“GovSatCom” Could Reduce the EU’s Dependence on “Starlink”
“GovSatCom”, or governmental satellite communications, is part of the EU Space Programme and is intended to provide Member States with secure satellite communications. It is designed to support critical functions, civil protection, border surveillance, and crisis management in situations where terrestrial communications infrastructure is overloaded or unavailable.
The main difference between “Starlink” and “GovSatCom” is that EU satellite services are intended to serve the needs of Member States. “Starlink”, by contrast, is owned by US billionaire Elon Musk, which means that he can, for example, not only prevent Russia from using it in the war against Ukraine, but also restrict Ukrainians from using “Starlink” to carry out long-range strikes on Russian territory. Since “Starlink” is a private company, there is little that can be done to influence it directly. For this reason, a solution that is fully under EU control and serves its interests is more advantageous for the EU.
On the other hand, the “Starlink” network currently already has more than 11,000 satellites, while after 2030, if the EU programme achieves its goals, it will have only 350 satellites. At present, there are very few of these EU satellites, and they are located in distant geostationary orbit. Such an orbit provides wider coverage, but communications are slower. “Starlink”, meanwhile, uses low-Earth-orbit satellites, which provide faster connections. In the future, the EU will also have such satellites. However, such a large number of satellites is not necessary for the needs of EU Member State governments because, unlike “GovSatCom”, “Starlink” has to serve millions of users.
In an interview with Latvian Radio, Signe Bāliņa, President of the Latvian Information and Communications Technology Association, described “GovSatCom” as Europe’s alternative to “Starlink”.
“‘GovSatCom’ is a public alternative satellite network created by European Union countries, which also includes various security protocols. Whereas in the case of ‘Starlink’ we rely on a single commercial operator, ‘GovSatCom’ is a common network of the entire European Union. In Europe, there is generally an ambition for Europe to be technologically independent and to have alternatives of its own,” she said.
In this respect, a solution that does not depend on the political or other preferences of a single company owner is more suitable for the communications security of EU Member States. However, Bāliņa emphasises that “Starlink” services are available to the general public, rather than only to public authorities, as is the case with “GovSatCom”.
Russia is also currently trying to develop its own satellite communications capacity – its own alternative to “Starlink”. However, according to “Business Insider”, the latest group of 16 satellites that Russia attempted to launch failed to reach the required altitude. The Ukrainian side has estimated that Russia would need between 200 and 500 satellites for the system to operate, the outlet reports.
Latvia Cannot Use All “GovSatCom” Satellites
“GovSatCom” began operating in January, and it currently provides access to satellites from five Member States – France, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, and Spain.
Jurijs Sadovskis, Director of the Communications Department at the Ministry of Transport, says that only some of these satellites can be used for Latvia’s needs because of their positioning.
“Not all satellites are suitable for Latvia. There are some that are. There are satellites launched by Luxembourg that cover Latvia. But this means that the functionality could be somewhat limited, because we cannot use the entire system to its full extent and capacity,” Sadovskis said.
Other satellites could be used, for example, if the Latvian government needed to communicate with one of Latvia’s embassies in another region of the world during an emergency. However, access to “GovSatCom” satellite communications must be requested at the relevant time. The terminals required to connect to the network must also be requested.
“The number of terminals is limited, and accordingly the cost relative to the benefit is very high. I cannot give you a specific figure right now for how much it would cost, because in my experience so far there has been no need to request something like this and provide such a capability,” Sadovskis said. He added that delivery of the terminals takes approximately one week.
The European Space Agency (ESA) told Latvian Radio that Member States do not have to pay for the possibility of using “GovSatCom” satellite resources.
The Ministry of Transport explained that terminals do have to be paid for, which raises a logical question: perhaps it would be worth investing in the development of such devices and creating so-called domestically developed satellite phones in Latvia that could then be connected to the “GovSatCom” network. On the other hand, one could ask whether, if this is a backup system intended for crises in which, for example, electricity is unavailable, it might make more sense to pay for it separately only when it is actually needed.
Meanwhile, the National Armed Forces (NAF) report that they have access to “GovSatCom” satellite communication services; however, to meet specific requirements in their day-to-day operations, alternative low-Earth-orbit satellite communication solutions are also used.
EU Plans to Develop Satellite Communications; Available Resources Must Be Used for Now
At present, the EU’s independent satellite communication capabilities are limited, but they are set to be significantly expanded. As early as next year, satellites owned by EU commercial operators that meet the required security standards are planned to be included in the “GovSatCom” network. Meanwhile, in 2029, the first satellites of the EU’s “IRIS²” programme are expected to be launched into orbit. Unlike “GovSatCom”, which brings together existing resources, this programme plans to launch more than 300 new satellites.
Both Bāliņa and Sadovskis believe that in a crisis, the resources available at the particular moment should be used. Therefore, both view positively the use of “Starlink” communications by several emergency services during the storm.
At the same time, it should be understood that satellite communications are, and will continue to be, one of the backup communication channels, while the biggest challenge during the storm was caused by disruptions to the electricity supply.
“In order to operate our devices or the ground-based equipment needed to receive these satellite signals, we need electricity. If we have such an alternative network that state institutions and state-authorised representatives can use, and generators are also provided accordingly, then it serves as an alternative,” Bāliņa said.
Pauls Irbins, Head of the Space Technology Department at Riga Technical University, emphasises in a written response that “the most important issue is not only access to the system itself, but also the country’s readiness to identify users, acquire appropriate equipment, develop usage procedures, and integrate satellite communications into crisis management processes.”
According to Irbins, this will determine how effectively these capabilities can be used in crisis situations.
Meanwhile, ESA reports that a new EU-wide early warning system based on the existing “Galileo” navigation satellite network will become operational at the beginning of next year. It will allow public authorities to send alerts to smartphones and other “Galileo”-compatible devices. Unlike cell broadcast, the new system will also work without a mobile network or internet connection. The responsible Latvian authorities have already tested the service and provided ESA with positive feedback.
Expert: Latvia Should Be More Actively Involved in Developing the EU Satellite Communications Network
“For us, as a smaller country, this is also a kind of decision point. We have to decide whether, in the future, we will buy these types of services and products from others, or whether we make the decision now to strategically and purposefully develop these capabilities ourselves, here in Latvia,” Štebelis said.
Satellite communication solutions manufactured in Latvia would be useful not only for crisis management, but also for managing rural and forest areas, ensuring urban mobility, and in other sectors of the economy, Štebelis said. Moreover, these solutions could be exported. He calls on the responsible ministry to continue the discussion with the industry and notes that space technologies in Latvia have become increasingly popular over the past three years, both among entrepreneurs and in academia.
