In recent weeks, public discourse in The Gambia has tilted heavily in favour of fast-tracking approval for Starlink. Social media commentary and segments of the tech community have framed the issue as a simple choice between progress and stagnation. That framing is flawed.
Connectivity is essential. I do not dispute that. But the question before us is not whether satellite broadband is innovative. It is whether regulatory approvals for critical digital infrastructure should be rushed under diplomatic pressure.
When I raised a parliamentary question to minister Jabbi back in July of 2025 on reported foreign pressure tied to Starlink’s licensing process, my intention was not to oppose technology. It was to defend process. My question sought clarity on safeguards to ensure that regulatory decisions remain insulated from external coercion. That is not obstructionism; that is constitutional responsibility.
The Minister for Digital Economy, Lamin Jabbi, responded with a position that deserves commendation. He disclosed that although the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority had recommended a VSAT license, subsequent clarification revealed that Starlink does not qualify as a VSAT operator. Signing a license instrument under a misapplied category would have been procedurally unsound. I respect the Minister’s decision to pause the process for reassessment and Cabinet consultation. That is due diligence.
International reporting, including from ProPublica, suggests that officials from the United States Department of State and the U.S. Embassy in Banjul exerted persistent pressure to accelerate approval. Allegations include diplomatic escalation, cancellation of meetings, and appeals directly to President Adama Barrow. Whether one interprets these actions as standard advocacy or undue pressure, the optics alone justify caution.
Technical reality must ground the debate. Starlink operates via low-Earth-orbit satellites and user terminals that bypass traditional fiber and terrestrial networks. This has advantages particularly in remote areas but it also introduces regulatory complexities. Spectrum allocation, cybersecurity standards, data governance, tax compliance, market competition rules, and national security protocols are not academic concerns. They are sovereign responsibilities.
A satellite operator that is not legally categorized as a VSAT cannot be licensed as one without distorting the regulatory framework. If that precedent is set today, what happens tomorrow when other emerging technologies seek entry under ill-fitting classifications? Strong nations build institutions that endure beyond personalities and political cycles. Weak ones bend rules for convenience.
There is also the economic question. I believe we must examine the pricing model relative to average Gambian income. Will service be affordable beyond urban elites? What is the local investment footprint? Are there commitments for capacity building, infrastructure partnerships, or knowledge transfer? Value for money is not just about faster internet speeds; it is about long-term national benefit.
Public praise for immediate approval often overlooks these structural questions. The argument frequently rests on geopolitical comparisons rather than domestic priorities. The Gambia’s benchmark should not be alignment in global rivalries; it should be national interest, regulatory clarity, and sustainable development.
Foreign investment plays a critical role in infrastructure expansion. I acknowledge that fully. But investment must respect domestic law. Diplomatic advocacy should not translate into policy acceleration that sidelines technical review. If approvals are granted after rigorous scrutiny, they will carry legitimacy. If they are rushed, they risk future dispute.
The Minister’s stance that the disruptive nature of the technology demands careful review of its economic, political, social, and security implications was apt and measured. I applaud that prudence. Progress without process is instability.
My position is straightforward: we can embrace innovation while insisting on proper classification, transparent terms, fair competition, and national safeguards. That balance is not anti-technology; it is pro-sovereignty. And in the long run, that is what builds investor confidence and public trust alike.
𝘣𝘺 𝘏𝘰𝘯. 𝘈𝘣𝘥𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘦 𝘕𝘫𝘢𝘪
