Since the 1980s, there has been speculation about wars potentially moving into space. These ideas were presented in warnings, threats and bold claims. From the Cold War until now, countries have prepared in different ways, some openly and some quietly. Today, this rivalry is no longer hidden; it is clear and undeniable. As underlined in my article "Under the shadow of satellites, orbital competition starts” published in Daily Sabah on April 16, the signs of this shift were already visible. Now the first hard results are before us, this time during an ongoing war.

During this year’s Victory Day parade in Moscow, hackers backing the Kremlin had, as reported, taken control of a satellite that provides television services to Ukraine. Instead of regular programs, people across the country suddenly saw the Russian parade: tanks rolling, soldiers marching, weapons on display. The purpose was, of course, psychological warfare, which has always been a part of modern conflict. It also carried a deeper message: Wars today are not only fought on land, at sea or in the air; they now extend into cyberspace and into outer space.

This type of operation may appear less violent than missiles or bombs, but its impact can be substantial. Disrupting or corrupting a satellite can disrupt communication, confuse navigation and interfere with both civilian and military operations. No soldier entered Ukrainian homes, no bomb fell on their streets in this incident, since they were far from the front lines; yet the war still reached them through the fragile signals that connect daily life.

New face of vulnerability

Satellites are often forgotten because they orbit far above us, yet they are central to modern life. They enable phone calls, navigation, banking, television, weather and border monitoring. The loss of only a few could cause national confusion. This is the new reality: the more societies depend on these invisible systems, the more dangerous they become when targeted.

Estonia, an EU member state on the Baltic Sea, had seen this directly. In 2007, it was hit by large cyberattacks widely alleged and strongly suspected to have originated from Russia. Since then, Estonia has built strong defenses and now provides NATO with a cyber training ground, including tools for space security. This shows that EU member states, with the roles they take, contribute to protecting not only the emerging battlefield above the Earth but also the cyber domain on the ground, where internet infrastructure is equally at risk.

The law has not yet kept pace with the times. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty bans nuclear weapons in orbit and declares outer space the province of all humankind, but it never imagined digital sabotage, cyber intrusions, or the manipulation of civilian satellites. Under international law, interfering with another country’s satellites could be considered a breach of sovereignty or even aggression; however, proving responsibility for a cyberattack is challenging. Evidence is often hidden, responsibility is denied, and accountability fails. This gray area invites danger.

From Türkiye’s perspective, both national and international action matter. Domestically, laws protect communications and impose security duties on operators. Internationally, Türkiye participates in United Nations work on establishing norms for responsible behavior in outer space. These instruments may sound abstract; still, without them, the rules of orbit would be set only by the strongest.

At this point, it is helpful to recall the late Dr. Jerry Pournelle, an American writer, strategist, political scientist, journalist, one of the first bloggers, and science fiction author with whom I had the privilege of working, and from whom I learned a great deal. In one of his essays, he noted a constant race between attack and defense; whenever interception improves, new methods of penetration soon follow. The rivalry now unfolding in orbit mirrors that cycle, only on a higher and faster level.

Battlefield without borders

The Ukrainian case is not an isolated act. It serves as a warning about the vulnerability of the invisible infrastructures that support modern life, such as satellites, digital networks and communication systems. These are no longer neutral tools; they have become targets of competition. Viewers in Ukraine saw the parade of another country forced onto their screens without consent; it showed that wars today can enter homes through signals and broadcasts, even far from the front lines.

This makes the legal and political task all the more urgent. Just as rules were once developed for the seas and the skies, similar agreements are needed for outer space to prevent hostile acts from escalating into wider conflicts. States must ensure that satellites remain tools of peace, connection and human progress, not instruments of coercion.

The lesson is clear: Space is no longer only for science or discovery. It is becoming a silent battlefield of our century, one without visible borders yet capable of affecting every home on Earth. What happened in Ukraine is only a shadow of what could come if states fail to protect this fragile frontier.

The sky may seem calm; behind it, quiet struggles are already underway. The question for our age is whether humankind will allow outer space to become the next stage of destructive rivalry, or whether wisdom will prevail to preserve it as a domain for peace and progress.