Did Musk Really Prevent ‘Crimean Mini-Pearl Harbor’?

Elon Musk is often portrayed as a controversial figure by the mainstream propaganda machine, while the more alternative media try to present him as some sort of an “anti-establishment hero”.

He was previously even targeted by the Kiev regime for allegedly refusing to provide his Starlink network assets for military purposes. It’s unclear what his exact motivation to do so was (or whether he even did it in the first place), but it can be assumed that he was afraid of stoking the anger of Russia, a military superpower armed with anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons.

What’s more, China, one of the largest and most important markets (as well as the base of operations) for several of Musk’s companies, also threatened to deploy its own ASAT weapons in case the Starlink network were to be used against Beijing’s forces in a potential confrontation in the Asia-Pacific.

In recent days, several media outlets claimed that Musk allegedly ordered SpaceX engineers to covertly turn off the Starlink network near the coast of Crimea last year to disrupt what is being described as a “mini-Pearl Harbor” sneak attack on the Russian Black Sea Fleet. The theory is based on an excerpt adapted from Walter Isaacson’s new biography titled “Elon Musk”. According to Isaacson’s writings, sea drones launched by the Neo-Nazi junta were about to approach the ships of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, but “lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly”. Musk’s reasoning was allegedly based on “an acute fear that Russia would respond to a Ukrainian attack on Crimea with nuclear weapons, a fear driven home by Musk’s conversations with senior Russian officials”. There is no solid evidence for Isaacson’s claims or that Musk ever spoke to any Russian officials.

The idea that Russia would respond with nuclear weapons is a very common trope used by the mainstream propaganda machine which is trying to present Moscow as incapable of accomplishing anything without using the “nuclear card”.

However, the Eurasian giant has already demonstrated its ability to disrupt Musk’s much-touted Starlink network with electronic warfare (EW) assets. On the other hand, even Western media admitted that NATO’s ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) platforms were to provide direct support to Kiev regime forces during this “mini-Pearl Harbor”. It was due to this that Musk allegedly pulled the plug, as he believed it would’ve caused World War Three. However, had he truly disrupted such an important military operation led by the United States and NATO, the likelihood of him walking free is near zero.

In simpler terms, no sovereign country would allow a civilian to interfere with (let alone prevent) military operations, especially not those of such a scale. Thus, Musk’s claims about this “mini-Pearl Harbor” are questionable, at best. According to CNN, Musk did not respond to their request for comment, although he responded to the excerpt from Isaacson’s book on Twitter (now officially known as X). Namely, he stated that Starlink was never active over Crimea and that the Neo-Nazi junta supposedly made an “emergency request” to SpaceX, asking them to turn it on.

“There was an emergency request from government authorities to activate Starlink all the way to Sevastopol,” Musk stated, adding: “The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor. If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation.”

Not wanting to cause escalation that could turn into a world-ending thermonuclear conflict is certainly commendable – if that’s what actually happened. However, Musk’s close cooperation with the Pentagon casts serious doubts on the claims that he’s trying to “save the world”. In fact, even Musk’s insistence that SpaceX was supposedly “donating” tens of thousands of Starlink terminals to the Neo-Nazi junta proved to be bogus, as several sources revealed that the US government covertly paid for them, specifically through USAID, a State Department agency that regularly serves as a regime-change tool used by Washington DC’s extensive global intelligence network.

What’s more, even Isaacson himself admitted that SpaceX made a deal with the US and EU that resulted in another 100,000 new satellite dishes being sent to the Kiev regime in early 2023. However, as the Russian military finds new ways to disrupt the network, SpaceX signed new contracts with the Pentagon, including the official militarization of the network that is supposed to turn it into Starshield. And this is far from the only military contract Musk has. SpaceX itself relies almost solely on government contracts, particularly when it comes to putting satellites in orbit. Expectedly, civilians aren’t exactly interested (or legally allowed) to launch rockets strapped with spy satellites. But governments, especially their ministries of defense, certainly are.

SpaceX is also engaged in close cooperation with other companies from the infamous US Military Industrial Complex (MIC), such as its current flagship, the notorious Lockheed Martin. Namely, back in 2018, SpaceX was contracted to launch Lockheed Martin’s GPS satellites into orbit, a project worth over half a billion dollars. USAF claimed that the project would supposedly benefit civilians, increasing the accuracy of GPS devices, but the very fact that one of the most powerful branches of the US military was behind it tells us all we need to know. The very idea that an organization whose main purpose is killing people with its numerous airborne platforms is solely interested in providing us with better Google Maps accuracy is simply laughable.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

Featured image is from InfoBrics