The White House criticized Elon Musk for endorsing what it deemed an “abhorrent promotion of antisemitic and racist hate,” related to his support for what officials called a “hideous lie” about Jews. Despite this, the U.S. government has recently become more dependent on Musk, committing up to $1.2 billion for SpaceX launches in the coming year, primarily for crucial Pentagon assets such as spy and command-and-control satellites.
In September, the Pentagon also agreed to invest millions in “Starshield,” a secure communications system developed by Musk’s SpaceX, utilizing the Starlink satellites, which played a vital role for Ukraine during its conflict with Russia. Administration officials emphasize the importance of Starlink in deterring Chinese efforts to disrupt communications, highlighting its resilience compared to the Pentagon’s own communication satellites.
The dilemma faced by the U.S. government is evident: despite public denunciations of Musk’s views, there are limited alternatives to his technology. Unlike publicly held defense contractors, SpaceX is privately owned by Musk, making it less susceptible to external pressure. The administration acknowledges the need for alternatives but points out that no other company has matched SpaceX’s capabilities in reusable rockets, astronaut launches, or deploying heavy satellites into high-Earth orbit.
Since the invasion of Ukraine, military reliance on Musk has grown. Musk’s decision to provide Starlink equipment to Ukraine enabled communication and targeting of Russian assets. Even as Musk declined to extend coverage to Crimea, his collaboration with Gen. Mark A. Milley led to the development of Starshield, a Pentagon system based on Starlink but under the Pentagon’s control.
NASA is also heavily engaged with Musk, with contracts exceeding $4 billion to use SpaceX’s Starship rocket for moon missions and supplying the International Space Station. During Q2 2023, SpaceX carried nearly 80% of the world’s payload by mass into space, showcasing its dominance in the space industry.
While Musk has brought cost benefits to the Defense Department, officials are actively seeking to diversify space launch options, especially for smaller commercial loads and sensitive national security launches. However, SpaceX’s dominance persists due to a lack of viable alternatives, and new providers are being sought to reduce reliance on a single launch provider.
The Pentagon’s increased demand for space access aligns with the growing need for low-Earth orbit surveillance and communication technology. The plan to launch thousands of smaller, cheaper satellites aims to defend against potential efforts by China to disable traditional, more expensive satellites. This strategy likely means continued reliance on SpaceX in the foreseeable future.
Even as competition from other companies like Blue Origin, Arianespace, and new entrants emerges, SpaceX remains the primary option due to delays in their own rocket systems. Concerns about SpaceX’s dominating role have been raised in Congress, particularly regarding national security liabilities. Senator Jack Reed highlighted these issues, emphasizing the potential risks associated with SpaceX’s commanding position in providing military access to space and space-based communications.
