Space X was at a severe political disadvantage vs aerospace incumbents. It did not have full government support. It still doesn’t compared to the incumbents. Could be wrong, but the military is not a major factor for Space X especially at the beginning. Why? Elon is not a fan of bribes.

Military literally paid for SpaceX to be a thing, and USAF is IIRC something in the range of 25% if not more initial funder for Starlink, and by virtue of very specific requirements, the only stable client who couldn't be easily served by few geostationary or Molniya satellites (operating an ISP in various countries can be... interesting. Elon is also very, very fond of government handout, that's how SpaceX and Tesla got funded pretty much, even if Elon provided certain capital to get things moving at times.

For example, how is Starlink going to provide local Ministry of Defense access to the network in time of emergency, which was at least in 2008 a requirement for any ISP in Poland spanning more than one commune (smallest administrative region)? Requirements like that mean that ISPs need to seek waivers or just avoid having customers in specific countries (or break the law - we're talking Elon here after all, just look at latest FSD brouhaha). And they greatly dimnish the value proposal of building a constellation.

OTOH, DoD had been shopping around for global satellite provider for last 15-20 years, as bandwidth and availability were often issues just in running bases, but also making it harder to drone strike an usually innocent group.

> but the military is not a major factor for Space X especially at the beginning

The US military funded the first two launches of the Falcon 1. Far from "not being a major factor", without that money, Musk and Space X (and likely Tesla) would have gone bankrupt in 200X.