Dear Elon, trust the process. It will serve Starlink well

Elon Musk is one of the most remarkable technology entrepreneurs of our era. Starlink is a genuine marvel of satellite engineering. But his October 8 post accusing India of protecting “crony capitalists” is wrong in its facts, framing, and strategy.

I have used Starlink, and I think it is awesome. What is in question is the argument in his post — that India’s regulatory process reflects cronyism. That argument does not survive contact with the facts.

Starlink is not the only company awaiting satellite broadband licensing in India. It is one of three — alongside Reliance Jio’s satellite venture, Jio Satcom, and Bharti-backed Eutelsat OneWeb. All three are at the same stage: Security clearance verification, then spectrum allocation. If this were cronyism designed to protect Reliance Jio, it would be peculiar cronyism — because Jio Satcom is itself in the queue, subject to the same requirements as Starlink.

Indian law requires that any satellite-based telecom service in India satisfy security conditions including lawful interception capability, verification of network nodes and ground stations, and confirmation that Indian users’ data is not routed through foreign territories without authorisation. These are not India-specific eccentricities. Equivalent requirements exist in the US, the EU, and virtually every country that takes communications security seriously.

Satellite broadband is qualitatively different from terrestrial telecom. A mobile tower has a fixed, auditable physical location. Starlink’s low-earth-orbit constellation is different — traffic passes through satellites and ground stations, some located outside Indian territory. The ability of Indian agencies to conduct lawful interception depends on how Starlink routes Indian users’ traffic and where those ground stations sit.

Starlink has been a significant factor in the Ukraine conflict, providing real-time communications capability to military units. India shares borders with two nuclear-armed adversaries and has experienced decades of cross-border terrorism. In August 2017, SpaceX formally expanded Starlink’s trademark registration to include satellite imaging, remote sensing, and communications for military applications. SpaceX has won US Air Force contracts and Starlink’s constellation has been explicitly integrated into US military doctrine as a unified warfighting architecture. This is not a broadband service with incidental military uses. It is a dual-use strategic system.

Musk says Starlink is licensed in 165 countries. What he does not say is that every one of those countries required specific security commitments before granting that licence. India is doing exactly what those countries did.

On Musk’s question, “Is Ambani the Real Boss of India?”, the direct answer is: No. The India Musk describes — where a single conglomerate dictates regulatory outcomes — is pre-2014 India: The 2G spectrum scam, spectrum allocated through opaque “first come, first serve” free. The reforms of the Modi government, including the spectrum auction framework I fought for as an MP at considerable personal cost, were specifically designed to change that. The Open, Safe, Trusted, and Accountable framework under which India’s tech sector now operates applies to all players — Indian and foreign, large and small. That is the opposite of cronyism.

Musk is not the first high-profile technology leader to discover that net worth and global celebrity do not translate into policy influence in democracies that take their sovereignty seriously. Mark Zuckerberg spent years resisting India’s data localisation requirements. Jeff Bezos flew to India in 2020 with a $1 billion announcement, and found visits do not substitute for compliance. With 900 million internet users, the world’s largest digital payments ecosystem, and the fastest-growing AI adoption curve in the developing world, the companies wanting access need India as much or more than India needs any one of them.

The most effective technology leaders in India have understood this. Apple navigated complex local sourcing requirements with patience and became India’s biggest electronics exporter. Samsung built manufacturing capacity long before PLI made it fashionable. None of them posted their frustration on X. They engaged, made their case through proper channels, and built relationships that outlast any single regulatory decision.

There is also something specifically counterproductive about the “crony capitalism” charge when deployed against India’s telecom sector, which has been more systematically reformed than almost any other in the economy. More than anyone, I can attest to that.

I want to end where I began: With genuine respect for what Starlink represents and for what Musk has built. The day Starlink or Jio Satcom or OneWeb is licensed in India will be a good day for Indian connectivity — particularly in rural and remote areas where terrestrial infrastructure is thin.

But right now, Musk is generating a great deal of noise. None of it is the signal. The signal is simple: Complete the security clearance process, satisfy India’s requirements as you have satisfied 165 others, and Starlink will operate in India. A regulatory process that can be accelerated by a founder’s social media reach is not a process. It is a favour. And India does not run on favours anymore.

Patience is unavoidable, Elon. India is doing what India must do — for its citizens, for its security, and for the integrity of the rules-based system it is building. That system will serve Starlink well, when the process is complete. Trust it.

The writer, former MP, former minister of state for Electronics & Information Technology, Government of India, is BJP Kerala state president and MLA for Nemom. Views are personal