7 ms·

People asked Elon Musk on twitter to deploy Starlink to Turkey and he said he can't because it is not approved. I wonder why.

Fellshard 4y ago
Erdogan explicitly declined it when Musk offered.
- anticensor 4y ago
  The main probable cause for it is that Starlink wanted to offer it unfiltered, as they normally do in all other cases of emergency relief coverage; but the Turkish government wanted the regular filtering.
IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
There is a difference between war and executive priviledges. The former (Russia) unilaterally imposed a decision (war) on another government and its people. The latter (erdogan) is acting in his capacity as the elected representative of the people. Starlink cannot override the decision of the elected executive. He needs approval for that.
- malfist 4y ago
  Approval from whom?
  - vinceguidry 4y ago
    The state. In the case of UA that was Zelensky. In Turkey it's Erdogan. HNer often seem to have this weird idea that companies can take governments head-on.
    - postingawayonhn 4y ago
      Depends on the countries involved. The US has backed SpaceX in enabling Starlink service in Iran.
      - Darmody 4y ago
        But Turkey is an ally and a NATO member.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  >> elected representative of the people. Was he? >>Starlink cannot override the decision of the elected executive. He needs approval for that. Pretty sure he could given the service is in space and Turkey lacks the ability or even really legitimate authority to enforce rules in Low earth orbit. Elon chooses not to because he has enough hot water with US Politicians than to open up that mess. I bet is more worried but US government reactions here than Turkey;s government
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- troad 4y ago
  This is a strange comment; maybe I'm not understanding it. 1) Starlink is available on the internationally recognised territory of Ukraine, with the support of the government of Ukraine. The unlawful presence of Russian troops in Ukrainian territory doesn't change any of this. Turkish authorities, conversely, have not authorised Starlink in Turkey (for obvious reasons - their terror at losing their power to censor). 2) Turkey is not a democracy, and to say Erdogan was elected by the people ignores his misuse of state power to suppress, harass, and imprison members of the opposition, his control of the media, his control of the judiciary, his vast corruption, and his meddling - both de jure and de facto - with Turkey's constitution and electoral law. No free election can happen under such circumstances. The trappings of voting do not make for a democracy.
- Darmody 4y ago
  I never stated that Starlink has any legitimacy over an elected government. My point is that Erdogan doesn't want his people to be able to communicate freely even in the middle of a catastrophe like this.
- saiya-jin 4y ago
  Whats the difference between Starlink and say all satellite TV networks available anywhere, to anybody with antenna pointing up? What can he do, sue an American company for allowing freedom of speech? Musk can safely ignore that, and Turkey would need his empire more than Musk Turkey (to be clear I can imagine erdogan strongarming US government due to Nato bases but he would be showing off some nasty side of himself) You can't block Starlink signal, it ain't cable in the ground or in sea you can cut at your will.
  - anticensor 4y ago
    Starlink satellites, unlike television satellites, perform active packet switching, not mere beam steering.
- seydor 4y ago
  > is acting in his capacity as the elected representative You can be the "elected representative" of anything if you put everyone else in jail
  - IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
    Yet. People voted for that. Same for Chavez. Same for maduro. The collective can make wrong decisions that doesnt take away from the fact that the laws and its people are sovereign over its territory.
    - seydor 4y ago
      Erdogan is not simply a populist and nationalist who also uses religion (even though he s a typical opportunist and definitely not a pious person). He also imprisons the opposition, silences media etc. This is typically called a dictator. The 'collective' did not make any of those decisions , he did
      - Darmody 4y ago
        Just to elaborate a bit further. The current mayor of Istanbul is the politician who could win the next presidential election and he's been sentenced to a few years in prison and banned him from politics because he "insulted some elected officials". His crime was actually calling a few people clowns when they recalled for a runoff of the elections he won. He then won the runoff with a wider margin and now has to be taken down somehow.
      - IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
        I don't have a horse in this race, but you do not get to change definitions...to accommodate your worldview. This "dictator" - from wikipedia: In the June 2011 elections, Erdoğan's governing party won 327 seats (49.83% of the popular vote) making Erdoğan the only prime minister in Turkey's history to win three consecutive general elections, each time receiving more votes than the previous election. The second party, the Republican People's Party (CHP), received 135 seats (25.94%), the nationalist MHP received 53 seats (13.01%), and the Independents received 35 seats (6.58%). To be clear, i'm not questioning (nor I have an opinion on) any of your prior Erdogan coloring, except of course the usage of the word "dictator".

Fellshard 4y ago

Erdogan explicitly declined it when Musk offered.

anticensor 4y ago
The main probable cause for it is that Starlink wanted to offer it unfiltered, as they normally do in all other cases of emergency relief coverage; but the Turkish government wanted the regular filtering.

IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago

There is a difference between war and executive priviledges. The former (Russia) unilaterally imposed a decision (war) on another government and its people. The latter (erdogan) is acting in his capacity as the elected representative of the people. Starlink cannot override the decision of the elected executive. He needs approval for that.

malfist 4y ago
Approval from whom?
- vinceguidry 4y ago
  The state. In the case of UA that was Zelensky. In Turkey it's Erdogan. HNer often seem to have this weird idea that companies can take governments head-on.
  - postingawayonhn 4y ago
    Depends on the countries involved. The US has backed SpaceX in enabling Starlink service in Iran.
    - Darmody 4y ago
      But Turkey is an ally and a NATO member.
phpisthebest 4y ago
>> elected representative of the people. Was he? >>Starlink cannot override the decision of the elected executive. He needs approval for that. Pretty sure he could given the service is in space and Turkey lacks the ability or even really legitimate authority to enforce rules in Low earth orbit. Elon chooses not to because he has enough hot water with US Politicians than to open up that mess. I bet is more worried but US government reactions here than Turkey;s government
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
troad 4y ago
This is a strange comment; maybe I'm not understanding it. 1) Starlink is available on the internationally recognised territory of Ukraine, with the support of the government of Ukraine. The unlawful presence of Russian troops in Ukrainian territory doesn't change any of this. Turkish authorities, conversely, have not authorised Starlink in Turkey (for obvious reasons - their terror at losing their power to censor). 2) Turkey is not a democracy, and to say Erdogan was elected by the people ignores his misuse of state power to suppress, harass, and imprison members of the opposition, his control of the media, his control of the judiciary, his vast corruption, and his meddling - both de jure and de facto - with Turkey's constitution and electoral law. No free election can happen under such circumstances. The trappings of voting do not make for a democracy.
Darmody 4y ago
I never stated that Starlink has any legitimacy over an elected government. My point is that Erdogan doesn't want his people to be able to communicate freely even in the middle of a catastrophe like this.
saiya-jin 4y ago
Whats the difference between Starlink and say all satellite TV networks available anywhere, to anybody with antenna pointing up? What can he do, sue an American company for allowing freedom of speech? Musk can safely ignore that, and Turkey would need his empire more than Musk Turkey (to be clear I can imagine erdogan strongarming US government due to Nato bases but he would be showing off some nasty side of himself) You can't block Starlink signal, it ain't cable in the ground or in sea you can cut at your will.
- anticensor 4y ago
  Starlink satellites, unlike television satellites, perform active packet switching, not mere beam steering.
seydor 4y ago
> is acting in his capacity as the elected representative You can be the "elected representative" of anything if you put everyone else in jail
- IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
  Yet. People voted for that. Same for Chavez. Same for maduro. The collective can make wrong decisions that doesnt take away from the fact that the laws and its people are sovereign over its territory.
  - seydor 4y ago
    Erdogan is not simply a populist and nationalist who also uses religion (even though he s a typical opportunist and definitely not a pious person). He also imprisons the opposition, silences media etc. This is typically called a dictator. The 'collective' did not make any of those decisions , he did
    - Darmody 4y ago
      Just to elaborate a bit further. The current mayor of Istanbul is the politician who could win the next presidential election and he's been sentenced to a few years in prison and banned him from politics because he "insulted some elected officials". His crime was actually calling a few people clowns when they recalled for a runoff of the elections he won. He then won the runoff with a wider margin and now has to be taken down somehow.
    - IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
      I don't have a horse in this race, but you do not get to change definitions...to accommodate your worldview. This "dictator" - from wikipedia: In the June 2011 elections, Erdoğan's governing party won 327 seats (49.83% of the popular vote) making Erdoğan the only prime minister in Turkey's history to win three consecutive general elections, each time receiving more votes than the previous election. The second party, the Republican People's Party (CHP), received 135 seats (25.94%), the nationalist MHP received 53 seats (13.01%), and the Independents received 35 seats (6.58%). To be clear, i'm not questioning (nor I have an opinion on) any of your prior Erdogan coloring, except of course the usage of the word "dictator".