Dear Portfolio Committee on Communications and Digital Technologies,

I trust you are well. I'm writing from Stellenbosch with regards to a recent report in Bloomberg that South Africa may consider allowing Elon Musk's Starlink to operate in the country. I believe this is a grave error in judgement spurred on by potential short-term gains at the expense of long-term stability in South Africa. I would like to detail why this is the case.

1. Elon Musk is actively hostile to South Africa. He has consistently and repeatedly spread disinformation about our democracy, our laws, and our social wellbeing to his followers, the news, and of course to the president of the USA. Acceding to his demands for trade in South Africa are a de facto admission that lying and bullying works. It is not the precedent we should set in South Africa - or Africa in general - given the centuries of exploitation on the continent by people just like Mr. Musk.

2. Elon Musk is an anti-democratic actor whose core values do not align with those of our nation. He has repeatedly made Nazi salutes, he spreads anti-Semitic rhetoric on Twitter, he has coerced and abused women, he is hostile to his own children, he is a transphobe, he uses the racist dog-whistle rhetoric of blaming 'DEI' for all that's wrong in the world, and he actively supports the genocide in Gaza.

3. Our communications infrastructure should not be in the hands of a hostile foreign political actor. Elon Musk has previously demonstrated that he would limit, restrict, or disable his Starlink service based on political pressure. Moreover, the free flow and access to information is what strengthens our democracy. Allowing an anti-democratic oligarch to control a sizeable portion of our communications infrastructure risks destabilising the South African social fabric. What safeguards are there if we share or do things that Mr. Musk does not like? What is to stop him from plunging our rural communities into darkness or restricting his service in a manner that would hold local services and industries hostage until his demands are met?

4. Alternatives are on the way. Companies like Eutelsat or Project Kuiper are due to launch in a few years with significantly less baggage and less intention to subvert democracies.

5. Invest in local alternatives. As the committee for Digital Communications and Technologies, you likely have the power to influence the development of a local satellite internet service given the breadth of local engineering talent, the African Space Agency, the South African National Space Agency, and local telecommunications companies.

6. The US political situation is volatile. There are several factors that make this a poor move even from a political point: there are already reports of Mr. Trump's frustration with Elon Musk casting doubt on the eventual sway held by Mr. Musk over Mr. Trump's decision-making. Mr. Trump is a second-term president nearing 80. To be frank, he will not be president a second time. Conceding to his or Mr. Musk's demands is a stop-gap measure that is unlikely to bear fruit in the long term. Whatever funding or trade deals are at risk, would still be at risk. Neither Mr. Trump nor Mr. Musk are known for honoring their deals and it is likely that South Africa would make concessions only to have the stronger party (the USA) renege or change the deal as suits the whims of Mr. Trump or Mr. Musk. South Africa cannot afford to make long-term commitments to persons of such mercurial character.

I would not presume to suggest a remedy, but if this deal must go ahead, I request that you open it for public comment as this has the capacity to fundamentally alter the political and social fabric of the South Africa which we all love.

Best Regards,
Stefan