British military historian Chris Owen argues that the controversy over restrictions imposed on Ukraine’s Starshield satellite service could inflict serious damage on the wider US defence industry.
According to Owen, the case provides a concrete example of a risk that has previously been discussed largely in hypothetical terms among countries buying American weapons: the possibility that US-controlled technology or support could be used as political leverage.
The order to restrict Ukraine’s Starshield service came reportedly from inside the White House. Media sources did not identify who issued the order. The White House denied that president Donald Trump had made the decision.
The Telegraph later reported, citing four sources, that Elon Musk had proposed slowing Ukraine’s connections to Trump and that Trump approved the idea. According to the newspaper, this cleared the way for the Pentagon to implement restrictions on Starshield.
The restrictions disrupted Ukrainian drone operations. Starshield connectivity was reportedly cut from fast-moving systems, complicating efforts including the interception of Russian attack drones and strikes in Russian-occupied territory.
Connections were later restored, although some speed restrictions remained in place.
Owen points to the F-35
Owen notes that after Donald Trump returned to the presidency, concerns were raised in Europe over whether the United States could theoretically prevent foreign operators from using F-35 fighter jets through a so-called “kill switch”.
The Pentagon has denied that the aircraft contains such a remote shutdown mechanism.
Nevertheless, the United States can influence the long-term operational capability of many advanced weapons systems sold abroad through support, spare parts, software and other services.
Chris Owen argues that after the Starshield case, the possibility of such dependencies being used for political pressure no longer appears as theoretical as it once did.
He says Trump and Musk have therefore damaged confidence in US defence exports in a way that could have consequences far beyond SpaceX.
“The obvious answer will be to not buy American in the first place,” Owen writes on X of how governments may seek to reduce their dependence on the United States.
The question also concerns Finland
Owen’s reference to the F-35 can be seen as relevant to Finland. The country’s first F-35A fighters arrived in Rovaniemi in September, and Finland has ordered a total of 64 aircraft from the United States.
Claims about a possible F-35 “kill switch” were already debated in Finland in 2025. Major General Timo Herranen, Commander of the Finnish Air Force, rejected the claim at the time, saying there was no system that would allow the United States to remotely disable the aircraft.
The Pentagon’s F-35 programme office has issued a similar statement.
Owen’s argument, however, does not depend on the existence of a technical kill switch. His central point is that the Starshield controversy raises a broader question over whether access to, or support for, US-controlled systems can be restricted as an instrument of foreign-policy pressure.