One million satellites in low Earth orbit. This is the new, unprecedented project that global satellite operator SpaceX has just filed with its national regulator for an orbital data centre constellation.
It is hard to evaluate how this will impact the way we use space. But one thing is certain: Europe should be worried.
Some Background
There are currently about 15,000 active satellites in orbit, with roughly 10,000 of those belonging to Starlink alone. Previous expansion plans from this operator were already preparing for a single constellation of up to 50,000 satellites.
We have now entered a new era. Space-based services are increasingly critical for civilian and military applications, from secure communication to weather monitoring. Yet Earth’s orbits are finite. So is the radio spectrum on which satellite services depend. Both are shared resources.
As a result of strong economic incentives to adopt a “first-come, first-served” approach, both are under mounting pressure. They can be progressively crowded out when a small number of actors move at scale, secure priority access, and leave others with fewer options.
The war in Ukraine has highlighted the consequences of limited options, or “strategic dependencies”, exemplified by Starlink threatening to cut connectivity for the country’s Armed Forces and Europe’s inability to swiftly deploy a credible alternative.
What is the EU doing about it?
What is at stake is our continent’s sovereignty: its ability to deploy or operate its own space assets or even choose from a variety of like-minded providers.
This is precisely why the upcoming EU Space Act matters. Published in June 2025, the EU Space Act is a proposal for a Regulation that would be directly applicable across all Member States.
The initiative was launched under the previous Commission, notably under the impetus of Thierry Breton. Developed by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Defence Industry and Space (DG DEFIS), the proposal now falls under the responsibility of the Commissioner for Defence and Space, Andrius Kubilius.
The Act is structured around three main pillars: safety, resilience and sustainability.
The safety pillar aims to ensure safe and reliable space operations.
The resilience pillar focuses on strengthening the cybersecurity of space assets, including through the application of existing EU frameworks such as the NIS2 and CER directives to the space sector.
The sustainability pillar addresses the environmental impact of space activities, from orbital congestion and debris to their effects on astronomy and pollution on Earth.
Negotiations are now underway under the EU’s ordinary legislative procedure. If they proceed according to schedule, trilogue discussions between the Council, Parliament and Commission are expected to take place under the Lithuanian Presidency in the first half of 2027.
Why It Matters
First, the Space Act matters because it recognises the inherently cross-border nature of space activities. It therefore seeks to establish a clear and common framework that harmonises key rules governing space activities across the Union.
In doing so, it offers an opportunity to unlock the potential of a European single market for space and strengthen the competitiveness of EU operators. It would also help prevent forum shopping, whereby foreign actors register their activities in Member States with less stringent regulatory requirements.
Second, the Act matters because orbital congestion is no longer a theoretical concern. As mega-constellations multiply, valuable orbital slots are becoming increasingly crowded, raising the risks of collisions, debris proliferation, and interference between systems.
For the first time at regional level, the Act proposes binding measures to account for the impact of constellations on the orbital environment, addressing the current lack of enforceable international rules.
In practice, the proposal would require operators to assess the state of orbital congestion before launching a new system, evaluate potential collision risks, and report any collision-avoidance manoeuvres. Here, Europe has an opportunity to lead. Just as it has set ambitious standards for environmental protection on Earth, the EU could help establish robust rules for the sustainable use of space.
Third, the Act matters because market access is one of the few real levers Brussels possesses. It proposes that all space operators, both EU and non-EU, be registered in a Union Register of Space Objects (URSO), ensuring that their activities comply with the Act before they can provide services in the EU.
The United States has long understood that technical rules, licensing conditions, and market access requirements can serve strategic ends. Europe should be no less serious when its own access to critical infrastructure is at stake.
If operators wish to provide services in the European market, the EU is entitled to require high standards of safety, sustainability, and responsible use of scarce common resources.
What Should We Make of it
This is also why the current debate should not be reduced to a familiar but misleading binary between regulation and innovation. Poor regulation can hinder innovation, but well-designed rules can also shape and direct it.
In this case, the EU Space Act would help fill important gaps in international space law, steer innovation towards more sustainable practices, and create the conditions for the emergence of European champions.
At the same time, Brussels is facing growing pressure to scale back its regulatory ambitions. Companies such as Starlink, supported by the US administration, are pushing back against European efforts to establish meaningful oversight of space services operating within the EU market.
This resistance echoes the pushback seen in other areas of EU digital and tech regulation, where legislation such as the Digital Markets Act, the Digital Services Act, and the AI Act have all faced intense lobbying from major US technology firms.
Negotiations on the proposal are likely to be lengthy. But Europe is running out of time. Delaying decisions or lowering the level of ambition would only deepen Europe’s strategic dependence in a domain that is becoming increasingly critical for its security and sovereignty.