Unfortunately I can’t read that in full but given what I could read, that’s simply Musk’s newest version that he posted on Twitter. It’s not clear what he did when he did it or when the Ukrainians knew what he had done or not done. The original version has Ukrainian ships adrift (and some did wash ashore though possibly in a separate incident). If so then yes the request to turn on Starlink would’ve been very urgent indeed. Basically Musk is doing damage control and the Ukrainians are quite rightly pissed. And his excuse is still bullshit regardless even in his version of events.Re: the Musk story:
I believe that is not an accurate characterization. (see today’s NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/europe/elon-musk-starlink-ukraine.html )
The Krim area had never been activated by Starlink, so Musk did not shut anything down.
What did happen, is that he refused an urgent Ukrainian request to activate Starlink over the Krim peninsula just before the planned attack, arguing that would have made him an “active participant” in the war.
Needless to say, that is obviously exactly what he should have done.
Edit: To be clear, the DoD should have handled the contracts for Starlink (as they do now) the moment they realized how dependent the Ukrainians were on it. That still doesn’t excuse Musk’s or Starlink’s antics.
Elon Musk gave biographer top Ukrainian official’s private messages without permission
Mykhailo Fedorov says disclosure of exchange about military access to Starlink internet service ‘not pretty’
www.ft.com
It is again reiterated that Musk turned it off, they wanted it back on. Whether or not he did it during the said naval operation is unclear (though it definitely was during the Kharkiv offensive and I do remember Ukranian soldiers complaining that suddenly Starlink stopped working as they advanced).
Last edited: