It's not illegal, but if it's dual-use, it's a war target asset, not a war crime. It's not running hospitals or giving people in Ukraine access to internet, it's being used a weapon.
Taking away a military ability would be like calling Ukraine's bombing of Russian data centers and oil refineries a war crime.
Note: I'm not forming an opinion of good or bad of the action, but I'm not going to call it a war crime. We take away access to all kinds of technology to plenty of places ALL the time when they're fighting and we've helped them before since, as long as I've been alive.
Because a private company didn't have to give service in the first place? It's not owned by a nation. It's not like the private company bombed or murdered someone.
I'm not even a fan of Musk or Starlink but a war crime, get real man.
Edit: also note, it's used in war making it a war asset thus a target. We take away tech from nations and groups we help all the time.
also note, it's used in war making it a war asset thus a target.
By your enemy. Military's assets are valid targets to your declared enemy. Someone you are declared at war with.
We're not talking about Russian warcrimes here. We're talking about a supposedly neutral private company sabotaging the defensive systems of an ally of the United States, in an effort to support Russia's warcrimes of targeting civilians, hospitals, and power infrastructire.
This shit's on par with providing blankets to the Native Americans. And if you don't understand that reference you should really stop chiming in on what is and isn't a warcrime because you need to read a LOT more history.
We're talking about a supposedly neutral private company sabotaging the defensive systems of an ally of the United States
I mean that's just not what sabotage means in this context.
If Lockheed refuses to sell country X, which is at war with country Y, more fighter aircraft, then Lockheed isn't suddenly 'sabotaging' country X's air force.
Musk's actions are eminently hateable and immoral from my POV, but that doesn't mean it's 'sabotage' or any other war crime.
He is not compelled by international law to render a service to Ukraine.
But he is rendering service to Ukraine and taking compensation for it.
Lockheed did sell to country X, which is at war with country Y, fighter aircraft. Then they remotely activated a secret kill switch to shut down half the fighters they sold right before a sortie to stop country Y from bombing the Country X National Orphanage and Puppy Hospital.
Your god elon musk doesn't get to actively interfere with Ukraine protecting itself via secret decisions and expect it all to go his way. If he doesn't want Starshield to help Ukraine and wants to side with Russia so badly, he needs to take that up with Germany and accept the consequences of his decision. Secretly interfering with Ukranian defenses to aide an invading dictator's attack on civilians sure as hell sounds war crimey to me.
24
u/Nekowulf 8h ago
Likely is. Sabotage of defense infrastructure in a foreign nation you are not at war with sounds pretty undeclared combatant warcrimy to me.