Satellites, science, and the new fight for spectrum in space

WHY IS IT IN NEWS?

• A new global race has emerged—not to reach the Moon, but to secure radio frequencies (spectrum) and orbital slots necessary for low-Earth-orbit (LEO) satellite megaconstellations.
• With over 50,000 satellites expected by 2030, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is under pressure as existing governance mechanisms struggle with congestion, interference, and debris.
• ITU reforms (WRC-23, ITU-R 74) aim to address spectrum coordination and space sustainability, but compliance remains limited (70% deorbiting rate).
• Megaconstellations are transforming global Internet access but risk deepening inequality and intensifying geopolitical competition.

Relevance

GS-II – International Relations & Global Governance

• ITU as a global institution; Global Commons governance
• Spectrum allocation disputes & geopolitics
• Power asymmetry: developed vs emerging nations in space rule-making
• Space as a strategic domain: communication, navigation, surveillance

GS-III – Science & Technology

• Satellite megaconstellations & LEO technology
• Space debris, orbital sustainability (ITU-R 74)
• Space economy growth & innovation
• Interference, spectrum congestion, orbital slot management

WHAT IS “SPECTRUM” AND WHY DOES IT MATTER?

a) Spectrum

• Electromagnetic frequencies used for wireless communication.
• Satellites need dedicated frequencies to transmit/receive signals without interference.

b) Most valued frequency bands

• Ku-band (12–18 GHz) → high-speed Internet
• Ka-band (26–40 GHz) → high-capacity broadband
• L-band (1–2 GHz) → GPS, navigation

Radio frequencies are so vital that spectrum = oxygen for space communication.

c) Orbital slots

• Precise physical positions in Earth’s orbit from which satellites can broadcast efficiently.
• Scarce resource → intense competition → strategic race.

d) Why both spectrum + orbit matter

• Spectrum prevents signal overlap
• Orbit ensures correct coverage footprint

MEGACONSTELLATION BOOM: SCALE OF THE RACE

Major players

• Starlink (SpaceX): 8,000+ satellites; plans for 42,000
• OneWeb: 648 satellites
• Amazon Project Kuiper: ~3,200
• China’s GuoWang: ~13,000

Market expansion

• $4.27 billion (2024) → $27.31 billion (2032)
• 25.5% CAGR driven by global broadband demand and lower launch costs.

Strategic dimensions

• Nations view megaconstellations as key for:
  • Technological sovereignty
  • Secure communications
  • Intelligence and navigation
  • Digital infrastructure dominance

WHY REGULATION STRUGGLES: ITU AND THE SPECTRUM–ORBIT CRUNCH ?

a) ITU’s role

• UN agency coordinating spectrum and orbital slots.
• Works on principle:
  “Limited natural resources must be used rationally, efficiently, and economically.”

b) First-come, first-served system

• Favors wealthy operators who can file early applications.
• Late entrants (developing nations) risk losing access to prime bands/orbits.

c) WRC-23 (World Radiocommunication Conference) reforms

Key decisions:

1. Resolution 8:
   1. Operators must notify deviations between planned vs actual deployment.
   2. Prevents spectrum hoarding.
2. Mandatory deployment milestones:
   1. 10% in 2 years
   2. 50% in 5 years
   3. 100% in 7 years
      Reduces speculative filings by companies seeking to lock future rights.

d) ITU under stress

• Framework designed for hundreds of satellites → now facing tens of thousands annually.
• 80% of ITU agenda today is satellite-related, revealing overload.

SUSTAINABILITY CHALLENGE: SPACE DEBRIS AND ITU-R 74

• 2023 resolution for sustainable spectrum-orbit use:
  • Mandatory deorbit within 25 years post-mission.
• Compliance is only ~70%, meaning debris accumulates faster than removal.

Current orbital conditions

• 40,000 tracked objects in orbit
• 27,000+ pieces of debris (>10 cm)
• By 2030 → 50,000+ new satellites expected

Growing risk:

• Collision cascade (Kessler syndrome)
• Loss of space access for all

DIGITAL DIVIDE: PROMISE VS REALITY OF SATELLITE INTERNET

Why megaconstellations matter

• LEO satellites (150–2,000 km)
  • Latency: 20–40 ms
  • Suitable for telemedicine, online education, remote work

But affordability is the bottleneck

• Starlink terminal: ~$600 (₹53,000)
• Monthly subscription charges → unaffordable for rural communities.
• ITU estimates $2.6–2.8 trillion needed to close global digital divide by 2030.

Connectivity inequality

• Global Connectivity Index:
  • Switzerland: 34.41
  • India: 8.59
  • A four-fold disparity
• 2.6 billion people still offline (2025).

Without subsidies or universal service mandates, LEO Internet may widen inequality rather than solve it.

WHERE DOES INDIA STAND?

a) India’s strategic strengths

• GSAT-N2: 48 Gbps throughput; covers remote regions (A&N Islands, Northeast).
• OneWeb: Bharti owns 39% → India embedded in global LEO ecosystem.

b) Spectrum allocation debate

• TRAI recommends administrative allocation, not auctions, for satellite spectrum.
  Rationale:
  • Satellite spectrum is inherently non-exclusive and shared.
  • Auctions could raise costs → reduce affordability → defeat universal access goals.

c) India’s dual challenge

1. Secure spectrum & orbital resources internationally
2. Ensure affordability domestically
   Without both, India risks losing out in the new space economy.

MACRO TRENDS SHAPING THE NEXT DECADE

A. Commercial imperatives

• Internet markets + remote-region connectivity
• Real-time applications (IoT, autonomous systems)

B. Geopolitical imperatives

• Nations competing for:
  • Strategic communication
  • Surveillance
  • Navigation independence

C. Governance imperatives

• Need for global rules on:
  • Spectrum equity
  • Orbital sustainability
  • Fair access for emerging nations

D. Risk of future conflict

Without reform →
“Spectrum wars” → overcrowded space → unsafe, unequal, unusable orbital environment.

---