helicopters, AOL reported.
- Service affected: Starshield, the military version of Starlink, per AOL.
- Musk’s reason: Ukraine breached the terms of service with offensive drone strikes and the “loophole was closed last week”, he wrote on social media, AOL reported.
- How long it lasted: Ukraine’s military was still struggling with a slowed system on the Friday after the restrictions began, with Starshield connections failing in most of the country for drones flying faster than 100mph, AOL reported citing The Wall Street Journal.
- Current status: access has since been restored, LBC reported on 4 November.
- TERASi’s pitch: hardware bought outright, not a subscription.
Why it matters
James Campion, chief executive and co-founder of TERASi, told LBC: “Ukraine should not be dependent on a single provider.” He said having a single provider and a captive market creates a risky situation in which supply can suddenly disappear, according to the broadcaster.
Related: who controls wartime satellite access; pressure on Europe to break Starlink’s grip.
What TERASi is proposing
LBC reported that TERASi is developing systems it says would let armed forces own and control their own secure communications. Campion told the outlet the immediate answer should not be a European replica of Starlink, which depends on a vast satellite network owned and operated by a commercial provider, warning that trying to recreate it would take five years.
He said forces do not need to go to space to solve the problem right now, and described the approach as giving customers sovereign capabilities rather than something the supplier can sit and control.
The RU1 radio unit
The company’s RU1 is a lightweight, pocket-sized radio unit that takes in data, boosts the signal and sends it through the air in a narrow, laser-like beam, according to LBC. Pointing two RU1 units at each other forms a secure wireless link that the firm says is designed to be harder to intercept or disrupt.
Campion said the system can be connected to platforms armed forces already own, including moving vehicles and uncrewed systems in the air and on the ground, and that TERASi is adapting the technology from fixed installations for use on the move. His point, he told LBC, is not that one system solves every communications problem, but that forces should have alternatives if a satellite service is restricted, slowed or switched off.
These performance claims are the company’s own, published in its 4 November report and its product material on TERASi’s own website. Neither LBC nor AOL reported independent testing of the RU1 or a battlefield deployment of it.
Conflicting accounts of who gave the order
The two reports do not line up on responsibility. AOL said Musk initially claimed that decisions to restrict the speed or usage of Starshield are made by the US military and, ultimately, the president, and that he maintained in a Saturday post that Starshield is controlled by the US government and what it decides to do is up to it.
In the same post he alluded to being behind the slowdown, AOL reported, writing that using Starlink — a civilian commercial service — for offensive drone strikes to kill people has never been allowed. LBC, citing Reuters, placed the order inside the White House, reported as a favour to Vladimir Putin. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy alleged the limits were a “planned operation” to stop Ukraine using interceptor systems against Russian drone attacks, and said the White House ordered it, according to LBC; Zelenskyy has said the speed limits remained in place after they were reported lifted.
Political fallout in Washington
Asked about the episode, Donald Trump told reporters he did not want to comment on whether he or someone else had made the call, and said it did not make any difference, according to LBC. He added that the bottom line was that Musk had put the service back.
Several Democrats called for an investigation after The Wall Street Journal reported that Musk ordered the Starshield slowdown, AOL reported, carrying reporting from The Hill. Senator Adam Schiff said either the president or Musk was lying, that the decision had life-or-death consequences for Ukraine, and that Musk should be compelled to testify before Congress under oath.
Musk pushed back by framing the service as indispensable. He wrote that Starlink is critical to Ukraine’s defence because it is the only system that cannot be jammed or blown up, at least for now, and that the Ukrainian front line would collapse immediately if it were turned off, AOL reported. He said this was not a threat but a statement of fact, and claimed SpaceX has done more to defend Ukraine than any private company on Earth. That claim is also, in effect, the argument TERASi is selling against: a single supplier whose withdrawal would be decisive.
The damage in Ukraine
Nazarii Barchuk, an analyst at the Ukrainian Security & Cooperation Centre, told LBC the restrictions caused the mass cancellation of a number of critical operations and affected both troops and civilians. He said the slowdown was “not an accidental technical malfunction but a deliberate restriction of functionality” in active combat zones.
Barchuk said the episode “dealt a blow to trust in international cooperation between Ukraine and the United States”, and warned that tactical effectiveness on the battlefield becomes hostage to corporate interests and domestic US politics.
What it means for consumer Starlink customers
The restrictions both outlets describe applied to Starshield, not to the consumer satellite internet product sold to households and businesses. The distinction is the one Musk himself drew: his stated justification was that the civilian commercial service may not be used for offensive strikes, so the cut-off he described was aimed at a military use case and a government-controlled service, not at retail subscribers.
On that basis, neither report describes any change to Starlink pricing, hardware costs or Starlink availability in other markets, and the only consumer-side effect either records is inside Ukraine, where Barchuk said civilians as well as troops were hit. TERASi is not competing for that market either: its argument, as put to LBC, is a procurement one aimed at armed forces — owning kit rather than renting capacity — and nothing in its pitch addresses what households pay for satellite broadband.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does the RU1 cost, and has anyone bought it?
Neither LBC nor AOL reported a price, a production timeline or any named military customer for the RU1.
Were Starlink or Starshield users outside Ukraine affected?
Neither report described restrictions applied anywhere other than Ukraine.
Did SpaceX comment as a company?
Neither outlet cited a SpaceX corporate statement separate from Musk’s own social media posts.
How many Starlink terminals in Ukraine were affected?
Neither report gives a figure for the number of terminals hit.
![Using Your Own Router with Starlink: Bypass Mode [2026]](https://starlink-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/using-your-own-router-with-starlink-bypass-mode-20-f6c09f95-120x86.png)
