Starlink service for the Ukrainian military was restored following a heated dispute over restrictions on satellite communications, and Elon Musk was forced to publicly explain SpaceX’s decision. All of this is happening on the eve of the U.S. midterm congressional elections, which could significantly alter the political prospects of Donald Trump and his inner circle.
popular videos
Political strategist Mykhailo Sheitelman, in his analysis published by 24 Channel, suggested that Musk may have been influenced not only by public outcry but also by the threat of massive financial losses. He also analyzed the elections in Brazil and Serbia, changes in U.S. policy, Ukrainian strikes against Russia, and the reasons why the Kremlin is trying to postpone a new round of negotiations.
The Elections in Brazil Preserved BRICS
On the eve of the U.S. midterm elections, significant political events took place in other countries as well. One of these was the vote in Brazil, where, according to results cited by Sheitelman, incumbent President Lula da Silva received 51.7% of the vote, while his opponent, Flávio Bolsonaro, received 48.2%.
Lula’s victory came as a surprise even to the political strategist himself. He had assumed that Bolsonaro would gain the upper hand after the first round, and that Bolsonaro’s rise to power would have significant implications for the BRICS international alliance.
Bolsonaro had spoken about the possibility of Brazil withdrawing from this organization. Such a move could have weakened the platform that Russia and China use to strengthen international ties and advance their own political interests.
However, a victory for the right-wing candidate would not have guaranteed Ukraine greater support. His father maintained contacts with Vladimir Putin, and Flávio himself did not promise Kyiv any substantial assistance.
“We didn’t destroy BRICS, but we annoyed Trump. If Bolsonaro had won, it would have been a victory for Donald Trump, because that was his bet,”
The election result also contradicts the claim that far-right politicians are inevitably winning in various countries around the world today. Lula represents the political left and relies heavily on social programs, aid to the poor, and the development of education and healthcare.
His background is also unusual: the future president grew up in poverty, dropped out of school early, and began working. Despite this, he managed to build a long political career and lead Brazil for the fourth time.
For Trump, Bolsonaro’s defeat was a setback on another continent. In Europe, however, the outcome of the parliamentary elections proved even more painful for a politician whom the Kremlin had long considered its partner.
Vucic Failed to Retain Power
In Serbia, Aleksandar Vučić had hoped to trade the presidency for the prime minister’s seat. According to the plan described by Sheitelman, after resigning, he was to lead his party, win the parliamentary elections, and subsequently reshape the division of powers between the president and the government.
Similar political maneuvers had already been employed in Russia. Vučić also attempted to retain power by combining democratic electoral procedures with an ever-increasing concentration of influence within his inner circle.
However, victory went to the opposition “Student List,” formed around the protest movement. Its members had taken to the streets for two years, demonstrating against the Serbian leadership.
Vucic maintained close personal ties with Putin, received Russian state awards, and at the same time tried to balance between Moscow and the West. Serbia even supplied artillery ammunition that ended up in Ukraine, although its political leadership did not renounce its cooperation with the Kremlin.
After his defeat, Vučić accused European countries and the American “deep state” – the so-called hidden power structure that, according to him, opposes Trump – of interfering.
This is clearly a blow to Trump. It’s Europe against Trumpism. Here’s an example of how the forces opposing such politicians are capable of winning
However, the change in power in Serbia will not mean an immediate break with Russia. Representatives of the student movement have previously stated that they do not intend to impose sanctions against Moscow. This position is linked, in particular, to strong pro-Russian sentiments in Serbian society.
At the same time, the country is seeking membership in the European Union. According to Sheitelman’s assessment, the new government will have to gradually align its foreign policy with that of its European partners, and this could also change Belgrade’s relations with the Kremlin.
He considers Vučić’s own accusations against American political institutions to be particularly telling. After all, it is precisely their involvement following the congressional elections that opponents of the Trump administration’s current course are anticipating.
America Is Not Limited to Trump
The U.S. midterm congressional elections will take place on November 3, but early voting is already underway. Sheitelman shared the story of Anna, a Ukrainian woman who went to a polling station in a small American town and heard words of support for Ukraine from an elderly volunteer.
The woman recognized the voter’s Ukrainian heritage by her last name, expressed sympathy for Ukrainians, and shared her positive attitude toward Volodymyr Zelenskyy. At the same time, she admitted that she was ashamed of the U.S. president’s behavior.
The political strategist cited this story as an example of the sentiments that exist in the U.S. regardless of the White House’s rhetoric. After all, American society and political institutions do not always share the views of the current president.
Trump himself continues his campaign rallies, during which he increasingly returns to discussing his own achievements and grievances. In particular, he again criticized Norway for not awarding him the Nobel Peace Prize, even though he claims to have ended eight wars.
Sheitelman pointed out that the prize is awarded by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, not the country’s government. He also compared Norway’s development indicators with those of the United States, highlighting the Scandinavian country’s high rankings in terms of standard of living, human development, and perceptions of corruption.
During other rallies, Trump spoke about his own cognitive tests, boasted that he had recognized a rhinoceros among images of animals, and made controversial statements about record-high poverty in America.
According to the political strategist, the Russian leadership may mistakenly interpret such behavior as a sign that the United States has lost the ability to pursue a consistent foreign policy.
“They don’t understand that America isn’t just Trump. America has its own ‘deep state’: people with decades of political experience – not from show business, but systemic players on the level of Biden or Obama,”
These are politicians, members of Congress, and government agencies that continue to operate regardless of the president’s personal preferences. Their decisions can influence government contracts, defense aid, sanctions, and the operations of American companies.
According to the political strategist, the influence of these institutions may already have been evident in the case of Elon Musk. After all, following prolonged disputes over the use of Starlink, the situation for the Ukrainian military unexpectedly changed.
What Made Musk Back Down
About two weeks before Starlink resumed full operations, Ukraine faced a series of problems in its relations with the U.S. Trump demanded a halt to strikes on Russian oil refineries, while Kyiv reported difficulties with satellite communications and obtaining intelligence.
Subsequently, Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed that Starlink was once again operating at the required speed and that Ukraine was receiving information about Russian ballistic missile launches. The president also attributed the positive changes to the public outcry over the previous restrictions.
After communications were restored, Musk published a detailed explanation. He claimed that the Ukrainian military had allegedly violated the terms of use for civilian Starlink by employing it for offensive drone strikes.
At the same time, the SpaceX CEO made a separate mention of Starshield – another satellite system linked to U.S. government military programs. Decisions regarding its use fall under the purview of U.S. government agencies.
Sheitelman pointed out that the restrictions on Starlink over Russian territory differ from its use by the Ukrainian military in temporarily occupied territories.
Starlink does not operate over the territory of the Russian Federation. Musk knows this very well. When we launch long-range strikes against Russia, Starlink is not used there. Crimea is Ukraine, Donetsk is Ukraine, Luhansk is Ukraine
He also disagreed with Musk’s assertion that the Ukrainian military’s goal is to kill people. Ukraine’s mission is to liberate the occupied territories, protect the population, and put an end to Russian aggression.
At the same time, the political strategist does not deny SpaceX’s importance to Ukraine’s defense. The company provided technology that has become extremely important for communications on the front lines, and its contribution to supporting the Ukrainian military is truly significant.
However, following his earlier decisions, Musk not only resumed the service but also began offering detailed justifications. Sheitelman attributes this change in behavior to the potential political and financial consequences for the billionaire.
“I think Musk simply got his tail pinched – and very seriously at that. He understands that his companies could lose tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars in market capitalization because of these questionable dealings with Trump,”
Musk’s companies work on major U.S. government contracts, so a conflict with American institutions could affect their prospects and market value. The political strategist speculates that the businessman’s lawyers may have received relevant warnings, particularly through contacts with State Department officials.
There is also a risk of congressional investigations. Following the change in the composition of Congress, lawmakers may take an interest in SpaceX’s decisions, its government contracts, and the circumstances surrounding the restrictions on communications with Ukraine.
Even a potential presidential pardon would not eliminate all the political consequences of such an investigation. Musk could be summoned to a hearing, and his lawyers would have to factor in the risks of new legal claims.
Pressure from influential politicians who support Ukraine may also have played a role. Among them, Sheitelman mentioned Boris Johnson, King Charles of the United Kingdom, and U.S. senators and members of Congress.
In his view, the restoration of Starlink was the result of a combination of several factors. Public reaction drew attention to the issue, and the potential business consequences made further confrontation significantly more costly for Musk.
The Kremlin Received a Response from Congress
Russian officials immediately capitalized on Musk’s public statements. In particular, Kirill Dmitriev, head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, echoed his criticism of so-called “warmongers” and began accusing European politicians of obstructing peace agreements.
His targets included British and European leaders, American Democrats, Senator Chuck Schumer, and critics of Donald Trump. Dmitriev also spoke out in defense of Jared Kushner, who has faced allegations regarding his international financial ties.
However, Republican Congressman Don Bacon responded to the Russian representative. His reaction was particularly telling, as it came from a member of Trump’s own party.
“Your country is an aggressor. Your country bombs cities, terrorizes civilians, and tortures prisoners of war. We have the deepest contempt for you and for Putin,”
Sheitelman views this incident as a reminder that the Russian leadership cannot count on the support of all Republicans simply because of Trump’s personal stance.
If the majority in Congress changes after the election, U.S. lawmakers will have more opportunities to launch investigations and review sanctions policy. It is also possible that restrictions against certain Russian officials currently involved in negotiations with Washington could be tightened.
At the same time, the restoration of Starlink is already of immediate importance to the Ukrainian military. Fighting continues on the front lines, and the Ukrainian Armed Forces are launching new strikes against Russian industrial facilities.
Ukraine Has Identified New Targets in Russia
Despite the controversy surrounding attacks on Russian oil refineries, strikes against facilities involved in the production of fuel and weapons continue. Recently, Ukrainian drones have attacked several synthetic rubber plants, including “Voronezhsintezkauchuk,” which is part of the “Sibur” group.
Sheitelman noted that this is already the third facility of this type to come under attack within a few days. The interest in these facilities is not limited to their primary products.
When we were prohibited from striking oil refineries, we found a way to sustain the fuel crisis in Russia. It’s not necessary to destroy the refinery itself if we can prevent it from producing the gasoline it needs
This refers to the production of methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE). This chemical is used as an additive to increase the octane rating of gasoline. It helps produce fuel with the characteristics required for modern automobile engines.
Similar production facilities operate, in particular, in Omsk, Perm, Tobolsk, and Voronezh. Damage to the plants that supply the Russian fuel industry with these components could complicate the production of gasoline of the required quality, even if the refineries’ main production capacities remain intact.
The second target of Ukrainian strikes is enterprises that manufacture components for missile weapons. In particular, there were reports of an attack on the “Energia” plant in Yelets, Lipetsk Oblast, which produces chemical power sources and batteries for military systems, including the “Iskander.”
The “Proton” plant in the Oryol region was also targeted. According to reports, Ukraine used Storm Shadow cruise missiles to strike these targets.
Separately, reports emerged of a major train accident near Yekaterinburg, where freight train cars derailed and fuel tank cars caught fire. The causes of the incident remain unknown, but its consequences have drawn attention to Russia’s fuel logistics.
At the same time, Russia continues to strike Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. Sheitelman cited reports from the “Epicenter” network regarding the destruction of four shopping centers in recent days.
Under these circumstances, the question of ending the war goes beyond military operations or political negotiations. For Ukraine, the return of prisoners of war, the release of abducted citizens, and the safety of people still living under Russian occupation remain paramount.
Danger for the Residents of Oleshky
During the latest prisoner exchange, 270 Ukrainians returned from Russian captivity – 261 military personnel and nine civilians. Among those released were defenders of Mariupol and Azovstal, as well as people whom Russia had been holding since 2018 and 2020.
According to information Sheitelman received from the relatives of some of the servicemen, some of those released have not yet been able to reunite with their families. After prolonged captivity, these individuals require medical examinations, treatment, and rehabilitation.
At the same time, a humanitarian operation was being prepared in the temporarily occupied town of Oleshky in the Kherson region. It was scheduled for the night of October 27, but many questions remained regarding how to organize the safe evacuation of civilians.
A political strategist received reports from people who were in contact with the town’s residents. They spoke of a shortage of drivers, the threat of shelling, and fears of possible forced deportation to Russia.
The evacuation route caused the greatest concern. Residents were told they could choose between leaving for Russia and returning to territory controlled by Ukraine, but it was unclear exactly how the second option would be facilitated.
Imagine living under occupation for many years. You know that the Russians torture and kill people. And now they’re telling you: if you want to go to Ukraine, we’ll take you through the occupied territories. And people are afraid they’ll simply disappear along the way
The threat of “filtration” caused particular concern. People feared that, under the guise of evacuation, they might be taken to camps or transported deep into Russia, where they would lose the ability to contact their loved ones.
Sheitelman called the upcoming operation a test of the ability to negotiate with Moscow. Even if the humanitarian evacuation of civilians carries the risk of forced displacement, this raises additional questions regarding the much larger-scale negotiations to end the war.
The Kremlin is waiting for the U.S. election
Russia agrees to discuss a new round of trilateral talks involving Ukraine and the U.S., but insists that the meeting take place after November 4. Sheitelman attributes this stance primarily to the U.S. midterm elections, which will take place on November 3.
The Kremlin does not want to create additional problems for Donald Trump before the voting concludes. An open rejection of U.S. peace initiatives or new maximalist demands from Russia could provoke a sharp reaction from Washington right in the midst of the election campaign.
Moscow cites National Unity Day, celebrated in Russia on November 4, as the official reason for postponing the talks.
They’re not going to say, “We can’t hold talks until after the U.S. election.” No, they say, “We have a major holiday – National Unity Day.” “We’ll start talking right after that,”
At the same time, Russia’s demands remain unchanged. Moscow is once again raising the issue of NATO returning to its 1997 configuration, which would mean a review of the Alliance’s military presence in Central, Eastern, and Northern Europe.
The Kremlin had issued similar ultimatums even before the full-scale invasion. Now they are trying to bring them back onto the international agenda, using the negotiations on Ukraine to secure broader agreements with the West.
At the same time, Ukraine’s position sets clear limits on any potential compromise. Volodymyr Zelenskyy has emphasized that Kyiv will not agree to neutral status, restrictions on the size or capabilities of the Ukrainian army, or legal recognition of the occupied territories as Russian.
Among Russia’s first practical steps, Ukraine demands an end to attacks on energy infrastructure and shipping. Kyiv also seeks to involve European partners in the negotiations, as Moscow’s demands directly affect the security of EU and NATO countries.
Sheitelman speculates that the Kremlin intends to use the period following the U.S. elections to push for new demands. However, by the time the next round of negotiations begins, the political balance in Washington may have shifted – and with it, Donald Trump’s ability to single-handedly influence decisions regarding Ukraine.
Mykhailo Sheitelman on the real reasons behind the resumption of Starlink, Vučić’s defeat, and the U.S. elections: watch the video
Related topics:
If you find an error on this page, select it and press Ctrl + Enter