US ambassador warns EU of retaliation over satellite spectrum plans

U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Andrew Puzder warned in an interview with the Financial Times published Oct. 18, 2026, that the EU would face significant American retaliation if it proceeds with plans to reserve satellite spectrum for domestic operators.

Puzder delivered the warning during an interview with the Financial Times, where he linked the EU’s spectrum reservation plans to possible US countermeasures and stressed concerns about market access for American satellite firms.

Current licences for the two GHz band are held by American firms Viasat and EchoStar since 2009 and are set to expire in 2027. These existing licences cover the same band now under discussion, and their impending expiry triggers the allocation debate.

In May 2026, the European Commission proposed to split the two GHz band into three 10-MHz blocks for 20 years, outlining how it would divide the band pending final approval by the European Parliament and member states. One block is for secure government communications including the EU’s IRIS2 sovereign satellite network. It is a secure communications programme intended to give governments, defence organisations and commercial customers independent communications capabilities.

One for European start-ups, and the rest open to all comers. Under the proposed split, U.S. firms such as SpaceX would compete for at most one of the three blocks, giving American satellite operators access to at most a single third of the band.

U.S. officials contend that artificially shielding regional champions undermines technological competition. Puzder said in the Financial Times that making U.S. providers less competitive is not a legitimate legislative goal, calling the plan ‘synchronized mediocrity’. He expressed this view during his interview, arguing that weakening American firms would not make European ones more competitive.

Puzder argued that Brussels cannot regulate its way to a world-class satellite industry. He noted that IRIS2 is years behind Starlink, and called the reservation of spectrum for nonexistent startups a gamble. This argument was part of his broader critique of the EU’s approach to spectrum allocation.

Puzder added that the threat of retaliation proves Europe’s case for sovereignty. He also pointed to Amazon’s push into satellites as evidence that Starlink will not be the only long-term option for global connectivity.

He made this point while speaking to the Financial Times, arguing that keeping US firms out of the MSS allocations (Mobile Satellite Service (MSS), which allows satellites to connect directly to ordinary mobile phones without intermediate ground infrastructure) would harm European businesses that rely on the American market. Puzder further cautioned that such a reservation could lead to ‘devastating’ retaliation against European firms in the United States, potentially affecting companies like SpaceX and Amazon.

FCC Chair Brendan Carr has said the U.S. could ‘mirror’ Europe’s approach and push European satellite operators out of the American market. The remark underscores the reciprocal threats that the sides are exchanging over spectrum policy.

SpaceX warned that the EU plan could undermine connectivity in Ukraine, where Starlink provides critical civilian and military communications. On Oct. 14, 2026, Starlink service for fast-moving terminals in Ukraine experienced throttling without warning, disrupting drone operations.

Elon Musk said the U.S. government sets the limits on the military Starshield service, and Reuters reported the White House ordered them. The throttling coincided with U.S. pressure on Kyiv to stop striking Russian oil refineries, the same pressure behind a Trump-era diesel deal with Putin.

For European governments, the episode showed that a network the United States can shut off is not reliable for defense, emergency services, or phone networks, strengthening the case for a European-owned system. Puzder argued that no serious government would leave its military, emergency services, or phone networks dependent on a service that authorities can throttle for political reasons.

EU regulators say the reservation nurtures domestic space industrial capabilities and complements the multi‐orbit IRIS2 sovereign satellite network. The European Commission is investing heavily in IRIS2, a secure satellite communications programme intended to give governments, defence organisations, and commercial customers independent communications capabilities.

According to August‐confirmed plans, IRIS2’s main constellation will consist of 348 satellites in low and medium Earth orbit, with the first launches set for 2029. This outlines the planned scale and timeline for the IRIS2 constellation.

IRIS2 aims to cut Europe’s dependence on foreign-controlled communications networks, especially during military emergencies, cyber incidents or terrestrial network outages. The Commission’s technical program says IRIS2 could support border management, crisis response, defense and other sensitive government tasks. Although IRIS2 remains non-operational, European commercial operators must contend with strong competition from SpaceX.

The FCC has cleared 15,000 next-generation Starlink Mobile satellites, and Brazil has granted full two GHz access, which Starlink describes as giving it global S-band priority. Deutsche Telekom plans a Starlink-based satellite-to-mobile service for Europe, targeting a 2028 rollout.

Eutelsat, which operates the OneWeb satellite network, is positioned to benefit from increased demand for alternatives to Starlink. Eutelsat’s shares rose sharply on Oct. 14, 2026, after reports of restrictions affecting Ukrainian access to certain Starlink services, reflecting renewed interest in European‐controlled satellite communications. OneWeb cannot simply replace Starlink across all applications because of differences in network architecture, terminal equipment, and available capacity.

The standoff highlights how satellite rules could spark wider transatlantic trade clashes, recalling past disputes that drove U.S. firms from European space summits over local‐content limits. The satellite dispute follows earlier disagreements over European regulation of American digital companies, including competition enforcement and restrictions on online platforms.

As reported by EU Today in May, the European Commission had already proposed reserving much of the future mobile satellite spectrum for European operators. This earlier proposal shows that the idea of reserving spectrum for European operators is not new.

Washington’s opposition introduces a different dimension because spectrum allocation directly affects market access, and the administration links the dispute to broader commercial relations, warning that measures against satellite firms could harm unrelated European industries. While the European Commission works on final allocation rules, Washington trade officials are increasing scrutiny of European telecom and industrial exporters.

Brussels has not announced a final decision on the disputed spectrum arrangements, and the United States has not specified which retaliatory measures it would impose. Nothing is final on the European side; the European Parliament and EU governments must negotiate the Commission’s proposal, and authorities could extend current licenses by up to two years. The immediate issue is regulatory rather than an enacted trade restriction; whether it escalates will depend on the Commission’s final proposals and Washington’s willingness to pursue the warning through commercial measures.