Rep. John Moolenaar, chairman of the House Select Committee on China, warned in a new letter that commercial satellite imagery may have revealed sensitive American military positions at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, shortly before Iran launched a devastating missile and drone strike on the installation on March 27.
The Michigan Republican's letter, obtained by Fox News Digital, urged War Secretary Pete Hegseth to press European aerospace giant Airbus to restrict the release of high-resolution satellite imagery that Moolenaar said risks becoming "targeting data for enemy forces."
At least 12 U.S. service members were wounded in the March 27 attack, two of them critically. Multiple high-value aircraft sustained damage, including KC-135 refueling tankers and an E-3G Sentry airborne warning and control system aircraft. The strike combined ballistic missiles and drones, and Moolenaar's letter raises the uncomfortable question of whether Iran knew exactly where to aim.
The sequence Moolenaar laid out is straightforward and alarming. A China-based company called MizarVision publicly released high-resolution, annotated views of U.S. military aircraft stationed at Prince Sultan Air Base shortly before Iran struck the installation. The letter identified Airbus satellites as the "most plausible" original source of that imagery, based on a technical analysis conducted with a satellite systems expert.
Moolenaar's letter cited multiple windows in which Airbus satellites were positioned to capture images of the base. It also stated there was a "high likelihood" that Airbus imagery was made available prior to the conflict. A satellite image caption referenced in the reporting showed planes at Prince Sultan Air Base dated February 21, 2026, weeks before the strike.
The letter did not establish how MizarVision obtained the images or whether Airbus provided them directly. That gap matters. But the circumstantial chain, European satellite company captures imagery, China-linked firm publishes annotated versions identifying American aircraft, Iran attacks the same base, demands answers.
The broader U.S. military campaign against Iran has involved high-stakes operations and clearly defined objectives, making operational security failures all the more consequential.
Airbus pushed back hard. A spokesperson told Fox News Digital:
"Airbus denies these allegations, and this letter contains many inaccuracies regarding our operations and commercial relationships. We strictly comply with all applicable sanctions, export controls and international regulatory frameworks."
The denial is categorical. But Moolenaar's concerns did not materialize overnight. In a December 2025 letter, the chairman had already warned that Airbus' work with Chinese firms linked to military development could risk advancing Beijing's aerospace capabilities. That earlier letter also flagged that the French government, Airbus' home government, had limited the committee's ability to obtain information about the company's operations.
Fox News Digital reported that entities linked to the Chinese Academy of Sciences were part of an Airbus joint venture in China. The committee's broader scrutiny of Airbus' ties to Beijing forms the backdrop for this latest alarm.
The conflict with Iran has already strained relationships with European allies. Austria blocked U.S. military flights from its airspace amid the escalation, and the question of whether a European defense contractor's commercial products helped an adversary target American troops adds another layer of friction.
Moolenaar's letter drew a pointed contrast. Planet Labs, another commercial satellite imagery provider, voluntarily withheld images of the region at the request of the U.S. government. Airbus, by the congressman's account, did not take similar steps.
That contrast matters. The commercial satellite industry has exploded in recent years, and the resolution available to paying customers now rivals what only intelligence agencies possessed a generation ago. When one company cooperates with national security requests and another does not, the gap is not just commercial, it is strategic.
The letter's satellite systems expert assessed that the images were unlikely to have originated from Chinese satellites given their known capabilities. If that analysis holds, it narrows the field. And it points toward Airbus.
Meanwhile, the broader military confrontation with Tehran has continued to escalate, with the administration ordering a Navy blockade of the Strait of Hormuz after nuclear talks collapsed, raising the stakes for every piece of operational intelligence that reaches hostile hands.
Fox News Digital reported that the Pentagon could not immediately be reached for comment. That silence is not unusual in the early hours of a story involving classified military positions. But the questions Moolenaar raised deserve prompt, public answers, not bureaucratic delay.
Twelve wounded Americans and damaged aircraft are not abstractions. If commercially available satellite imagery helped Iran plan or refine its targeting, that is a systemic vulnerability, not a one-off intelligence failure. Congress has every right to demand transparency from both the Defense Department and the foreign companies whose products may have contributed to the problem.
The consequences of strikes enabled by leaked or commercially available targeting data have already been felt across the region. Iran's own leadership has suffered devastating consequences from U.S. and Israeli airstrikes, underscoring how high the stakes run on both sides of this conflict.
The letter establishes a plausible chain but leaves critical links unresolved. How did MizarVision acquire the imagery? Did Airbus sell it directly, or did the images pass through intermediaries? Were export controls followed at every step? And did anyone in the U.S. national security apparatus flag the MizarVision publication before the strike, and if so, what was done about it?
Moolenaar's December 2025 complaint that the French government blocked the committee's access to information about Airbus suggests the answers will not come easily. A European ally shielding a defense contractor from congressional oversight, while American troops sit in the crosshairs, is a diplomatic problem that deserves far more attention than it has received.
European allies have already shown a willingness to complicate U.S. military operations during the Iran conflict. Spain shut its airspace to U.S. military flights tied to the campaign, and the Airbus question sits squarely in the same zone of allied friction meeting American security needs.
Commercial satellite imagery is not going away. The technology will only improve, the resolution will only sharpen, and the number of companies selling it will only grow. The question is whether the United States will treat the uncontrolled distribution of imagery showing American military positions as the national security threat it plainly is, or continue to hope that voluntary cooperation from some companies will be enough.
Planet Labs cooperated. Airbus, if Moolenaar's account is accurate, did not. Iran struck. Americans bled. Those facts, even with gaps in the causal chain, should be enough to force action.
When foreign companies profit from imagery that may end up guiding enemy missiles toward American service members, "we comply with all applicable frameworks" is not an answer. It is a talking point. And talking points do not stop warheads.
