Amid expanding censorship, deliberate internet shutdowns, and nationwide protests, SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet has become a vital lifeline for tens of thousands of Iranian users seeking free access to information. But this connection provoked a fierce reaction from the Islamic Republic. A formal complaint submitted by Iran to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) marked the beginning of an unprecedented legal battle between the concept of national sovereignty and the right to internet access, a conflict that continues in successive meetings of the Radio Regulations Board (RRB).
October 2025: Renewed Complaint by Iran
On October 20, 2025, the Islamic Republic submitted a new official document to the ITU, asserting that Starlink terminals were still operating unlawfully within Iran, with “at least 100,000 users” connected to the service. Iran submitted real speed test results from Tehran as evidence that the terminals were technically functional and providing stable coverage. The government demanded the immediate deactivation of Iranian user terminals, describing the situation as a “fundamental violation of national sovereignty and ITU regulations.”
U.S. and Norway: Denying Responsibility, Defending Connectivity
In response, the United States reaffirmed its commitment to Article 18 of the Radio Regulations and reiterated ITU’s mission to connect the unconnected. It rejected Iran’s allegations of violation, claiming that Iran itself systematically undermines that mission.
Norway, the notifying administration for Starlink, stated that it had no obligation to fulfill Iran’s demand to disconnect users, as the ITU’s current framework does not authorize the RRB to enforce such actions. In its formal reply, Norway warned that the RRB’s references to WRC-19 and WRC-23 resolutions were “overinterpreted” and must be treated with caution.
Iran’s Strong Rebuttal: Accusing the U.S. of Lies and Norway of Evasion
In a separate follow-up document, the Islamic Republic launched a sharply worded rebuttal, accusing the U.S. of “false and misleading statements” and of deliberately justifying Starlink’s unlawful operations in Iran. Iran urged the RRB to explicitly affirm that full responsibility for the operation of a satellite network lies solely with the notifying administration, not with a collective of associated states. Iran further cited SpaceX’s deactivation of over 2,500 terminals in Myanmar to argue that the technical capability to block Iranian users clearly exists, and failure to act cannot be excused.
Ban Demanded on Starlink-Equipped Drones
In the final section of the document, Iran explicitly demanded a ban on Starlink terminals installed on foreign reconnaissance drones, particularly Israeli ones. Previously, Iran had submitted a photo of an Israeli surveillance drone spotted near its western borders carrying a Starlink antenna as evidence in its filings to the ITU.
Conclusion: Not Just a Technical Dispute, But a Political Collision
The Starlink case is more than a regulatory dispute, it represents a broader political clash between authoritarian governments with a security-driven definition of the internet, and users with a freedom-centered vision of global connectivity. As the world’s primary radio-frequency regulatory body, the ITU is now tasked with navigating contradictory interpretations of its own resolutions while balancing mounting political pressures from its member states. The outcome of this case could set a legal precedent for or against open internet access in future international disputes.