India’s space programme represents national determination, scientific excellence and strategic self-reliance. From satellite technology and launch vehicles to planetary exploration, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has demonstrated that India can develop sophisticated capabilities without surrendering its technological destiny. As private enterprise and international partnerships expand the space sector, commercial growth must not compromise national security, institutional integrity or strategic autonomy. In February 1968, Vikram A Sarabhai, founder of India’s space programme, articulated its defining philosophy: “We must be second to none in the application of advanced technologies to the real problems of man and society.” His vision was technology in the service of humanity, with scientific excellence measured by its contribution to people and national development. That principle remains relevant as India navigates commercial space technology, satellite communications and foreign investment. The question is not whether India should welcome innovation, but whether partnerships strengthen national capabilities while remaining accountable to Indian laws and strategic priorities.
Elon Musk, founder and CEO of SpaceX, has publicly challenged the circumstances surrounding Starlink’s entry into India, alleging that powerful business interests protect established market positions. Such allegations must be assessed on evidence, not accepted as fact. Equally, market access must be determined by transparent regulation and national-interest considerations, not public pressure from a powerful foreign entrepreneur. India should welcome technological investment and competition without accepting any company’s preferred terms or operating model by default. Satellite communications require appropriate licensing, security safeguards and regulatory oversight. Authorisation to provide a service must also be distinguished from compliance with all conditions required to commence operations. The test must be consistent for domestic and foreign providers: transparent rules, proportionate security requirements and accountability. A company’s foreign origin does not establish a security risk; equally, commercial reputation cannot substitute for scrutiny.
Innovation with accountability
Pawan K Goenka, Chairman of the Indian National Space Promotion and Authorisation Centre (IN-SPACe), has cited SpaceX as a reference point for India’s commercial space ambitions. His reported remarks in 2025 and June 2026 encouraged comparison with SpaceX’s achievements and highlighted the potential for greater risk-taking by Indian investors. These remarks do not, in themselves, establish improper favouritism. India can learn from SpaceX’s innovation and commercial scale without replicating its operating model or becoming dependent on its infrastructure. IN-SPACe must balance its responsibility to promote private participation with its role in authorising space activities. Its decisions should strengthen indigenous capabilities, protect critical infrastructure and ensure continuity of essential services. These standards must apply irrespective of a provider’s nationality or commercial reputation.
On September 6, 2026, ISRO clarified that space-sector reforms would neither privatise the organisation nor diminish its importance. It reaffirmed its central role in advanced research, national and strategic missions, space science and critical technologies, describing the objective as an “ISRO-led national space ecosystem”. This is the appropriate distinction. ISRO must remain the bedrock, private enterprise the force multiplier, and the service of humanity the enduring measure of success.
Commercial excellence is not strategic reliability
International experience illustrates why technological sophistication alone cannot guarantee continuity or strategic reliability. Ukraine: Starlink became operationally important to Ukrainian forces during the war.
In October 2026, reports of restrictions affecting satellite connectivity used in military operations renewed concerns about dependence on privately controlled infrastructure. The lesson is not that private operators should be presumed hostile. It is that access to critical communications cannot be treated as assured merely because a provider is commercially successful.
Iran: Starlink has been used by some people to circumvent government-imposed internet restrictions. Satellite connectivity can sustain communications when conventional networks are disrupted, while raising questions about jurisdiction, state authority and the decisions of foreign operators.
These situations differ in their legal and operational circumstances. None, by itself, establishes hostile intent towards India. Together, however, they demonstrate why critical services require credible continuity arrangements, contractual protections, accountability and viable alternatives. Satellite broadband can connect remote communities, improve access to education and healthcare, support disaster response and serve areas poorly covered by terrestrial networks. Cybersecurity, lawful access, network control, emergency continuity and the possibility of external leverage must therefore form part of regulatory assessment. India should apply these principles consistently to every provider.
No single platform should become a strategic vulnerability simply because it offers an efficient or commercially attractive service. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s vision of Aatmanirbhar Bharat is not technological isolation. It is the development of domestic capability and confidence so that India can engage the world from a position of strength. International partnerships can accelerate innovation and attract investment. Their value, however, must be measured by whether they strengthen indigenous capabilities, protect essential services and preserve sovereign decision-making. IN-SPACe has a responsibility to ensure that commercial expansion and national security are considered together, while respecting legitimate commercial confidentiality.
India must retain the expertise, infrastructure and institutional independence needed to pursue national priorities. Commercial partnerships should complement ISRO’s strategic mandate, not leave critical functions vulnerable to decisions beyond India’s control.
The choice is not between innovation and sovereignty. It is between partnerships that build lasting national capability and arrangements that risk creating strategic dependence. India must never confuse connectivity with dependency, innovation with sovereignty, or commercial convenience with national security.
The door is ours, and so is the key.
The writer is a financial, geopolitical, security analyst and an India-Nepal relations observer; Views presented are personal.