US could cut Ukraine's access to Starlink services over minerals, say sources | Hacker News Reader

US could cut Ukraine's access to Starlink services over minerals, say sources

reuters.com

57 pointsnickthegreek22 comments

Any economy proposing widescale deployment of starlink over capital investment in terrestrial communications take note.

People should find ways to fund diverse LEO orbit providers. There are lots of non colliding orbital planes, Musk, and US strategic relationships do not own space.

I'm pretty sure this will accelerate European planning in this space (-sorry) anyway.

Another nail in the coffin of nuclear non-proliferation.

Russia, the UK, and the US promised to refrain from such economic extortion in the Budapest Memorandum in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons:

  3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and The United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the Principles of the CSCE Final Act, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Securi...

How is this not extortion on a grand scale? What next, chopping off the hands of miners if quotas aren't met à la King Leopold II?

It seems this will be a way for Ukraine to pay for its defense, since Europe is not willing to cover the cost and the US is no longer willing to do it either. It also puts countries that live under the US umbrella in a position to start thinking about their own security. For Ukraine this seems like a win, allowing them to defend themselves at the cost of things underground that they haven't cared to touch, all while receiving protection from the US.

Sounds like Mafia‘s protection deals.

The USA and Europe are on par when it comes to military aid to Ukraine, both with around 62bn EUR. The US spent 45bn EUR on other aid, while Europe spent 70bn.

See the charts on page 4 and 5 here: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/fileadmin/Dateiverwaltung/Subject_Do...

Demanding 500bn in return seems quite a bit. https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-demands-500b-in-rare-e...

Please the small but significant typo: it is B instead of M for the numbers.

yes -- corrected -- thanks

I didn't mention this topic. The issue is that neither Europe nor US are currently willing to allocate the resources necessary for Ukraine to win. Whatever, whoever, gave in the past is irrelevant now.

No it’s not irrelevant it’s still owed.

Source?

EU funds are contributed by more than 27 countries, none of whose individual contribution comes close to what US has contributed.

According to official gov website of EU and US

* EU has allocated $145b + $50b[1]

* US has allocated $174b [2]

$500b is too much but considering how Ukraine has been losing valuable resources to Russia, it's only fair to ask for some security. According to your article, this was the "Victory Plan" all along and Zelensky agreed to it.

[1] https://www.ukraineoversight.gov/Funding/

[2] https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/united-states-america...

And the US is like more than 50 states. Now what?

Germany has 16 states

France has 27 states

Poland has 16 states

Bulgaria has 28 states

Italy has 20 states

so on... Shall we start counting state wise?

And the US has over 3000 counties, many of which are comparable in size and population to those states; compare apples to apples

The money the US sent to Ukraine in relation to its defense is then in turn spent with US military companies. It's a wash deal.

But by sending said money, the US is extending soft (semi-hard) power in the region. This advances US interests.

By essentially trying to blackmail Ukraine however, you make it clear to all other parties that the US is not an entity that can work in good faith. Additionally, by leveraging US private sector tech (Starlink), you're telling others not to integrate US technology if at all possible, hurting the market for US business. We're essentially doing what we accused Hwuawei of doing.

The Trump administration seems to be of the belief that they don't have work with anyone, but that others should work for them. Nothing about this is in the US's best interest. This is foreign policy folly.

A huge amount of American aid sent to Ukraine isn't worth anything. Some of it is Vietnam-era surplus that hadn't been trashed yet. Some of it is Cold War era surplus that would have been trashed too if not donated.

As an American taxpayer, I don't feel a need to squeeze Ukraine over paying for American trash. Maybe they should pay list price for the new toys like the Patriot, but not our reserve equipment. That's plain extortion.

It’s a recapitulation of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, with the modern distinction being between nuclear states and the apparently less sovereign.

won't be this decade but Italy is working on their own system too

https://www.reuters.com/technology/italy-working-alternative...

The sad part is that imposing our will on other countries like this will surely work in the short term to much celebrating among Trump's fan club but this isn't how you treat your friends. And over time we're going to find our soft power on the world stage greatly diminished as countries learn not to take favors from the US because they'll be leveraged against you later.

I know Putin has Trump on a leash but even still I'm impressed they managed to trick him and his crew that the US isn't buying something extremely valuable by throwing our support behind Ukraine. Russia forgot to put the proxy in the war and exposed their real military. You couldn't ask for a better position for the US/NATO to be in getting to hit them directly and keep your hands clean and people out of conflict.

Looks like Trump is treating the government expenditure like a business and wants a ROI.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com