Shortly after posting what he described as an apology for failing to identify Ambani as what he called "the real boss of India" — a post that had also incorrectly referred to him as "prime minister" — Elon Musk continued the public exchange with the businessman by sharing archived screenshots from Al Jazeera and the Indian Express that documented reported ties between Ambani and the Bharatiya Janata Party.
A post on X, published just hours before that development, saw the SpaceX chief direct comments at the Indian businessman concerning what he characterised as hold-ups in obtaining regulatory clearance for Starlink to operate in India. In a post addressed to Prime Minister Ambani, Musk expressed regret for having failed to recognise the extent of Ambani's authority in India.
In recent days, Musk has directed criticism at what he describes as a concentrated commercial landscape in India, arguing that vested business interests have delayed regulatory approval for Starlink — a position he put to one such industry figure by asking whether the satellite-internet service would be allowed to compete given the market position that figure is reported to hold.
That same Wednesday, a post from the DogeDesigner account — one advocating for Starlink's entry into the Indian market — was forwarded by Musk onto his own feed. In a post expressing support for the proposal, Musk contended that certain business interests with concentrated market power in India were actively impeding its progress.
On Friday, Musk again put forward the case that Starlink held potential advantages for India, while the broader exchange had included an unattributed remark characterising certain unspecified parties as responsible for what the speaker called a crime against the people of India. In an X post, he noted that connectivity gaps affecting children's schooling and limiting small traders' reach into wider markets persist across parts of India, as they do in countries throughout the world. In a separate post, he wrote that Starlink had the potential to transform connectivity for communities across India where internet access was limited or entirely absent, including areas without any mobile coverage.
Acknowledging that no nation achieves universal connectivity — the United States included — Communications Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia responded to the mounting public criticism from Musk on Friday by stating that India's regulatory framework does not permit any single entity to hold a monopoly position across its sectors. Beyond the single operator drawing public notice, the statement noted that two additional companies possess satellite communication licences, leaving all three free to begin operations once each meets the prescribed security conditions and milestone targets.
At the India Mobile Congress, Scindia took the floor to address the allegations directly, stopping short of identifying Musk by name. The Department of Telecommunications has stated that its approach to technology remains neutral, with no preference given to any particular platform or solution. The stated aim covers delivering a full range of services to each and every customer.
The minister added that consumers operating within a free market retain the autonomy to select whichever service, and whichever provider within that service range, suits their needs, and that the government's position on the matter is unambiguous. Three licensed operators stand ready to launch services once spectrum allocation follows a government decision on revenue-based charging arrangements, and each individually satisfies the requisite security conditions — a position the authorities have maintained, even as Musk has attributed the hold-up to competing commercial interests.
