The Russia-Ukraine War Is a Test Case for the Future of Military Communications

Ukraine’s military now relies on an estimated 100,000 satellite internet terminals, making it one of the world’s largest wartime users of low-Earth-orbit (LEO) communications systems.

What began as an emergency response to Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022 has evolved into a communications network supporting battlefield coordination, drone operations, emergency services, local government functions and civilian connectivity in areas where conventional infrastructure has been damaged, occupied or destroyed.

The scale of the deployment has few historical precedents. For defense planners, satellite operators and military technology companies, Ukraine has become a real-world test case for how communications function when critical infrastructure on the ground can no longer be relied upon.

The experience is shaping not only how Ukraine communicates during war but also how governments and militaries are thinking about the future of connectivity in conflict zones.

When Traditional Infrastructure Fails

Before Russia’s invasion, Ukraine had one of Europe’s most developed telecommunications sectors. Mobile networks covered the vast majority of the population, while fiber-optic infrastructure connected cities, businesses and government institutions across the country.

Like most modern communications systems, however, those networks depended on fixed infrastructure where cell towers could be damaged or destroyed, and fiber routes could be cut. The 2022 Russian invasion exposed those vulnerabilities quickly.

Russian missile and drone strikes repeatedly targeted energy and telecommunications infrastructure. In frontline regions, repairing damaged networks became increasingly difficult and in occupied areas, Ukrainian communications systems often ceased functioning entirely.

Satellite communications offered an alternative because they bypassed local infrastructure.

Instead of relying on terrestrial networks, users could connect directly to satellites overhead through portable terminals that could be deployed almost anywhere with access to power and a clear view of the sky.

“Satellite communications have become a critical enabler for both civilian society and national security in times of crisis,” said Dmytro Stetsenko, founder and chief executive of Ukrainian satellite communications company Stetman, while in conversation with International Business Times.

Within days of the invasion, Ukraine secured access to Starlink terminals after then-Digital Transformation Minister Mykhailo Fedorov publicly appealed to SpaceX for assistance. The first shipments arrived in February 2022.

What initially appeared to be a temporary solution quickly became part of Ukraine’s communications architecture.

Starlink terminals were deployed by military units, emergency responders, hospitals, energy operators, local governments and civilian organizations. During periods when Russian attacks caused large-scale power outages and disrupted traditional telecommunications services, satellite internet often remained available.

For many communities near the front line, satellite connectivity became one of the few reliable ways to communicate with the outside world – it turned out to be the only system that worked when many other systems did not.

The Communications Layer of Modern Warfare

As the war evolved, satellite communications became increasingly intertwined with military operations.

Modern warfare depends on the movement of information: intelligence must be collected, processed and shared. Drone operators require connectivity, and commanders need access to real-time information from multiple units operating simultaneously.

The result is that communications infrastructure has become part of the battlefield itself.

Drone warfare provides perhaps the clearest example.

What began as limited drone reconnaissance operations has evolved into one of the defining characteristics of the conflict. Both Ukrainian and Russian forces now rely heavily on unmanned systems for reconnaissance, target acquisition and strike missions.

Those systems depend on communications networks.

Operators require links to receive intelligence, transmit imagery and coordinate missions. Information often moves between drones, operators, commanders and artillery units within minutes or even seconds.

“Without communications, military capabilities become significantly less effective,” says Robert “Magyar” Brovdi, commander of Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces. “Russians are very well aware of this as they observe what we are doing. So they are trying very hard to expand their drone capabilities and match our level.”

“Russian drone-related units grew from approximately 86,000 personnel at the beginning of 2026 to roughly 114,000 within a matter of months,” he adds. “Moscow is increasingly adapting methods first developed by Ukrainian operators while investing heavily in communications and drone-management systems.”

The growth reflects a broader trend visible across the battlefield. Military effectiveness increasingly depends on the ability to collect, process and distribute information rapidly.

Jamming, Detection and Electronic Warfare

The advantages of satellite communications come with vulnerabilities. For example, as satellite systems became integrated into military operations, they also became targets.

Both Ukrainian and Russian forces have invested heavily in electronic warfare capabilities designed to disrupt communications, interfere with signals and reduce the effectiveness of networked systems. Jamming has become a constant challenge.

Military operators frequently adjust equipment, operating procedures and software to maintain connectivity in contested environments. Satellite providers have also modified systems in response to evolving battlefield conditions.

The conflict has created what amounts to an ongoing technological competition between communications providers and electronic warfare units.

Unlike traditional communications infrastructure, satellite networks are difficult to disable entirely because they are distributed across large constellations rather than concentrated in a limited number of physical locations. That resilience is one reason military planners have become increasingly interested in LEO communications systems.

At the same time, the war has demonstrated that no communications technology is invulnerable. For instance, reliability increasingly depends on adaptation, redundancy and the ability to operate under contested conditions.

“This war has demonstrated the strategic value of commercial satellite communications in a way we have never seen before,” says Victoria Samson, chief director for space security and stability at the Secure World Foundation.

For communications specialists, the most important lesson may be that resilience matters more than any individual technology.

Beyond Starlink

While Starlink remains the dominant satellite communications provider in Ukraine, the war has highlighted the risks of relying too heavily on a single system.

Questions surrounding coverage restrictions in certain areas and broader concerns about dependence on a foreign commercial provider have encouraged Ukraine and its partners to explore alternatives.

German-funded Eutelsat OneWeb terminals began operating in Ukraine in 2025, providing additional communications capabilities for government and strategic users.

The deployments remain significantly smaller than Starlink, but they reflect a growing recognition that redundancy is increasingly important.

For military users, multiple communications options can be as important as the performance of any single system.

The objective is not necessarily to replace Starlink but to ensure that communications remain available if one network becomes unavailable or degraded. That lesson is influencing both military planning and commercial development.

The conflict has also encouraged Ukrainian companies to develop their own communications capabilities.

One of the most ambitious efforts is UASAT LEO, a planned Ukrainian low-Earth-orbit communications constellation being developed by Stetman in cooperation with Danish satellite manufacturer GomSpace.

The project is expected to begin with the launch of UASAT-NANO in 2026.

According to Stetsenko, the system is being designed around operational lessons learned during the war.

“Fundamentally, three hundred satellites will be enough to achieve the maximum global coverage,” he says.

The long-term goal is to create a constellation capable of supporting government, military and critical infrastructure users.

Unlike many commercial broadband projects, the emphasis is on resilience and operational continuity.

“The experience of this war has shown that resilient communications are essential for both national security and civilian continuity,” Stetsenko adds.

For companies operating in the defense and communications sectors, the conflict has accelerated technological development.

Denys Shtilerman, chief executive of Ukrainian defense company Fire Point, said collaboration remains essential in areas ranging from radar systems to communications links and guidance technologies.

“We are deeply interested in collaboration because we don’t have experience in radar, we don’t have experience in seeker, we don’t have experience in data link,” Shtilerman says, “Ukraine’s experience is already attracting attention from governments, militaries and commercial operators around the world.”

The war has provided one of the first opportunities to observe how large-scale satellite communications networks perform under sustained wartime conditions. It has also demonstrated how quickly commercial technologies can become integrated into military operations.

Future conflicts are likely to place similar pressure on communications infrastructure. Networks on the ground will remain vulnerable to attack, disruption and occupation. Satellite systems will increasingly serve as backup networks, operational networks or, in some cases, primary networks.

More than four years after Russia’s full-scale invasion, Ukraine’s communications architecture looks very different from the one it entered the war with. A growing share of the country’s most important military and civilian connectivity now depends on systems operating hundreds of kilometers above the battlefield.