Wars without bullets.. Is the fate of conflicts in the hands of Silicon Valley?

Listen to the article. The audio text is automated, generated by an automated system

Imagine the fate of a bloody battle, in which the axes of attack and defense were arranged, and tanks and planes were mobilized for it, not by a decision from the General Staff, but by a quick push of a button or a simple adjustment made by an engineer in Silicon Valley, which is thousands of kilometers away from the lines of fire.

This concept is no longer just a plot from science fiction scenarios, but rather a tangible reality that shocked the entire world. American officials confirmed the day before yesterday that American billionaire Elon Musk had issued orders to slow down the “Starshield” system, which is the military version of the “Starlink” satellite service that the Ukrainian army relies on for its communications and directing its operations.

They also added that Musk set a maximum speed limit for the devices that can connect to the network, which led to depriving the Ukrainian attack and interceptor drones of real-time communication in the sky, and making them practically useless while they were moving at high speed, according to the Wall Street Journal.

This decision came at a time when Musk and US President Donald Trump expressed their dissatisfaction with the Ukrainian attacks that targeted Russian oil refineries.

Although the US Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, denied that the Pentagon had directed any changes, and Trump confirmed that the administration was not responsible for Kiev’s loss of service, this incident shed light on the fate of the battle fronts, which has apparently become dependent on servers led by private companies.

In this context, Dr. Ghada Mohamed Amer, professor of electrical systems engineering at Benha University, specialist in artificial intelligence at the Center for Support and Decision Making at the Presidency of the Egyptian Council of Ministers, and a fellow and lecturer at the Military Academy for Postgraduate and Strategic Studies, confirmed that the news of the slowdown of the “Starshield” system is not merely a technical dispute between a company and a government, but rather “a moment revealing a profound shift in the nature of power, and a clear warning that the keys to modern war are no longer entirely in the hands of official armies.”

She also added in statements to Al Arabiya.net/Al Hadath.net that “StarShield” represents the encrypted and protected military version of the “Starlink” satellite network, which Musk developed for the Pentagon and national security agencies, and is considered the “military nervous system” of the Ukrainian army, as it ensures directing drones, coordinating the movement of units, and operating interception squadrons that chase missiles and suicide planes.

She pointed out that one decision to set a speed limit for mobile devices that does not exceed 160 km/h is sufficient for the interceptor drones to lose their connection immediately at the moment of clash.

In addition, the artificial intelligence official added that the incident is not the first of its kind; In 2022, Starlink coverage over the Kherson front was disrupted during a counterattack, so Kiev’s drones went out and its artillery faltered. She stressed that her thesis and research at the Military Academy and Military College on asymmetric warfare and the dangers of rapid development proved that technology gives the smaller party the ability to challenge the larger party, but at the same time it cultivates “a hidden weakness, which is reliance on systems that it does not possess.”

Amer pointed out that the entry of artificial intelligence into this equation doubles the danger, as the management of self-directed battles depends on three layers: infrastructure, flowing data, and algorithms.

She also explained that whoever owns these classes, even if it is an unelected commercial company that is not subject to the laws of war, now has the ability to resolve the battle without firing a single bullet.

In turn, Dr. Muhammad Askar, a specialist in information systems and artificial intelligence, believed that the directives restricting military service for “Starshield” highlight an issue that goes beyond the boundaries of political disagreement, to raise a crucial strategic question, which is, has possession of technology now given companies and individuals the ability to reshape the balance of wars and the choices of countries?

Askar also explained to Al Arabiya.net/Al Hadath.net that military power is no longer measured only by the soldiers and traditional military arsenal countries possess, but rather by their ability to control the digital infrastructure that makes these weapons effective and operational on the battlefield. He said: “When operations are managed via satellite communications networks to exchange data and analyze it in real time via artificial intelligence techniques, the continuity of service becomes combat power itself.”

He also considered that the most important lesson from the “Starshield” case goes beyond the person of Elon Musk and touches on the nature of the world that is currently being shaped, where the influence of companies that own data centers, satellites, and smart platforms is increasing, which forces countries to reconsider their contracts and oversight mechanisms so that their military options do not become hostage to volatile commercial or political arrangements.

For his part, Engineer Mahmoud Al-Koumi, a specialist in artificial intelligence, said that what is happening demonstrates how the technical role of companies has shifted from merely providing commercial services to directly influencing the operational capabilities of armies.

Al-Komi also indicated to Al-Arabiya.net/Al-Hadath.net that restricting the speed of service in “Starshield” paralyzed the movement of Ukrainian fast marches. He said: “Here you do not need to destroy the weapon to disrupt its mission, rather it is sufficient to restrict the service on which it depends.” He pointed out that despite the conflicting stories about who made the decision, what is certain is that excessive reliance on one company creates enormous influence for the supplying party, especially in the absence of a ready alternative.

He concluded by stressing that artificial intelligence and modern systems require a permanent connection between data collection, transmission, and analysis. He explained that the concept of “technological sovereignty requires that any regime not only support the external technological option, but rather must build local capabilities and find alternatives capable of working under conditions of crises and service interruptions.”