SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
northrop grumman
The Rise of the Drone-Industrial Complex
A new force — Silicon Valley startup culture — has entered the fray, and the military-industrial complex equation is suddenly changing dramatically.
Feb 11, 2025
Last April, in a move generating scant media attention, the Air Force announced that it had chosen two little-known drone manufacturers — Anduril Industries of Costa Mesa, California, and General Atomics of San Diego — to build prototype versions of its proposed Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), a future unmanned plane intended to accompany piloted aircraft on high-risk combat missions. The lack of coverage was surprising, given that the Air Force expects to acquire at least 1,000 CCAs over the coming decade at around $30 million each, making this one of the Pentagon’s costliest new projects. But consider that the least of what the media failed to note. In winning the CCA contract, Anduril and General Atomics beat out three of the country’s largest and most powerful defense contractors — Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman — posing a severe threat to the continued dominance of the existing military-industrial complex, or MIC.
For decades, a handful of giant firms like those three have garnered the lion’s share of Pentagon arms contracts, producing the same planes, ships, and missiles year after year while generating huge profits for their owners. But an assortment of new firms, born in Silicon Valley or incorporating its disruptive ethos, have begun to challenge the older ones for access to lucrative Pentagon awards. In the process, something groundbreaking, though barely covered in the mainstream media, is underway: a new MIC is being born, one that potentially will have very different goals and profit-takers than the existing one. How the inevitable battles between the old and the new MICs play out can’t be foreseen, but count on one thing: they are sure to generate significant political turbulence in the years to come.
The very notion of a “military-industrial complex” linking giant defense contractors to powerful figures in Congress and the military was introduced on January 17, 1961, by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell address to Congress and the American people. In that Cold War moment, in response to powerful foreign threats, he noted that “we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions.” Nevertheless, he added, using the phrase for the first time, “we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
Ever since, debate over the MIC’s accumulating power has roiled American politics. A number of politicians and prominent public figures have portrayed U.S. entry into a catastrophic series of foreign wars — in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere — as a consequence of that complex’s undue influence on policymaking. No such claims and complaints, however, have ever succeeded in loosening the MIC’s iron grip on Pentagon arms procurement. This year’s record defense budget of approximately $850 billion includes $143.2 billion for research and development and another $167.5 billion for the procurement of weaponry. That $311 billion, most of which will be funneled to those giant defense firms, exceeds the total amount spent on defense by every other country on Earth.
Over time, the competition for billion-dollar Pentagon contracts has led to a winnowing of the MIC ecosystem, resulting in the dominance of a few major industrial behemoths. In 2024, just five companies — Lockheed Martin (with $64.7 billion in defense revenues), RTX (formerly Raytheon, with $40.6 billion), Northrop Grumman ($35.2 billion), General Dynamics ($33.7 billion), and Boeing ($32.7 billion) — claimed the vast bulk of Pentagon contracts. (Anduril and General Atomics didn’t even appear on a list of the top 100 contract recipients.)
Typically, these companies are the lead, or “prime,” contractors for major weapons systems that the Pentagon keeps buying year after year. Lockheed Martin, for example, is the prime contractor for the Air Force’s top-priority F-35 stealth fighter (a plane that has often proved distinctly disappointing in operation); Northrop Grumman is building the B-21 stealth bomber; Boeing produces the F-15EX combat jet; and General Dynamics makes the Navy’s Los Angeles-class attack submarines. “Big-ticket” items like these are usually purchased in substantial numbers over many years, ensuring steady profits for their producers. When the initial buys of such systems seem to be nearing completion, their producers usually generate new or upgraded versions of the same weapons, while employing their powerful lobbying arms in Washington to convince Congress to fund the new designs.
Over the years, non-governmental organizations like the National Priorities Project and the Friends Committee on National Legislation have heroically tried to persuade lawmakers to resist the MIC’s lobbying efforts and reduce military spending, but without noticeable success. Now, however, a new force — Silicon Valley startup culture — has entered the fray, and the military-industrial complex equation is suddenly changing dramatically.
Along Came Anduril
Consider Anduril Industries, one of two under-the-radar companies that left three MIC heavyweights in the dust last April by winning the contract to build a prototype of the Collaborative Combat Aircraft. Anduril (named after the sword carried by Aragorn in J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings) was founded in 2017 by Palmer Luckey, a virtual-reality headset designer, with the goal of incorporating artificial intelligence into novel weapons systems. He was supported in that effort by prominent Silicon Valley investors, including Peter Thiel of the Founders Fund and the head of another defense-oriented startup, Palantir (a name also derived from The Lord of the Rings).
From the start, Luckey and his associates sought to shoulder aside traditional defense contractors to make room for their high-tech startups. Those two companies and other new-fledged tech firms often found themselves frozen out of major Pentagon contracts that had long been written to favor the MIC giants with their bevies of lawyers and mastery of government paperwork. In 2016, Palantir even sued the U.S. Army for refusing to consider it for a large data-processing contract and later prevailed in court, opening the door for future Department of Defense awards.
In addition to its aggressive legal stance, Anduril has also gained notoriety thanks to the outspokenness of its founder, Palmer Luckey. Whereas other corporate leaders were usually restrained in their language when discussing Department of Defense operations, Luckey openly criticized the Pentagon’s inbred preference for working with traditional defense contractors at the expense of investments in the advanced technologies he believes are needed to overpower China and Russia in some future conflict.
Such technology, he insisted, was only available from the commercial tech industry. “The largest defense contractors are staffed with patriots who nevertheless do not have the software expertise or business model to build the technology we need,” Luckey and his top associates claimed in their 2022 Mission Document. “These companies work slowly, while the best [software] engineers relish working at speed. And the software engineering talent who can build faster than our adversaries resides in the commercial sector, not at large defense primes.”
To overcome obstacles to military modernization, Luckey argued, the government needed to loosen its contracting rules and make it easier for defense startups and software companies to do business with the Pentagon. “We need defense companies that are fast. That won’t happen simply by wishing it to be so: it will only happen if companies are incentivized to move” by far more permissive Pentagon policies.
Buttressed by such arguments, as well as the influence of key figures like Thiel, Anduril began to secure modest but strategic contracts from the military and the Department of Homeland Security. In 2019, it received a small Marine Corps contract to install AI-enabled perimeter surveillance systems at bases in Japan and the United States. A year later, it won a five-year, $25 million contract to build surveillance towers on the U.S.-Mexican border for Customs and Border Protection (CBP). In September 2020, it also received a $36 million CBP contract to build additional sentry towers along that border.
After that, bigger awards began to roll in. In February 2023, the Department of Defense started buying Anduril’s Altius-600 surveillance/attack drone for delivery to the Ukrainian military and, last September, the Army announced that it would purchase its Ghost-X drone for battlefield surveillance operations. Anduril is also now one of four companies selected by the Air Force to develop prototypes for its proposed Enterprise Test Vehicle, a medium-sized drone intended to launch salvos of smaller surveillance and attack drones.
Anduril’s success in winning ever-larger Pentagon contracts has attracted the interest of wealthy investors looking for opportunities to profit from the expected growth of defense-oriented startups. In July 2020, it received fresh investments of $200 million from Thiel’s Founders Fund and prominent Silicon Valley investor Andreessen Horowitz, raising the company’s valuation to nearly $2 billion. A year later, Anduril obtained another $450 million from those and other venture capital firms, bringing its estimated valuation to $4.5 billion (double what it had been in 2020). More finance capital has flowed into Anduril since then, spearheading a major drive by private investors to fuel the rise of defense startups — and profit from their growth as it materializes.
The Replicator Initiative
Along with its success in attracting big defense contracts and capital infusions, Anduril has succeeded in convincing many senior Pentagon officials of the need to reform the department’s contracting operations so as to make more room for defense startups and tech firms. On August 28, 2023, Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks, then the department’s second-highest official, announced the inauguration of the “Replicator” initiative, designed to speed the delivery of advanced weaponry to the armed forces.
“[Our] budgeting and bureaucratic processes are slow, cumbersome, and byzantine,” she acknowledged. To overcome such obstacles, she indicated, the Replicator initiative would cut through red tape and award contracts directly to startups for the rapid development and delivery of cutting-edge weaponry. “Our goal,” she declared, “is to seed, spark, and stoke the flames of innovation.”
As Hicks suggested, Replicator contracts would indeed be awarded in successive batches, or “tranches.” The first tranche, announced last May, included AeroVironment Switchblade 600 kamikaze drones (called that because they are supposed to crash into their intended targets, exploding on contact). Anduril was a triple winner in the second tranche, announced on November 13th. According to the Department of Defense, that batch included funding for the Army’s purchase of Ghost-X surveillance drones, the Marine Corps’ acquisition of Altius-600 kamikaze drones, and development of the Air Force’s Enterprise Test Vehicle, of which Anduril is one of four participating vendors.
Just as important, perhaps, was Hicks’ embrace of Palmer Luckey’s blueprint for reforming Pentagon purchasing. “The Replicator initiative is demonstrably reducing barriers to innovation, and delivering capabilities to warfighters at a rapid pace,” she affirmed in November. “We are creating opportunities for a broad range of traditional and nontraditional defense and technology companies… and we are building the capability to do that again and again.”
Enter the Trumpians
Kathleen Hicks stepped down as deputy secretary of defense on January 20th when Donald Trump reoccupied the White House, as did many of her top aides. Exactly how the incoming administration will address the issue of military procurement remains to be seen, but many in Trump’s inner circle, including Elon Musk and Vice President J.D. Vance, have strong ties to Silicon Valley and so are likely to favor Replicator-like policies.
Pete Hegseth, the former Fox News host who recently won confirmation as secretary of defense, has no background in weapons development and has said little about the topic. However, Trump’s choice as deputy secretary (and Hick’s replacement) is billionaire investor Stephen A. Feinberg who, as chief investment officer of Cerberus Capital Management, acquired the military startup Stratolaunch — suggesting that he might favor extending programs like Replicator.
In a sense, the Trump moment will fit past Washington patterns when it comes to the Pentagon in that the president and his Republican allies in Congress will undoubtedly push for a massive increase in military spending, despite the fact that the military budget is already at a staggering all-time high. Every arms producer is likely to profit from such a move, whether traditional prime contractors or Silicon Valley startups. If, however, defense spending is kept at current levels — in order to finance the tax cuts and other costly measures favored by Trump and the Republicans — fierce competition between the two versions of the military-industrial complex could easily arise again. That, in turn, might trigger divisions within Trump’s inner circle, pitting loyalists to the old MIC against adherents to the new one.
Most Republican lawmakers, who generally rely on contributions from the old MIC companies to finance their campaigns, are bound to support the major prime contractors in such a rivalry. But two of Trump’s key advisers, J.D. Vance and Elon Musk, could push him in the opposite direction. Vance, a former Silicon Valley functionary who reportedly became Trump’s running mate only after heavy lobbying by Peter Thiel and other tech billionaires, is likely to be encouraged by his former allies to steer more Pentagon contracts to Anduril, Palantir, and related companies. And that would hardly be surprising, since Vance’s private venture fund, Narya Capital (yes, another name derived from The Lord of the Rings!), has invested in Anduril and other military/space ventures.
Named by Trump to direct the as-yet-to-be-established Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk, like Anduril’s Palmer Luckey, fought the Department of Defense to obtain contracts for one of his companies, SpaceX, and has expressed deep contempt for the Pentagon’s traditional way of doing things. In particular, he has denigrated the costly, generally ill-performing Lockheed-made F-35 jet fighter at a time when AI-governed drones are becoming ever more capable. Despite that progress, as he wrote on X, the social media platform he now owns, “some idiots are still building manned fighter jets like the F-35.” In a subsequent post, he added that “manned fighter jets are obsolete in the age of drones anyway.”
His critique of the F-35 ruffled feathers at the Air Force and caused Lockheed’s stock to fall by more than 3%. “We are committed to delivering the world’s most advanced aircraft — the F-35 — and its unrivaled capabilities with the government and our industry partners,” Lockheed declared in response to Musk’s tweets. Over at the Pentagon, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall had this to say: “I have a lot of respect for Elon Musk as an engineer. He’s not a warfighter, and he needs to learn a little bit more about the business, I think, before he makes such grand announcements as he did.” He then added, “I don’t see F-35 being replaced. We should continue to buy it, and we also should continue to upgrade it.”
President Trump has yet to indicate his stance on the F-35 or other high-priced items in the Pentagon’s budget lineup. He may (or may not) call for a slowdown in purchases of that plane and seek greater investment in other projects. Still, the divide exposed by Musk — between costly manned weapons made by traditional defense contractors and more affordable unmanned systems made by the likes of Anduril, General Atomics, and AeroVironment — is bound to widen in the years to come as the new version of the military-industrial complex only grows in wealth and power. How the old MIC will address such a threat to its primacy remains to be seen, but multibillion-dollar weapons companies are not likely to step aside without a fight. And that fight will likely divide the Trumpian universe.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Analysis Shows US Lawmakers Traded Up to $113 Million in Arms Stocks This Year
"If Congress wants to wash itself of conflicts of interest it can start by passing a stock trading ban."
Dec 26, 2024
Dozens of U.S. lawmakers and their families bought or sold up to $113 million worth of shares in top Pentagon contractors this year, an analysis published on Wednesday revealed.
The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft found that at least 37 members of Congress and their relatives traded between $24-113 million worth of stock in companies listed on Defense and Security Monitor's Top 100 Defense Contractors index.
As the Quincy Institute noted: "Eight of these members even simultaneously held positions on the Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees, the committees overseeing defense policy and foreign relations. Members of Congress that oversee the annual defense bill and are privy to intelligence briefings have an upper hand in predicting future stock prices."
The analysis found that one Democratic congressman accounted for the vast bulk of defense stock trading in 2024.
Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey traded at least $22 million and as much as $104 million worth of shares in companies on the index, including Microsoft, Northrop Grumman, and IBM. Gottheimer—who said his trades are handled by a third-party firm—sits on both the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the National Security subcommittee of the Committee on Financial Services.
(Image: Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft/Datawrapper)
Next on the list in distant second place is former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who has defended stock trading by lawmakers, and according to Quincy, "sold over $1 million worth of Microsoft stock in late July."
"The timing of Pelosi's Microsoft trades in the past have garnered attention, too; in March 2021, she bought Microsoft call options less than two weeks before the Army announced a $22 billion contract with the software company to supply augmented reality headsets," the analysis states.
"Pelosi had the most profitable 2024 of any lawmaker, netting an estimated $38.6 million from all stock trading activity, according to Quiver Quantitative," the report adds.
Pelosi was followed by Reps. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), Scott Franklin (R-Fla.), and Thomas Keane Jr. (R-N.J.).
The Quincy Institute asserted: "If Congress wants to wash itself of conflicts of interest it can start by passing a stock trading ban. The Ending Trading and Holdings in Congressional Stocks Act, or ETHICS Act, would prohibit members of Congress from trading individual stocks."
The ETHICS Act was approved by the Democrat-controlled Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs in July. The full Senate—which will be GOP-controlled starting next month—has yet to vote on the bill.
Earlier this month, U.S. President Joe Bide n was applauded by progressive lawmakers for backinga ban on congressional stock trading and asserting that "nobody in the Congress should be able to make money in the stock market while they're in the Congress."
On Monday, Biden signed the $895 billion Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025. As Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has highlighted, "Of that nearly $1 trillion dollars... about half will go to a handful of hugely profitable defense contractors."
Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) decried both the enormity of the military budget, as well as the fact that some of her colleagues have profited from investments in the military-industrial complex.
Tlaib has introduced the Stop Politicians Profiting from War Act, which would ban members of Congress, their spouses, and their dependent children from trading defense stocks or having financial interests in companies that do business with the U.S. Department of Defense.
In 2012, Congress passed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act, legislation that has been panned as
weak and ineffective.
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Resumes Offensive Weapons Sales to Major Human Rights Abuser: Saudi Arabia
Such a move will only strengthen this repressive regime and increase regional conflicts.
Aug 13, 2024
One issue that has slipped beneath the radar in terms of news coverage is the recent decision by the Biden administration to resume the sale of offensive weapons to Saudi Arabia. For starters, the U.S. will be sending a shipment of bombs worth $750 million in the coming months.
These weapons were cut off by the Biden administration in 2021 because the Saudis were using them in Yemen in their war against the Houthis, killing thousands of civilians.
The resumption of the sale of offensive weapons is part of U.S. efforts to push the Saudis to normalize relations with Israel. In 2020, Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) signed normalization agreements that are collectively known as the Abraham Accords. These deals were brokered primarily by the Trump administration. Some of the countries that signed on, such as the UAE, view the accord not only as a way to bolster trade, but as a military alliance against their historical rival, Iran.
For the Saudis, however, normalization has been pushed off the table by the Israeli assault on Gaza and public sympathy for the Palestinians. A December 2023 survey by the pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy found that a near unanimous 96 percent of Saudis say that Arab countries should break all contacts with Israel to protest against Israeli attacks in Gaza.
The Saudis say that Israel must first end the war in Gaza and, even more elusive, create a credible pathway to a Palestinian state. Saudi Arabia has told the United States it will not open diplomatic relations with Israel unless it agrees to accept an independent Palestinian state on the internationally-recognized pre-1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital. Such a Palestinian state is precisely what Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Knesset are dead set against.
But U.S. officials still want to push for normalization, and the Biden administration has offered a series of incentives, including negotiating a defense pact and an agreement for civil nuclear cooperation.
The U.S. also wants to build closer Saudi ties to drive a wedge into the peace process between Saudi Arabia and Iran that was brokered by China last year, and to counter the inroads that China is making in the region. More immediately, the U.S. wants Saudi cooperation in repelling Iranian retaliatory attacks on Israel. In mid-April, when Iran retaliated against the April 1 Israeli airstrike that killed a top Revolutionary Guard commander in Syria, the Saudis, along with Jordan and the United Arab Emirates, cooperated with the U.S. and Israel in repelling some 300 missiles and drones that Iran fired on Israel. The Israelis are now bracing for another Iranian response to the killing in Tehran of Hamas political leader Ismael Haniya.
But the arms sales violate the Biden administration’s earlier promises of a new approach to Saudi Arabia that would focus on human rights. In 2020 Biden vowed to treat Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom’s de facto ruler, as a “pariah,” mainly because of the 2018 assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Despite recent cosmetic openings like musical concerts and some real reforms like giving women the right to drive and the abolition of the religious police, Saudi Arabia remains one of the most repressive countries in the world. While U.S. officials regularly criticize elections in neighboring Iran, there are no elections in Saudi Arabia. It continues to be one of the last remaining absolute monarchies in the world.
You don’t have to look at the damning reports from groups like Amnesty International and Human Right Watch to see the extent of Saudi repression. Just look at the U.S. State Department’s 2023 human rights report. It talks about extrajudicial killings; enforced disappearance; torture; life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; lack of an independent judiciary; punishment of family members for alleged offenses by a relative; violence against journalists and press censorship; serious restrictions on internet freedom, religious freedom and freedom of movement, including the right to leave the country; bans on independent trade unions; violence against gay and transgender persons; and the excessive use of the death penalty.
Remember: this stinging critique is coming from the US government–a major ally of the Saudis.
Sending more weapons to the Saudis will only strengthen this repressive regime and increase regional conflicts. But, of course, it will also increase the profits of weapons companies, such as Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. That, in turn, increases the campaign coffers of our politicians.
So the U.S. government is authorizing the sale of offensive weapons to Saudi Arabia, while it continues to tout itself as the defender of the “free world.” Go figure.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular