In brief
In a tense interview with the BBC, Ukrainian adviser Serhii "Flash" Beskrestnov blasted Washington for restricting intelligence sharing, claiming it has cost lives. He said Ukraine is still not receiving reliable pre‑attack warnings on Russian ballistic missile strikes, and that the US has also limited the use of the Starlink satellite Internet crucial for drones and communication. Beskrestnov called the simultaneous Starlink restrictions and intelligence gaps a deliberate move to pressure Kyiv into negotiations. Washington denies any pause in intel sharing and points to a software glitch. The debate highlights the high stakes of tech and information warfare in Ukraine.
Zelensky’s adviser Serhii "Flash" Beskrestnov slammed Washington in a BBC interview, saying Ukraine is still not getting reliable warning on Russian missile attacks. He claimed that the lack of timely intel has already taken lives.
Beskrestnov added that the United States has also restricted Ukraine’s use of the Starlink satellite‑internet system, limiting the speed of mobile units to only 100 mph. He said this blocks Ukraine’s ability to shoot down drones or launch their own mid‑range attacks.
The adviser said both the intelligence lapse and the Starlink slowdown are likely intentional, aimed at forcing Kyiv into negotiations with Russia. "It’s probably the United States trying to convince us to talk to the Russians," he told the BBC.
The White House insists there have been no changes to intelligence sharing. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also denied any pause, mentioning a software glitch in the early‑warning system instead.
Ukraine has its own radar, but Beskrestnov said it provides only limited warning. He highlighted the urgent need for alternative communications, not just for air defence but for the entire military and civilians.
Starlink owner Elon Musk noted that the U.S. government ultimately controls Starshield, the military version, suggesting the restrictions could stem from Washington. Trump has denied U.S. involvement.
The debate underscores how critical tech and real‑time information are in modern warfare, and how diplomatic tensions can translate into direct human cost.
