Italy, beyond the denials from Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, will make an agreement with the Starlink di Elon Musk on satellite services, at least in the so-called white areas of market failure? And if so, will the advantages or the risks be greater for Italy? It is not easy to answer these questions, which are inflaming the Italian political debate, because the whole matter is still too shrouded in fog. But if there is a person in Italy who is able to talk about Starlink without ideological prejudices and with great technical competence, this is certainly Franco Bernabe, former CEO of Eni and Telecom Italia and recent author with Paolo Pagliaro of a scathing book published by Solferino, the title of which is Iin a trap it's a whole program and it clearly highlights the dangers that the entire West is running. In this interview with FIRST online Bernabe explains How are things on Starlink? and he does not spare strong judgments on Musk (“brilliant entrepreneur but reckless politician”) who will be discussed for a long time to come. Let’s hear it.
Doctor Bernabè, the hypothesis of an agreement between Italy and Elon Musk's Starlink for the supply of satellite services for 1,5 billion euros is inflaming the Italian political scene but it is not clear what exactly it is. What services are we talking about and for Italy what would be the advantages and opportunities of an agreement with Starlink and what, instead, are the risks and dangers?
"We must start from a question: what is Starlink? And how can Italy address the issue of the relationship with Starlink? It must be said that, objectively, it is a radical entrepreneurial innovation, which risks putting the telecommunications world in difficulty. In my opinion, the telecommunications world has not yet understood the problems that will arise from the presence of Starlink: it is in fact a company disruptive at the telecommunications level just like Tesla was for the automotive world. Now, let's start with a fact: Starlink has 4 million subscribers in the world, 50 thousand of which are in Italy. It uses satellites that rotate in low orbit (much less expensive than the handful of satellites that Italy has put in geo-stationary orbit, that is, higher up, ed). Just to make a comparison: all the other satellite operators have a combined 4 million customers, but the big difference is that Starlink has created all its users very recently, while the others have taken thirty years to collect them”.
Given these premises and these data, what is, in your opinion, the objective of Starlink?
"Starlink is moving forward like its rocket. Through his company, Musk has developed a launcher that puts dozens and dozens of satellites into orbit at a time. His ambition, in my opinion, is to become a global telephone operator and put the world of telecommunications in difficulty. Mind you, the satellite does not yet have the capacity of terrestrial lines, that is to say fiber, but it must be recognized that Starlink sends new satellites into orbit - about 7 thousand to date, with the ambition of rapidly increasing the number - and has a very intelligent and particularly ambitious business model because, depending on the development of demand, Starlink directs the satellites".
What does it mean?
“It means that the satellites are moved from time to time depending on how the demand evolves. It works more or less like this: Musk continually sends new satellites into orbit to expand the coverage band because the illumination cone of each satellite is limited. In addition, there is the problem of handover because the system is made up of satellites that rotate. This means that communication must pass from one satellite to another. The further you move away from the coverage band, the more power the signal loses. The satellites, moreover, can be moved depending on where the demand for connectivity is and the fuel that the satellites have in their bellies is used to redirect the satellites. Then, when the fuel is exhausted, the satellites are taken back and taken away – with a problem of satellite junk – and gradually the network expands. Elon Musk's plan is truly grandiose”.
And so?
“Musk is now present in Italy with a very competitive offer: for around 40 euros, in rural areas you have coverage with a latency that is not yet comparable to that of mobile networks because today the latency measured at a normal customer with the tools available on the network is between 100 and 140 milliseconds compared to a normal satellite transmission latency which is 500 milliseconds and compared to a 5G latency which is 20 milliseconds. So there is still a delay in the signal but it is still much better than what is available today on the satellite communications market”.
Would Starlink's supply cover the so-called white areas of the country or the entire national territory and also civil, military and diplomatic networks?
“Nothing is known yet about this hypothetical agreement.”
There are those who argue that on an economic and industrial level, Starlink's offer is very competitive and has no rivals, but that to be fully operational it would require large investments: who should pay for them?
“There are European funds linked to the PNRR. However, I would like to underline that Musk’s is an ambitious goal that still requires significant investments that do not only concern satellites but also ground stations because if Tizio makes a call via satellite, Tizio can talk to Caio who is also connected directly to the satellite. But if Tizio needs to talk to someone who has a cell phone, Tizio must go through a terrestrial interchange point”.
Translated?
“Translated: you need to have ground addressing stations. Musk had a ground station in Switzerland, now they tell me he has three ground stations in Italy, but there is Telespazio that could offer him all the ground stations he needs. With an agreement with Telespazio, therefore, Musk could guarantee broad coverage of the territory”.
What effects would an agreement between Italy and Starlink have on Europe, which is planning Iris2? Would the EU be taken aback by the Italian initiative?
“The Iris2 satellite project, assigned to some of the most important European satellite companies for the development of 290 low-orbit satellites, will not be truly operational before 2030. How can an Italian or European politician who looks at this situation react? He is certainly aware of the fact that here we have a very strong delay in covering the white areas. Open Fiber has delays and objective difficulties in completing the coverage and would probably be happy to get rid of this responsibility today. In short, I do not exclude that the politician is tempted to say: let's use Starlink to cover the white areas. And certainly Starlink would cover them easily and very quickly”.
Is there a prerequisite for an agreement between Italy and Starlink that there is a tender and that Starlink wins it or could the Government resort to shortcuts?
“A tender must be held, of course. And I don’t see why the Government should ever think of resorting to shortcuts, there is no need for that. OneWeb from the English Eutelsat would present itself at the tender – which however has 600 satellites instead of the 7 thousand of Starlink, and then we need to see what latency it has -, Project Kuiper from Amazon could perhaps present itself but its launchers have not yet been tested. And I fear very little else. It means that Starlink would win the tender hands down. Moreover, it is sufficient that the technical specifications are sufficiently stringent and there would be no doubts about who can grab the victory”.
Beyond the economic and industrial aspects, it is the political aspect that worries and above all the security of the data that passes through Starlink and that are, yes, encrypted but that are often managed by companies not free from the risk of infiltration by secret services as revealed some time ago by an investigation by the American press. Who can give guarantees on this aspect so delicate for national security?
“On the issue of the security of military and diplomatic networks, I would say that satellite connection networks already exist , embassies already talk with a protected network. Honestly, I don't see a security problem. Military structures? They have their own secure communication systems. So, while I clearly see a competitive advantage in the civilian sector, there are alternatives for the rest, even if objectively Starlink would offer superior performance. What is certain, however, is that the embassy or military unit must have the encryption key, it is the State that must have control over it. The signal must be sent already encrypted, it is transmitted and the satellite must only guarantee transport. When we talk about security in relation to Starlink, we are talking about security in transport and not in the management of the contents of communications. The military have their own encryption systems and they keep them very tight".
Really no risk, in your opinion?
“Of course, I also see government figures speaking freely on WhatsApp chats and I can imagine that the lack of continuous attention to security when communicating is an ever-present risk. But in a normal state, law enforcement, the military and embassies have their own transmission networks, their own encryption systems and have secure management of communication systems. The risks come more from individual behavior than from the infrastructure system. The war in Ukraine has shown that most sensitive information is collected from communications between commonly used mobile phones or even from social networks. Security must be guaranteed by the service that uses the communication infrastructure. Starlink can guarantee performance”.
The other worrying political aspect of Starlink is linked to the personality of Elon Musk who not only will occupy an important role in the new Trump administration but who is used to making politically casual use of Starlink, as when he turned on and off satellite and cybersecurity services first in Ukraine and then in Taiwan: what guarantees of industrial and political neutrality can Italy receive from Starlink?
“The State must protect itself from the eccentricities of a character like Musk. A genius from an entrepreneurial point of view, but reckless from a political and social point of view. Today, however, it is not clear what exactly is being discussed at the government level. I repeat, Starlink has enormous potential for the coverage of white areas and guarantees performances much superior to other satellite communications systems. It probably also represents a danger for mobile telecommunications operators”.
That?
“Not today but in a fairly close perspective, Musk’s business model is to use the frequencies he has available to directly serve cell phones. That is, cell phones become the ground station and the service is transformed into dual use: it will be possible to have a contract, for example, with Tim but when you are out of coverage you will have a contract with Starlink. So Musk would become a global telephone operator because if he uses 5G frequencies and the cell phone speaks directly to the satellite, then he has made a leap in quality. So, ultimately, he would operate outside of all the rules that have governed the definition of the strategies of global telephone operators. Musk would offer his services to everyone. However, for the moment these are hypotheses and many details still need to be clarified”.
Would a possible agreement with Starlink bring other Italian telecommunications and cybersecurity companies to their knees?
“Be careful, Musk is about to start a revolution with its risks and opportunities. But it is also true that it is not possible to fill the sky with satellites: at a certain point someone will say that those spaces must be the subject of an international treaty that currently does not exist for low-altitude satellite orbits. It is not possible for space to be occupied by whoever arrives first. There are problems of all kinds, from satellite junk to interference in celestial observations that must be regulated with an international agreement that must however be much more stringent than the one launched many years ago on extra-atmospheric space. However, telecommunications companies have never considered a satellite operator as a potentially risky competitor. Today, however, they must be careful of Musk”.
