February 2025 Falkland Islands Starlink status – what a few days it’s been!

“Thursday, February 7th 2025: These past few days have been the most contentious since the Starlink Petition Group began its activities in May 2024 to legalise Starlink usage in the Falkland Islands. Boy, what a week so far it has been!

They say a week is a long time in politics, but even a day feels like an eternity when it comes to Starlink activities in the Falklands. Who would’ve thought that ten months ago?

So, let’s catch up with what has been happening. Hold on to your seats!

Monday, 3rd February 2025 – The week began with a Press Release updating islanders on the progress of the Starlink Select Committee in addressing the requests outlined in the petition.

The release followed an update to the Select Committee regarding an overdue report—set to be forwarded to EXCO—prepared by Cambridge Management Consultants. The report outlines recommended next steps for FIG and the Communications Regulator to legalize Starlink’s use in the islands. FIG’s Development and Commercial Services team is overseeing this process.

Falkalnds Government Starlink Press Release.

The Falkland Islands Government Press Release.

Download the full PDF here.

The stated delay from February to April seems reasonable, and we should continue supporting the stakeholders in their efforts. The stated reason behind the delay is particularly interesting, and I may revisit this topic later.

Tuesday, 4th February 2025: The following message was sent to many Starlink users on the Falkland Islands.

This message, targeted at users of Starlink, marks an abrupt shift by significantly disrupting the positive momentum driven by the Starlink Petition Group and supported by the Starlink Select Committee to secure legal approval for Starlink’s use in the Falklands.

The timing and wording of Starlink’s message to consumers couldn’t be worse, with several stakeholders describing it as ‘devastating.’

Industry colleagues have informed me that Starlink services in the Falkland Islands could be cut off within 60 days though I believe this will not occur in practice. It behoves FIG, Communications Regular and EXCO to accelerate their activities to provide Starlink with the approval for the service they require.

Of particular concern is the second sentence of Starlink’s message: ‘Local telecommunication authorities have instructed Starlink to disable your services.’

I must emphasize that we have no verified information regarding the identity of this ‘telecommunication authority.’ FIG and the Communications Regulator currently deny any involvement as can be seen in the Press Release below.

I seem to remember that such emails were sent to users on Ascension Island before approval was granted by the island’s Governor.

Wednesday, 5th February 2025. The Falkland Islands Communications Regulator issued a Press Release following the Starlink Message.

“The Falkland Islands Government (FIG) is aware that Starlink yesterday issued a notification to some of its users, indicating their intent to disable services due to the Falkland Islands not being an authorised territory.

Despite the wording of the communication from Starlink, FIG has not instructed Starlink to carry out this action. Further information will be sought from Starlink, but it is understood by FIG that Starlink may be enforcing its own policy on roaming packages that have remained fixed in place for 60 days or more, and which form part of the terms and conditions of use.

As stated in the press statement issued on 3 February 2025, Starlink has not applied for regulatory approval, though some exploratory discussions have taken place.

Users with a valid VSAT licence who may be affected by this change should contact Starlink in the first instance, and may also contact the Regulator, but should be aware that neither FIG nor the Regulator has any power to override Starlink’s application of its internal policies.”

I commend its release, but I have three points to make concerning this Press Release:

1. 1. Credibility of Starlink’s Statement:
      Based on my decades of experience in the telecommunications industry, I find it unlikely that Starlink would use the words, “Local telecommunication authorities have instructed… “, unless this were factually accurate. If this were solely an internal licensing policy issue, as suggested, they would have clearly stated that as the cause. It would be commercially counterproductive for them to create unnecessary controversy without cause. It is conjecture to say this, just as much my opinion is conjecture.
      Research shows that similarly worded messages have been sent to roaming users in several African countries in the last few years, including the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zimbabwe. However, much debate has been about whether Starlink has actually disconnected any individual in practice. It doesn’t seem to be the case. There is also no information as to whether these messages were triggered by a government demand or not.
   2. Identifying the Stakeholder Behind the Directive:
      The only stakeholder benefitting from such a directive is the local telecommunications provider. This request could have originated from either Sure Falkland Islands or its parent company, Sure International, headquartered in Guernsey. Clearly, a public statement explicitly denying their involvement is necessary to clarify the situation. I would doubt that Sure has requested a shutdown from Starlink.
   3. Incorrect Licensing Language:
      The final paragraph’s reference to “users with a valid VSAT licence” is factually incorrect. In practice, no valid VSAT concerning Starlink licences has been issued by FIG. Companies that have paid £5,400 for such FIG VSAT licences have no greater legal standing to use Starlink than the hundreds of so-called ‘illegal’ users. These FIG-issued VSAT licences should not have been granted in the first place. it is inappropriate for FIG or the Communications Regulator to deflect responsibility onto licensees by expecting them to resolve the matter with Starlink themselves. While it is still acknowledged that Starlink usage is ‘illegal’ in the Falklands, this issue requires FIG’s accountability to resolve.

Wednesday, 5th February 2025. Having written the above, I was pleased to see later in the day that the following communication was forwarded to me anonymously from the Communications Regulator to holders of a FIG VSAT licence. This addressed the situation I described in point 3 above.

“Hello everyone I hope you are well although I am sure you are concerned if you received a notification from Starlink suspending your services. I am working at speed to address this.

I am in touch as you all have VSAT licences to use Starlink services. I apologise to have to get in touch and ask information from yourselves. If you could please supply the below information at your earliest convenience, I will work to ensure that your services are not suspended. I apologise for this inconvenience.

Please confirm the following: User ID (this includes terminal ID and other Starlink identifiers – see here): Name to which package is registered: Did you receive a notification from Starlink: I presume unless otherwise instructed that you are happy for this information to be shared with Starlink – they possess this information already in one form or another.

As ever, I am working with FIG/Starlink/Sure to reach a long-term solution. I appreciate your patience and cooperation at this time. I am around most of the afternoon and will endeavour to reply to emails and return any calls. Thanks  Communications Regulator”

However, the stated ambition—”I will work to ensure that your services are not suspended” is impossible to achieve no matter how well meaning the proposal is.

It’s difficult to understand why Starlink would treat FIG VSAT licensees any differently from other ‘illegal’ Starlink users, especially if the service suspension threat is being attributed to Starlink’s internal policies rather than directives from “local telecommunication authorities” as conjectured.

Starlink usage in the Falkland Islands is illegal, a point the Attorney General has reiterated multiple times during the Select Committee process. This applies equally to all users, regardless of whether they have paid for a FIG-issued £5,400 VSAT licence or not. If FIG VSAT licensees are permitted to continue using Starlink, the same policy should logically extend to all other Falkland Islands ‘illegal’ users.

Wednesday, January 5th 2025: Sure issued a Press Release today.

The timing and content of this press release raise important questions about the motivation Sure in issuing it. The final paragraph, in particular, may not fully consider how consumers and businesses in the Falkland Islands will perceive it. In today’s media landscape, public perception is highly influential.

The statement, “Anyone who has been left in an uncertain position with their broadband supply or who needs help improving their broadband performance,” could be interpreted as a direct response to Starlink’s recent announcement about the potential discontinuation of its service in the Falkland Islands. The timing of this release may also contribute to such perceptions.

As a result, the statement has prompted significant negative discussion on social media, where many individuals have shared concerns regarding its intent and implications. There is a prevailing view that the press release indirectly references Starlink’s service update. Some have speculated about Sure’s potential involvement in the matter, given its role as a local telecommunications authority—though there is no definitive evidence to support this. Nonetheless, public perception plays a crucial role in shaping opinions.

With Starlink potentially gaining approval for operation in the Falkland Islands by April, this press release will unintentionally influence consumer choice of regarding broadband services.

A clear statement from Sure addressing their position on this matter may help clarify any misconceptions.

A little research shows that

This seems to be a good time to end this post as it is getting on the long side.

Addendum;

There is an interesting overview of this situation on YouTube: