Written by Frode Skar, Finance Journalist.
Europe’s satellite independence and the cost of losing American space dominance
A geopolitical warning from orbit
Satellite and space technology has rapidly shifted from a specialised technological field into a central pillar of geopolitical power. Since the change of administration in the United States at the end of January, European governments and defence planners have been forced to confront a new strategic reality. Dependence on American space infrastructure can no longer be treated as a neutral technical choice. It has become a potential vulnerability with economic, military and political consequences.
Recent disputes surrounding satellite communications and surveillance capabilities have intensified this debate. Statements and actions from key American actors have raised doubts about whether critical services would remain reliable during crises or conflicts. For Europe, this has triggered a reassessment of strategic autonomy, market exposure and long term security planning.
Satellite communications as a security issue
Satellite based communications are now essential to modern military operations. They enable command and control, drone operations, intelligence sharing and reliable connectivity for forces operating in contested environments. In Ukraine, such systems have become deeply embedded in daily military operations, with tens of thousands of terminals in active use.
When this infrastructure is controlled by private companies closely linked to a single state, the risk profile changes fundamentally. Dependence can quickly turn into leverage. For European policymakers, this has underscored that satellite communications are not merely a commercial service, but a core element of national and continental security.
Economic exposure to American suppliers
For American satellite providers, Europe represents a substantial share of their customer base, spanning both civilian users and government contracts. NATO member states and neighbouring regions account for a significant proportion of subscriptions and institutional demand.
If European governments decide to gradually replace American systems with domestic or pan European alternatives, the financial impact on US suppliers could be considerable. Beyond lost revenue, such a shift would weaken American industrial influence in the space sector, an area increasingly tied to economic competitiveness and strategic power.
The emergence of European alternatives
Europe is not starting from zero. A broad ecosystem of satellite operators, manufacturers and research institutions already exists across the continent. In low and medium Earth orbit, European constellations now provide coverage across Europe, parts of Africa and adjacent regions.
These systems were initially designed for civilian purposes, but they hold clear potential for defence and security applications. The main obstacle has been fragmentation. Capabilities are distributed across multiple companies, countries and programmes, limiting scalability and slowing coordinated deployment.
Iris 2 and European industrial strategy
A decisive shift came when the European Union committed substantial funding to a unified satellite initiative. The Iris 2 programme is intended to consolidate European expertise in secure communications, surveillance and resilient digital infrastructure into a coherent system.
The objectives are both strategic and economic. On one level, Iris 2 aims to ensure European control over critical infrastructure. On another, it seeks to strengthen the global competitiveness of European space companies in a market long dominated by American firms.
The programme envisions the deployment of hundreds of satellites in different orbital regimes within a relatively short timeframe. While ambitious, this scale is necessary if Europe is to achieve genuine autonomy.
Cooperation versus fragmentation
A persistent weakness in European defence and space industries has been limited coordination. Large industrial players have often pursued parallel projects in competition with one another rather than contributing to shared platforms. The result has been duplicated costs and slower innovation.
In the space sector, this fragmentation is particularly costly. Past successes in European defence cooperation demonstrate that joint development can deliver advanced capabilities more efficiently. Applied to satellites, deeper integration could reduce unit costs, accelerate production and improve interoperability across systems.
Launch capacity and strategic vulnerability
Satellites require reliable access to launch services. Europe’s launch capability has historically relied on a primary spaceport located outside the continental mainland. While effective in peacetime, this concentration presents an obvious risk in a conflict scenario.
Any disruption to access could severely limit Europe’s ability to replace damaged satellites or expand capacity rapidly. This has renewed interest in alternative launch sites, as well as smaller, more flexible launch vehicles tailored to the growing small satellite market.
National contributions within a shared framework
European space capability is unevenly distributed, but nearly every major country contributes in some form. Some specialise in satellite manufacturing, others in propulsion, software, sensors or ground infrastructure.
When integrated into a shared European framework, these national strengths multiply in value. Smaller countries gain access to technologies and markets beyond their individual reach, while larger states benefit from risk sharing and political legitimacy.
Satellite imagery and intelligence
Communications represent only one dimension of space power. Earth observation and intelligence gathering have become equally critical. The war in Ukraine has demonstrated how access to timely satellite imagery can shape both tactical decisions and strategic outcomes.
Restrictions on access to American imagery providers have highlighted the importance of European alternatives. Systems capable of operating regardless of weather or lighting conditions have proven especially valuable, reinforcing the case for full European control over intelligence data pipelines.
Artificial intelligence and dual use technology
Many European space programmes were originally developed for civilian purposes such as environmental monitoring and disaster response. Yet the underlying technologies often have clear military applications.
Artificial intelligence plays a central role in processing vast volumes of satellite data, enabling rapid detection of changes on the ground. While this raises ethical and political considerations, it also offers strategic advantages. Dual use systems can reduce costs and speed up innovation by serving both civilian and defence needs.
Strategic autonomy as an economic decision
Europe’s investment in space is not driven by security concerns alone. It is also an industrial and economic strategy. Space programmes generate spillover effects across advanced manufacturing, software development and research sectors.
Reducing dependence on American suppliers may require significant upfront investment. Over time, however, it can deliver greater control, lower systemic risk and increased value creation within Europe’s own economy.
The road ahead
Europe stands at a strategic crossroads. Reliance on American space infrastructure has been exposed as a potential weakness in an era of heightened geopolitical competition. At the same time, Europe possesses the technological foundation needed to chart a more independent course.
Success will depend on coordination, sustained investment and political willingness to prioritise security and autonomy over short term savings. If Europe succeeds, the space sector could become a defining example of how strategic independence also serves long term economic interests.
